Triadisation
Up Regionalisation Triadisation

 

 





 

Globalisierung

Triadisation Instead of Globalisation?

The following excerpt from the Group of Lisbon clearly draws our attention to the fact that the processes of commercial 'globalisation' are limited to a small number of states, which is why it is more exact to speak of 'triadisation'. This aspect is also clarified by the graph from the Group of Lisbon, which depicts the international flow of capital according to destination
.

"Today's globalisation is rump globalisation. For this reason, »triadisation« represents a fitting description for the present situation. Triadisation means that the technological, commercial, and socio-cultural integration processes between the three most developed regions of the world (Japan and the newly industrialised nations of South and South-East Asia, Western Europe and North America) are more general, more intensive and more important than integration between these three regions and the less developed countries, or the integration between the disadvantaged countries themselves.

Triadisation also take place in the minds of people. Japanese, North Americans and Western Europeans assume that the only world that counts is their own. This is where cultural and scientific predominance, technical superiority, military hegemony and economic prosperity exists, and therefore also the ability to control and form the world economy and society
.

Furthermore, the phenomenon of triadisation also shows itself in the geographic pattern of strategic corporate alliances. Of the 4,200 strategic cooperation agreements entered into by companies between 1980 and 1989, 92 percent were made between companies from Japan, Western Europe and North America.

The statistics available on foreign direct investments also show that Japan, the USA and Western Europe have increasingly undertaken investments between themselves in the last decade. The triadisation of foreign direct investments is the result of streams of investment, that, between the 60s and 70s have brought forth a completely different economic situation.

Up until the beginning of the 80s, the developing countries played a certain, when only limited role as the destination for and origin of foreign investments. The triads accounted for four fifths of all international capital flows in the 80s. The developing countries share fell from 25 percent in 70s to 19 percent (...). The triad countries are integrating more and more amongst themselves and their integration process is developing.

If the goal is victory, there can only be few winners. The losers will be excluded and left to fend for themselves. The winners will continue to stick together and integrate. The importance of building new bridges between those who are excluded and those who are integrated loses in importance. Thus resulting in a new global schism in alongside globalisation.

Some countries and regions are gradually losing contact with the economically developed countries and regions of the world as a result of the partitioning process. Instead of participating in the increasingly economic interdependence and integration brought about by the new global world, these countries are moving in the opposite direction. Partitioning effects nearly all countries in Africa, large parts of Latin America and Asia (with the exception of South-East Asia), and the countries of the former Eastern Bloc.

The existing figures speak for themselves: In 1980, the share in the exchange of goods of the 102 poorest countries in the world equated to 7.9 percent of world exports and 9 percent of world imports. This share dropped to 1.4 percent and 4.9 percent respectively just 10 years later. Conversely, the share for the three triad regions rose from 54.8 percent to 64 percent of world exports, and 59.5 percent to 63.8 percent of world imports.

Further signs of this are shown by the fact that in 1970 (...) the share of world trade for these regions (equated) to 60.8 percent. In 1990, intracontinental trade in each region equated to 48.7 percent, and intercontinental trade between the three regions rose to 24.9 percent. The share in world trade for the three regions equated to 73.6 percent together. The remaining 26.4 percent was shared between Russia and Eastern Europe, the Near East, Africa and Latin America.

What is also important is the high rate of growth in intercontinental trade between Asia/Pacific and Western Europe. This rose from 6.3 percent to 10.2 percent, and 27.1 percent to 33.4 percent respectively. In contrast to this, Africa's and the Middle East's share fell from 14.1 percent in 1970 to 9.9 percent in 1990, with Latin America’s share falling from 7.8 percent to 6.1 percent, and the former Communist Bloc’s share from 7.3 to 4.1 percent.

In other words, during the last twenty years, the world economy has been characterised by a gradual reduction in the exchange of goods between the richest and fastest growing economies of North America, Western Europe and Asia, and the rest of the world (in particular Africa). If one were to extrapolate this trend over the next twenty years, Africa's, the Near East's, Latin America's, Russia's and East Europe’s share would plummet from 39.2 percent (1970) to 26.4 percent (1990) to 5 percent (2020). This is partitioning. This is the new schism between a global world that is becoming increasingly integrated, and parts of the globe that are forced out onto the sidelines with ever increasing force
."

[Gruppe von Lissabon, Grenzen des Wettbewerbs. Die Globalisierung der Wirtschaft und die Zukunft der Menschheit, Lizenzausgabe für die Bundeszentrale für politische Bildung, Bonn 1997, p. 108-112]

Global economy numbers

Intra and inter-regional trade in goods in 2000 (in billion dollars)

       from
to

North America

Latin America 

West-Europe

Mid-/ East Europe

Africa

Middle East

Asia

World

North America

421

174

195

6

12

20

229

1058

Latin America

220

62

45

3

3

3

21

359

West Europe

263

55

1654

129

59

60

199

2441

Mid-/ East Europe

12

6

147

72

3

7

20

271

Africa

26

4

72

1

11

2

25

145

Middle East

41

3

48

2

10

17

126

263

Asia 

423

41

278

15

22

42

807

1649

World

1406

346

2438

229

120

150

1427

6186

[Source: WTO, http://www.wto.org]

Share of the intra- and inter-regional flow of trade for each region against the total goods exported in 2000 (in percent)

       from
to

North America

Latin America 

West-Europe

Mid-/ East Europe

Africa

Middle East

Asia

World

North America

39,8

16,5

18,5

0,6

1,1

1,9

21,6

100,0

Latin America

61,3

17,3

12,5

0,8

0,8

0,8

5,8

100,0

West Europe

10,8

2,3

67,8

5,3

2,4

2,5

8,2

100,0

Mid-/ East Europe

4,4

2,2

54,2

26,6

1,1

2,6

7,4

100,0

Africa

17,9

2,8

49,7

0,7

7,6

1,4

17,2

100,0

Middle East

15,6

1,1

18,3

0,8

3,8

6,5

47,9

100,0

Asia 

25,7

2,5

16,9

0,9

1,3

2,5

48,9

100,0

World

22,7

5,6

39,4

3,7

1,9

2,4

23,1

100,0

[Source: WTO, http://www.wto.org]

[Back to top of page]

 

SubjectsHuman Rights  I  Examples  I  Democracy  I  Parties  I  Europe  I  Globalisation  I  United Nations  I  Sustainability

Methods:    Teaching Politics    II    Peace Education    II    Methods

       


 

This online service on the subject of political education was developed by agora-wissen, the Stuttgart-based Gesellschaft für Wissensvermittlung über neue Medien und politische Bildung (GbR) (Partnership for the Exchange of Information Using New Media and Political Education). Please contact us with your questions or comments. Translation from German into English by twigg's Übersetzung deutsch-english.