This project has been funded with support from the European Commission (226388-cp-1-2005-1-de-comenius-c21). This publication reflects the views only of the authors
Yüklə 0,49 Mb.
|
- Bu səhifədəki naviqasiya:
- 1.2.4. Cultural Erosion
1.2.3. Hegemony of R&DInvestment on knowledge forms the basics of innovativeness and technologic development. This investment that can be measured through R&D, software and education expenditures is increasing in most OECD countries. Today developing countries have significant R&D expenditures. For example, in 2005 China with an average annual growth of 18% between 2000 and 2005 is third after the USA and Japan in terms of R&D expenditure. Table 3: Total R&D Spending as a Percentage of GDP
Source: [Available at http://foustat.nifustep.no/nifu/?language=en], (Accessed 13.03.2008). It can be seen from Table 3 that developed countries have high R&D / Gross Domestic Product (GDP) ratios. All countries that aim development should increase R&D investments. Countries that attain this increase can grow fast. Table 4: Transformation in Technology
When Table 4 is examined, it can be seen that today economic activities depend on factors of production such as information, computer, knowledge, network and intelligence and that can be attained through R&D or that eases R&D. The result of R&D investment is reflected in the number of patents. They are positively related. This positive relationship can easily be followed from realizations. Another point is the severe relationship between inventions and transformation of these inventions into economic activities. The invention of Tetra Pak in Sweden, turbo by SAAB, dialysis, dynamite, cooker and fridge and their transformations into economic activities are good examples for this relationship. Today R&D has entered a new phase and started to globalize. Increasing R&D costs as a result of increased elasticity in cross-border R&D projects, strengthening of intellectual property rights or the taxation of R&D activities, and important policy changes support this tendency. In the 1995-2005 period the number of scientific publications that are jointly written in the international platform tripled. The ratio of cross-border cooperation in total world-wide inventions doubled (from 4% in 1991-3 to 7% in 2001-3). From the beginning of 1990s the ratio of the inventions that have cross-border property in total inventions has increased to 16% from 11%. The internalization process in the field of research is supported by MNCs final investment models. Much more than 16% of the total industrial R&D expenditures in OECD region in 2004 (it was 12% in 1993) is constituted by R&D done by domestic and foreign affiliates moreover, in most countries the affiliates under the control of foreign investment has more R&D intensities than the domestic firms. Although per capita R&D expenditures differ widely among countries, all are increasing. An important reflection of this increase can be seen in the number of R&D personnel. 1.2.4. Cultural ErosionThe globalization process supplies two distinct culture presences simultaneously. The first of them is to reach to upper limit of “particular culture”. This upper limit is the globe. All heterogeneous cultures dissolve in the prevailing culture that covers the whole world. Second presence is related to the “tightening of cultures”. Different cultures flow side by side without any organizational principle. Field of culture that includes more and more cultural movement and complexity constitutes the second stage of the globalization of culture. Therefore there are important discrepancies on the effects of globalization on culture. Some intellectuals like John Meyer and Daniel Bell believe that globalization brings integration. Cultural globalization indicates common shape of local cultures. The concept used to define this situation is “McDonaldization”. The term means the resemblance of life styles, cultural symbols and behaviors. For example, people from Germany to India, Singapore to Brazil watch the same series (Dallas), wear the same brand (Levi’s) and smoke the same cigarette (Marlboro). Marshall McLuhan through “global village” conceptualization and Ohmae through “cross-border civilization” definition designate the formation of global culture. This resemblance certainly does not indicate that local cultures are dependent on global culture. Local cultures have the possibilities to interpret the global and redefine it in their authentic characteristics framework. In this framework a lot of philosophers ranging from Giddens to Friedman, from Robertson to Cox refuse that globalization will combine all societies under a single economic, politic and cultural unit (cultural integration). Anthony Smith declares that “global culture” is problematic. According to him “global culture” is impossible as the term “culture” refers to a plural fact. If internet, satellite and mobile communication systems and the fact that the committee of Olympics has more members than the United Nations (UN) are taken into consideration, it can be said that cultural globalization diffuses faster than economic globalization. This process causes both the dissolve of local cultures in the global culture and the contributions of local cultures in the global culture. While the corruption of local culture by global culture occurs very easily and spontaneously through technology, communication and interaction, the protection of local cultures and the contribution of it to global culture is a process that should need endeavor and that should be managed. Yüklə 0,49 Mb. Dostları ilə paylaş:
|