UPI Study › Courses › Business Ethics › Free lessons › Lesson 17.3 Free with a free account
Weighing the Gains and Losses of Business Globalization
Business Ethics · Chapter 17: Going Global: International Business Ethics and StrategySection 17.3 · lesson 91 of 10516 min · free with a free account
Free preview
Create a free account to keep watching
It takes a minute and costs nothing. Your free account unlocks all of Chapter 1 and 3 more lessons of Business Ethics.
Lesson complete
Earn the 3 college credits for Business Ethics
Enrolling adds a quiz after each lesson, the graded work and the official transcript. Recommended for credit by NCCRS.
Next lesson: Cross-Cultural Leadership Across National Borders →← The Environments Multinational Firms Must NavigateNext lesson: Cross-Cultural Leadership Across National Borders →
In this lesson
Identify possible benefits and costs, then examine their distribution and the values used to weigh them.
- Identify 4 commonly cited economic gains and 4 loss categories.
- Explain comparative advantage through relative opportunity cost.
- Distinguish diffuse gains from concentrated losses across groups and regions.
- Apply the plant-relocation case and the trade-agreement question.
- Separate empirical evidence from value judgments in 5 reviews.
Free study notes
Get this lesson's notes by email
The key points and 4 practice questions with answers, in your inbox. One email, free.
One email. Unsubscribe in one click.
Transcript
Everything said in the video, section by section (1,962 words). Read along, or search it.
Going Global: International Business Ethics and Strategy
Weighing the Gains and Losses of Business Globalization
Business globalization integrates economies through trade, investment, and business activity crossing national borders. Its consequences can include economic benefits and significant costs, experienced differently across people and places. This lesson identifies four commonly cited gains and four categories of losses or concerns. The gains concern prices and variety, and investment-related growth. They also concern specialization and innovation under competition. The losses concern displaced jobs, pressure on some wages, community disruption, and standards or interdependence. These are mechanisms to investigate, rather than guaranteed effects in every market or business decision. Comparative advantage explains the trade argument through relative opportunity cost, rather than absolute productivity alone. Diffuse gains spread benefits broadly, while concentrated losses fall heavily on identifiable workers or communities. The same person can receive a consumer benefit and bear a substantial employment-related cost. The source's plant-relocation case illustrates several effects from the same decision without calculating their net value. Its trade-agreement question asks how broad price benefits should be weighed against concentrated job losses. That assessment involves evidence about outcomes and values about how the affected interests should be weighted. Our goal is a transparent explanation of effects, distribution, assumptions, and reasons for a particular judgment.
Commonly cited gains
Describe the mechanism without promising every outcome
The first gain category is lower consumer prices and a wider variety of available products. Access to foreign production and markets can expand options and strengthen relevant competitive pressures. Lower production costs can help. They do not necessarily produce lower retail prices for every product or consumer. The second category is growth where new investment or export opportunities support employment and income. Those opportunities can benefit particular workers without establishing that every person in the economy gains. The third category is efficiency from specialization according to comparative advantage and opportunities for trade. We explain that mechanism through relative opportunity cost, rather than simply identifying the biggest producer. The fourth category is innovation encouraged by broader competition, useful inputs, and access to knowledge. Competitive pressure does not guarantee faster innovation in every firm or under every set of conditions. The source identifies commonly cited gains, while actual outcomes depend on institutions and the operating context. Adjustment conditions and other policies can affect whether potential benefits reach workers and consumers. Describe the mechanism and relevant evidence before treating a possible gain as an established outcome. The comparison needs both the benefit's scope and any costs arising alongside it in the particular setting.
Comparative advantage
Compare what production requires giving up
Comparative advantage means producing a good at a lower opportunity cost relative to another producer. Opportunity cost asks what must be given up. It compares the cost of using resources for that production. In our constructed example, producer A can make eight cloth units or four grain units. Producer B can make six cloth units or two grain units with the same resource input. The example assumes constant trade-offs and illustrates relative costs, rather than describing real countries. One grain unit costs A two cloth units, while it costs B three cloth units. Therefore, A has comparative advantage in grain because its relative opportunity cost is lower. One cloth unit costs A one half of a grain unit and B one third. Therefore, B has comparative advantage in cloth, although A can produce more of either product. Absolute output advantage differs from the relative opportunity-cost comparison used in the argument for trade. The model explains potential mutual gains through specialization and exchange under its assumptions. It does not guarantee that every worker gains, require complete specialization, or calculate unlike products indiscriminately. Preserve the distinction between an efficient allocation argument and the actual distribution of benefits and costs.
Commonly cited losses
Costs can concentrate even while other parties benefit
An import-competing industry produces goods that compete with goods imported into its market. That competition can involve price, quality, or other attributes, rather than only cheaper imported goods. The first loss category is job displacement in industries affected by competition or relocated production. The second is wage pressure affecting some workers when their competitive conditions or bargaining position change. The third is concentrated disruption in communities that depend heavily on an affected industry. Those local effects can be severe even when a broader assessment identifies economic benefits elsewhere. The fourth category groups concerns about weaker labor or environmental standards and greater cross-border dependencies. Those concerns identify possible effects requiring evidence, rather than an inevitable result of international activity. Costs can vary. The size and duration of job or wage effects differ across workers, industries, and regions. Trade is also not the only possible explanation for a change in employment or earnings. Technology, domestic demand, and other operating conditions can influence the same observed outcomes. Investigate the relevant cause and affected group before attributing every disruption to the broad globalization trend. An accurate comparison recognizes potential costs without turning them into universal claims about every business decision.
Who experiences what?
Groups overlap, and national averages can conceal local costs
A concentrated loss falls heavily on an identifiable worker group, industry, community, or region. A diffuse gain spreads benefits across many people, such as small price reductions across many consumers. That distribution helps explain why observers can describe the same economic change very differently. Consumers may benefit from lower prices and variety. They can experience costs through another social role. The consumer who loses a job is both a purchaser and an affected worker. Export-sector workers and firms may gain markets or income, while remaining exposed to foreign demand changes. Import-competing workers may receive ordinary purchasing benefits while facing concentrated employment or earnings pressures. Dependent communities may receive some broader consumer benefits alongside lasting local economic disruption. These roles overlap; they are not entirely separate populations with only one kind of experience. A positive aggregate assessment can therefore coexist with a particular group's substantial net loss. The amounts, duration, and distribution of effects matter when evaluating that coexistence in practice. An average benefit does not itself show that each harmed person was compensated or became better off. Map the actual roles and effects before using national averages to describe a community's experience.
One relocation, several effects
The source case specifies gains and losses at the same time
The source considers a mid-sized town whose main manufacturing plant relocates production abroad. Town workers experience concentrated job loss, while the local community experiences real economic disruption. Consumers nationally receive an assumed small price reduction spread across many purchasers of the products. Workers in the destination country receive new employment and income from the relocated production. The case identifies these effects together. One effect need not cancel another's existence. Recognizing employment elsewhere does not erase the town's job losses or its concentrated disruption. Likewise, recognizing the town's losses does not make the source's assumed consumer benefit nonexistent. However, the description supplies no monetary amounts, measured history, named company, or identified country. Two benefiting groups and one losing group are not enough to prove a positive net result. A numerical comparison would require effect magnitudes, timing, appropriate valuation, and an explicit assessment scope. In a real relocation, consumer-price changes and employment outcomes need actual evidence rather than assumption. The source illustrates simultaneous effects; it does not guarantee those effects for every relocation. Explain who experiences what while keeping the existence of benefits separate from the unresolved net judgment.
Standards and interdependence
Treat concerns as questions for evidence and responsibility
The race to the bottom describes a concern about competitive pressure toward weaker protective standards. Firms might pursue locations with weaker labor or environmental protections, creating questions about practices and effects. The concern does not prove that every international operation lowers standards or chooses its location that way. Assess the actual operation, affected parties, protections, institutions, and enforcement relevant to its activities. Interdependence raises another question: how can disruption elsewhere affect a distant operation or community? A dependency in supply or demand can transmit effects across borders through the business relationship. However, broader sourcing can also spread some concentrated exposures, depending on how the arrangements are designed. Therefore, greater integration alone does not establish that every form of business risk increases. Identify the actual dependency, the disruption pathway, and any diversification relevant to the comparison. The same network can contain benefits and vulnerabilities. Their significance depends on the particular circumstances. A broad globalization label cannot establish the severity or cause of every standards or disruption concern. Evidence of actual practices and credible exposure supports a more accurate assessment of responsibility. Recognize the concern, examine its mechanism, and avoid replacing that examination with a universal assumption.
Think About It: a projected trade agreement
Weigh diffuse consumer benefits against concentrated job losses
The source projects a trade agreement that slightly lowers prices across millions of consumers. It also projects concentrated job losses in one industry and region affected by the agreement. One perspective emphasizes that many small purchasing benefits may create substantial value in aggregate. Another emphasizes lost earnings, local disruption, and the difficulty affected workers face in adjusting. Neither perspective can be evaluated simply by counting how many categories of people gain or lose. Assess magnitude, duration, uncertainty, affected populations, and possible support or adaptation for those bearing costs. Whether an effect occurs and how large it becomes are empirical questions requiring relevant evidence. How to weight severe local losses against dispersed gains also involves values and priorities. State the evidence and the weighting so the judgment can be assessed by someone with different priorities. The source provides no price amount or employment total. It also supplies no duration or probability for computing a numerical result. Do not invent those missing values or present the description as a completed cost-benefit calculation. The exercise asks for reasoned consideration of both sides, rather than a predetermined verdict. Disagreement can concern outcomes, value weighting, or proposed responses; distinguish those questions in the explanation.
Five review questions
Explain the mechanism, distribution, and disagreement
The first review asks for the standard trade argument based on comparative advantage. Production according to lower relative opportunity cost and exchange can support mutual gains under the model's assumptions. The second review asks how jobs can disappear while consumer prices decline at the same time. Competition can lower prices while displacing particular jobs, with effects distributed across different roles and places. The third review concerns observer judgments. Why do they reach different verdicts about the same globalization trend? Their experiences differ, and they can weight effect size, distribution, duration, and affected interests differently. The fourth review asks how the relocation example produces both gains and losses simultaneously. Town workers lose employment, while consumers receive the assumed price benefit and destination workers receive new jobs. The example's missing amounts mean those effects do not establish an overall positive or negative net calculation. The fifth review asks why the lesson does not declare a single verdict for all globalization. It identifies possible effects and their distribution, while a particular judgment needs evidence and explicit value weighting. Recognizing different values does not make every factual claim equally supported or exempt it from evidence. Keep the mechanism, the observed outcome, and the evaluative judgment distinct when answering each question.
Apply and carry forward
Assess what happens, to whom, and under which assumptions
Begin by identifying which globalization mechanism is relevant to the decision or trend being assessed. Describe potential benefits and costs. Do not assume every category occurs in the same case. Then map who receives the benefits and who bears concentrated costs across roles and regions. Remember that consumers, workers, and residents overlap rather than occupying perfectly separate populations. Test evidence about effect magnitude, duration, cause, uncertainty, and the assumptions underlying the comparison. Relative opportunity cost explains comparative advantage, while an allocation gain does not guarantee every person benefits. Diffuse price benefits can coexist with serious employment losses and disruption in a dependent community. The plant-relocation example makes that coexistence clear without supplying enough values for a numerical net result. The trade-agreement question adds the challenge of weighting dispersed gains against concentrated losses. Explain both the empirical basis and the values used to reach the particular conclusion. Consider possible responses or adaptations alongside the effect comparison, rather than assuming an unavoidable simple verdict. An aggregate gain does not prove each person is compensated, and one loss does not erase every benefit. A transparent assessment makes the consequences, distribution, assumptions, and reasons supporting the judgment visible.
About Business Ethics at UPI Study
Business Ethics (Business 211) is a self-paced online course of 105 video lessons in 19 chapters, from moral reasoning and compliance to governance, diversity, government and society, social responsibility, consumers, advertising, technology, the environment and global business. It carries a NCCRS credit recommendation for 3 semester credits.
Every lesson transcript is free on pages like this one, and the videos are free with a free UPI Study account. Enrolling adds a practice quiz after each lesson, the graded work and final exam that earn the credit, lifetime access, and an official transcript on completion. UPI Study has helped over 130,000 students with college credits. ACE and NCCRS have over 2,100 cooperating colleges that will consider accepting credits; the final decision is with the universities.
Enroll now → Course details Download the syllabus All Business courses Every course with PRO →
Compare: Which ethics course? · Business Law vs Business Ethics
Why take it here
Why students take Business Ethics with UPI Study
Where the credit goes
Universities that work with NCCRS
Business Ethics carries a NCCRS credit recommendation. These universities work with NCCRS; some are UPI Study's signed partners. ACE and NCCRS have over 2,100 cooperating colleges that will consider accepting credits; the final decision is with the universities.
Thomas Edison State UniversitySigned partner
University of the PeopleSigned partner
Charter Oak State CollegeSigned partner
Strayer UniversitySigned partner
Columbia Southern UniversitySigned partner
Indiana TechSigned partner
Penn StateWorks with NCCRS
Southern New Hampshire UniversityWorks with NCCRS
SUNYWorks with NCCRS
+many more cooperating universitiesFind my college →Find my college → Not listed? Ask Athena in the corner of this page, or book a 15-minute call.
FAQ
Questions students ask us
About Weighing the Gains and Losses of Business Globalization
What are the benefits of globalization?
What is comparative advantage, with a simple example?
What are the main costs of globalization?
What do diffuse gains and concentrated losses mean in trade?
About the Business Ethics course
How many college credits is Business Ethics?
How much does Business Ethics cost and what is included?
Which universities accept UPI Study credits?
How long does Business Ethics take?
How are the exams done?
How do my credits reach my college?
Ready for the full course? Earn 3 credits in Business Ethics.
105 video lessons, a quiz after each one, and the graded work that earns the credit. Recommended for credit by NCCRS.
3 credits · NCCRSEnroll →