The Problem With Feudalism

Medieval historians generally arent bothered by words. The intrepid medievalist is always ready to leap into the rough-and-tumble milieu of Old English word origins, medieval French literature, and Latin Church documents. Icelandic sagas hold no terror for the medieval scholar. Next to these challenges, the esoteric terminology of medieval studies is mundane, no threat to the historian of the Middle Ages. But one word has become the bane of medievalists everywhere. Use it in discussing medieval life and society, and the average medieval historians face will screw up in revulsion. What word has this power to annoy, disgust, and even upset the ordinarily cool, collected medievalist? Feudalism. What Is Feudalism? Every student of the Middle Ages is at least somewhat familiar with the term, usually defined as follows: Feudalism was the dominant form of political organization in medieval Europe. It was a hierarchical system of social relationships wherein a noble lord granted land known as a fief to a free man, who in turn swore fealty to the lord as his vassal and agreed to provide military and other services. A vassal could also be a lord, granting portions of the land he held to other free vassals; this was known as subinfeudation and often led all the way up to the king. The land granted to each vassal was inhabited by serfs who worked the land for him, providing him with income to support his military endeavors; in turn, the vassal would protect the serfs from attack and invasion. This is a simplified definition, and many exceptions and caveats go along with this model of medieval society. It is fair to say that this is the explanation for feudalism youll find in most history textbooks of the 20th century, and it is very close to every dictionary definition available. The problem? Virtually none of it is accurate. Description Inaccurate Feudalism  was  not the dominant form of political organization in medieval Europe. There was no hierarchical system of lords and vassals engaged in a structured agreement to provide military defense. There was no subinfeudation leading up to the king. The arrangement whereby serfs worked the land for a lord in return for protection, known as manorialism or seignorialism, was not part of a feudal system. Monarchies of the early Middle Ages had their challenges and their weaknesses, but kings didnt use feudalism to exert control over their subjects, and the feudal relationship wasnt the glue that held medieval society together, as had been said. In short, feudalism as described above never existed in Medieval Europe. For decades, even centuries, feudalism has characterized our view of medieval society. If it never existed, then why did so many historians say it did? Werent entire books written on the subject? Who has the authority to say that all those historians were wrong? If the current consensus among experts in medieval history is to reject feudalism, why is it still presented as reality in nearly every medieval history textbook? Concept Questioned The word feudalism was never used during the Middle Ages. The term was invented by 16th- and 17th-century scholars to describe a political system of several hundred years earlier. This makes feudalism a post-medieval construct. Constructs help us understand alien ideas in terms more familiar to our modern thought processes. Middle Ages and medieval are constructs. (Medieval people didnt think of themselves as living in a middle age—they thought they were living in the now, just like we do.) Medievalists might not like the way the term medieval is used as an insult or how absurd myths of past customs and behavior are commonly attributed to the Middle Ages, but most are confident that using Middle Ages and medieval to describe the era as between the ancient and early modern eras is satisfactory, however fluid the definition of all three timeframes might be. But medieval has a fairly clear meaning based on a specific, easily defined viewpoint. Feudalism cannot be said to have the same. In 16th-century France,  Humanist  scholars grappled with the history of Roman law and its authority in their own land. They examined a substantial collection of Roman law books. Among these books was the  Libri Feudorum—the Book of Fiefs. Libri Feudorum The  Libri Feudorum  was a compilation of legal texts concerning the proper disposition of fiefs, which were defined in these documents as lands held by people referred to as vassals. The work had been put together in Lombardy, northern Italy, in the 1100s, and over the intervening centuries, lawyers and scholars had commented on it and added definitions and interpretations, or  glosses.  The  Libri Feudorum  is an extraordinarily significant work that has been barely studied since 16th-century French lawyers gave it a good look. In their evaluation of the Book of Fiefs, the scholars made some reasonable assumptions: The fiefs under discussion in the texts were pretty much the same as the fiefs of 16th-century France—that is, lands belonging to nobles.Te  Libri Feudorum  was addressing actual legal practices of the 11th century, not simply expounding on an academic concept.The explanation of fiefs origins in the  Libri Feudorum—that grants were initially made for as long as the  lord  chose but were later extended to the grantees lifetime and afterward made hereditary—was a reliable history and not mere conjecture. The assumptions might have been reasonable, but were they correct? French scholars had every reason to believe they were and no real reason to dig any deeper. They werent so much interested in the historical  facts of the time period as they were in the legal questions addressed in the  Ã¢â‚¬â€¹Libri Feudorum.  Their foremost consideration was whether the laws had any authority in France. Ultimately, French lawyers rejected the authority of the Lombard Book of Fiefs. Examining Assumptions However, during their investigations, based in part on the assumptions outlined above, scholars who studied the  Libri Feudorum  formulated a view of the Middle Ages. This general picture included the idea that feudal relationships, wherein noblemen granted fiefs to free vassals in return for services, were important in medieval society because they provided social and military security at a time when  the central  government was weak or nonexistent. The idea was discussed in editions of the  Libri Feudorum  made by legal scholars Jacques Cujas and Franà §ois Hotman, who both used the term  feudum  to indicate an arrangement involving a  fief. Other scholars soon saw value in the works of Cujas and Hotman and applied the ideas to their own studies. Before the 16th century ended, two Scottish lawyers—Thomas Craig and Thomas Smith—were using feudum in their classifications of Scottish  lands and their tenure. Craig apparently first expressed the idea of feudal arrangements as a hierarchical  system imposed on nobles and their subordinates by their monarch as a matter of policy.  In the 17th century,  Henry Spelman, a noted English antiquarian, adopted this viewpoint for English legal history. Although Spelman never used the word feudalism, his work went a long way toward creating an -ism from the ideas over which Cujas and Hotman had theorized. Not only did Spelman maintain, as Craig had done, that feudal arrangements were part of a system, but he related the English feudal heritage with that of Europe, indicating that feudal arrangements were characteristic of medieval society as a whole. Spelmans hypothesis was accepted as fact by scholars who saw it as a sensible explanation of medieval social and property relations. Fundamentals Unchallenged Over the next several decades, scholars explored and debated feudal ideas. They expanded the meaning of the term from legal matters to other aspects of medieval society. They argued over the origins of feudal arrangements and expounded on the various levels of  subinfeudation. They incorporated manorialism and applied it to the agricultural economy. They envisioned a complete system of feudal agreements running throughout Britain and Europe. But they didnt challenge Craigs or Spelmans interpretation of the works of Cujas and Hotman, nor did they question the conclusions that Cujas and Hotman drew from the  Libri Feudorum. From the vantage point of the 21st century, its easy to ask why the facts were overlooked in favor of the theory. Present-day historians  engage in  a rigorous  examination of the evidence and clearly identify a theory as such. Why didnt 16th- and 17th-century scholars do the same? The simple answer is that history as a scholarly field has evolved over time; in the 17th century, the academic discipline of  historical  evaluation was in its infancy. Historians didnt have the tools, both physical and figurative, taken for granted today, nor did they have the example of scientific methods from other fields to incorporate into their learning processes. Besides, having a straightforward model by which to view the Middle Ages gave scholars the sense that they understood the time period. Medieval society becomes so much easier to evaluate and comprehend if it can be labeled and fit into a simple organizational structure. By the end of the 18th century, the term feudal system was used among historians, and by the middle of the 19th century, feudalism had become a fairly well-fleshed-out model, or construct, of medieval government and society. As the idea spread beyond academia, feudalism became a buzzword for any oppressive, backward, hidebound system of government. In the  French Revolution, the feudal regime was abolished by the  National Assembly, and in Karl Marxs  Communist Manifesto,  feudalism was the oppressive, agrarian-based economic system that preceded the industrialized, capitalist economy. With such far-ranging appearances in academic and mainstream usage, breaking free of what was, essentially, a wrong impression would be an extraordinary challenge. Questions Arise In the late 19th century, the field of medieval studies began to evolve into a serious discipline. No longer did the average historian accept as fact everything that had been written by his or her predecessors and repeat it as a matter of course. Scholars of the medieval era began to question interpretations of the evidence and the evidence itself. This wasnt a swift process. The medieval era was still the bastard child of historical study; a dark age of ignorance, superstition, and  brutality, a thousand years without a bath.  Medieval historians had much prejudice, fanciful invention, and misinformation to overcome, and there was no concerted effort to shake things up and re-examine every theory ever floated about the Middle Ages. Feudalism had become so entrenched that it wasnt an obvious choice to overturn. Even once historians began to recognize the system as a post-medieval construct, its validity wasnt questioned. As early as 1887,  F.W. Maitland  observed in a lecture on English constitutional history that we do not hear of a feudal system until feudalism ceased to exist.  He examined in detail what feudalism supposedly was and discussed how it could be applied to English medieval law, but he didnt question its existence. Maitland was a well-respected scholar; much of his work is still enlightening and useful today. If such an esteemed historian treated feudalism as a legitimate system of law and government, why should anyone question him? For a long time, nobody did. Most medievalists continued in Maitlands vein, acknowledging that the word was a construct—an imperfect one, at that—yet going forward with articles, lectures, treatises, and books on what feudalism had been or, at the very least, incorporating it into related topics as an accepted fact of the medieval era. Each historian presented his or her own interpretation of the model; even those claiming to adhere to a previous interpretation deviated from it in some significant way. The result was an unfortunate number of varying, sometimes conflicting, definitions of feudalism. As the 20th century progressed, the discipline of history grew more rigorous. Scholars uncovered new evidence, examined it closely, and used it to modify or explain their view of feudalism. Their methods were sound, but their premise was problematic: They were trying to  adapt  a deeply flawed theory to a wide variety of facts. Construct Denounced Although several historians  expressed concerns over the indefinite nature of the model and the terms imprecise meanings, it wasnt until 1974 that anyone thought to point out the most fundamental problems with feudalism. In a groundbreaking article titled The Tyranny of a Construct: Feudalism and Historians of Medieval Europe,  Elizabeth A.R. Brown  leveled a finger at the academic community, denouncing the term feudalism and its continued use. Brown maintained that the feudalism construct, developed  after  the Middle Ages, bore little resemblance to actual medieval society. Its many differing, even contradictory, definitions had so muddied the waters that it had lost any useful meaning and was interfering with the proper examination of evidence concerning medieval law and society. Scholars viewed land agreements and social relationships through the warped lens of the feudalism construct and either disregarded or dismissed anything that didnt fit into their version of the model. Brown asserted  that, even  considering how difficult it is to unlearn something, continuing to include feudalism in introductory texts would do readers a grave injustice. Browns article was well received in academic circles. Virtually no American or British medievalists objected to any part of it, and almost everyone agreed: Feudalism wasnt a useful term and really should go. Yet, it stuck around. Hasnt Disappeared Some new publications in medieval studies avoided the term altogether; others used it sparingly,  focusing on actual laws, land tenures, and legal agreements instead of on the model. Some books on medieval society refrained from characterizing that society as feudal. Others, while acknowledging that the term was in dispute, continued to use it as a useful shorthand for lack of a better term, but only as far as it was necessary. But some authors still included descriptions of feudalism as a valid model of medieval society, with little or no caveat. Not  every  medievalist had read Browns  article  or had a chance to consider its implications or discuss it with colleagues. Additionally, revising work conducted on the premise that feudalism was a valid construct would require the kind of reassessment that few historians were prepared to engage in. Perhaps most significantly, no one had presented a reasonable model or explanation to use in place of feudalism. Some historians and authors felt they had to provide their readers with a handle by which to grasp the general ideas of medieval government and society. If not feudalism, then what? Yes, the emperor had no clothes, but for now, he would just have to run around naked.

The Arch of Titus The Triumph of the Emperor Essay

One of the most striking uses of architecture for glorification of a Roman emperor is the Arch of Titus. Built specifically upon the highest point of the Via Sacra, or Sacred Road, this arch is a lasting monument to the glorification of Titus. The Arch of Titus was built by Emperor Domitian to honor the capture and siege of Jerusalem by Titus and his apotheosis, or deification. This arch is an outstanding example of one of the most celebrated ways used by the Romans to express the honor and glory of their emperors. The Arch of Titus is known for its depictions of the spoils brought back to Rome after the destruction of Jerusalem. As a result of the Jewish attacks on Roman installations and the start of a revolt against Roman rule in 66†¦show more content†¦Titus, backed by four legions, began his assault on the beleaguered city in the spring of 70 CE. In less than four weeks, he had breached the walls of Jerusalem, and by that August, the outer Temple court had been reached, the Temple burned to the ground and its captives killed. With the fall of Jerusalem and the end of the revolt, Titus was hailed as imperator, or commander, by his troops. This was a necessary step in order for a general to apply to the Senate for a triumph, which Titus shared with his father Vespasian when he returned to Rome. A triumph was both a civil and religious ceremony in Imperial Rome; it was used to pay tribute to a military commander, or an imperator, for a successful foreign war campaign and to display the booty captured in the war. The ceremony was a parade showcasing the captured gold and silver and slaves from the war. The triumph followed a precise route through the streets of Rome, culminating in the march up the Via Sacra into the Roman Forum. To better celebrate a triumph, a triumphal arch was often erected to march underneath during the procession or as a commemoration to the triumph itself. The role and history of the triumphal arches in Rome is a little murky, as they are not mentioned by most Roman historians, and most notably they are left out by Vitruvius, the first century BCE writer on Roman architecture. However, Pliny the Elder does discuss the role of triumphal arches and points out thatShow MoreRelatedArch of titus Essay1445 Words   |  6 Pagesï » ¿ The Arch provides one of the few contemporary depictions of Temple period artifacts.[6][7]  The seven-branched  menorah  and  trumpets  are clearly depicted. It became a symbol of the Jewish  diaspora. In a later era, Pope  Paul IV  made it the place of a yearly  oath of submission. Jews refuse to walk under it.[citation needed]  The menorah depicted on the Arch served as the model for the menorah used on the emblem of the state of Israel.[citation needed]However, when the existence of modern State of IsraelRead MoreThe Arch Of Titus, An Architectural Monument And Sculpture Built Around C. 79-811086 Words   |  5 Pages The Arch of Titus is an architectural monument and sculpture constructed around c. 79-81 CE. by Domitian in the Forum Romanum, Rome, notable on the plaza for its huge scale and central position. The arch includes three outstandingly elaborated reliefs, two on both passages, which depict the martial victory of Rome under the leading of the Roman emperor Titus, and one on the vault, which displays Titus carried by an eagle to the heaven. The monumental, geometric arch and the detailed, naturalisticRead MoreArt Piece 2 : Arch Of Titus Essay1525 Words   |  7 PagesArt piece 2: Arch of Titus Dated: This art piece was dated Basic outline: Titus emperor who died Built by his bro, Domitian Triumphal arch Passageway on Sacred Way Inscriptions, friezes telling war stories. Details: The domitian built this arch on the road leading into the Roman Forum to honor his brother, the emperor Titus, who became a god after his death. Victories fill the spandrels of the arcuated passageway. Freestanding/ triumphal arch Material: The concrete and white marble, (originallyRead MoreComparison Between Roman Arches And The Arch Of Titus2388 Words   |  10 Pagespaper I attempt to admire the spectator’s experience while viewing the Arch of Titus, and bring to the forefront why I find the Arch of Trajan to be underappreciated. I will compare the two by first analyzing the meaning of the Arch of Titus, and then analyzing and summarizing the Arch of Trajan. The source I used for the Arch of Trajan may be among the outliers of most scholars, but I find that I agree with their analysis of the arch in that it was not simply a list of Trajan’s accomplishments, but ratherRead MoreAncient Roman Buildings Influence The Modern Architecture Essay1828 Words   |  8 PagesRoman buildings with to the modern architectures: the Colosseum and Beijing National Stadium, Pantheon and Thomas Jefferson Rotunda, Arch of Titus and Arc de Triomphe, to investigate study how the ancient Roman buildings influence t he modern architectures. The Colosseum and Beijing’s National Stadium The Colosseum is, a grand amphitheatre built by the Flavian emperors in the first Century CE. It was used to stage various forms of fighting events such as gladiator combats and wild animal hunts.Read MoreA Short Note On The Arch Of Constantine887 Words   |  4 PagesArch of Constantine Constantine’s the Great was one of the strongest and most important rulers in late Roman Empire and the founder of the Byzantine Empire. His legacy is known for his bold changes and accomplishments in uniting the empire making it become more powerful once again and his outlawing of paganism, and curbing Christians from persecutions. The Arch of Constantine was erected between 312 and 315 AD., in Rome adjacent to the Coliseum to commemorate Constantine’s triumphRead MoreMidterm 3 History Essay8024 Words   |  33 Pagesand Cleopatra were raised by Octavia so that Octavian could keep tabs on possible future threats.  ·   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Which title did Augustus prefer to use?   Why? o   Ã‚  Augustus preferred to use the title of Princeps (â€Å"leading man†) rather than Imperator (â€Å"emperor†). o   Ã‚  Princeps dictated an emphasis towards senatorial leadership rather than military leadership.  ·   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  How long after Actium was the First Constitutional Settlement?   Ã‚  Main goals?   What specific things happened during this event? o   Ã‚  The FirstRead More Four Styles of Roman Wall Painting and Mosaics Essay examples2687 Words   |  11 Pagesmarble sculpture 34’5† tall and 38’ long. It commemorates the triumph of Augustus’ return after the Civil War. This major type of monument features ox heads and garland with mythical figures representing peace, prosperity, and motherhood. One the side, a family is depicted in imperial procession, with the royal family in high relief. The frontal figures are higher with the emphasis on the children. Constructed during the reign of Emperor Augustus, in Campo Marzio, the Ara Pacis was a great work to

Trade vs. Protectionism Free Essays

string(45) " by imposing economic barriers and policies\." Arjan Chhatwal Poli 305/4 ID: 6178332 International Political Economy Prof. E. Bloodgood Trade vs. We will write a custom essay sample on Trade vs. Protectionism or any similar topic only for you Order Now Protectionism Trade between countries has been going on for centuries. Movement of goods and services began as a mean for nations to obtain what they couldn’t produce themselves. With the introduction of Ricardo’s â€Å"comparative advantage† – which illustrated how all countries that participate in trade benefit from it-, trade began to focus on what a country is better at producing a product or a service and which country can produce it at a lower cost. Nowadays, developed countries and international organization promote free trade, open borders, and liberalization of the market intensively. However, many of those core countries also practice protectionism in order to shield their industry from foreign competition. This poses a great problem to developing countries which are forced by core countries to practice free trade but would actually benefit from protectionist measures. In order to represent this situation, I will analyze the economic situation of two countries with very different economies: Pakistan, representing the developing countries and the United States, which represent the developed countries. I will compare their economic situation and policies under the Bush administration and Musharaf’s government. In this essay, I will demonstrate that our international economic system is very hypocritical in the sense that the countries that would benefit from and help other countries by practicing free trade are practicing protectionism, and those who would benefit from protectionism are forced to implement free trade policies. First, I will observe and describe those two main economic policies: protectionism and free trade. Then I will concentrate on the economic situation in Pakistan and the United States in order to illustrate what use countries are making of free trade and protectionism and, on the other hand, what face they are showing to the world. Free Trade: A Market Model of Deregulation Free trade is a market model which promotes trade liberalization by the reduction of trade barriers. This model was promoted by the economist David Ricardo in the late 18th century and beginning of the 19th century. He coined the â€Å"comparative advantage† theory. Comparative advantage† is a theory that promotes free trade by demonstrating how trade between countries benefits all parties because of the different opportunity costs. Every country can produce a good at a cheaper price than another country and has to focus on producing and exporting that particular good. If all countries do so and specialize in the production of the good that is cheaper to produce in their country, they can trade thos e products with each other at lower costs than if they produced all of the goods themselves. Practicing free trade means the abandonment of government restrictions in the flow of goods, workers and services across borders. Those restrictions include taxes, quotas, tariffs, and subsidies. This economic model is based on deregulation and on the elimination of binding rules on corporations. Free trade also prohibits government to give financial advantages to businesses through tax cuts in order to make them more competitive against foreign industries. This results in the elimination of monopolies and oligopolies in countries by allowing full competition. However, negative outcomes of economic deregulation includes less respect and commitment to health, labor, and environmental laws and can help multinationals outcompete smaller local industries. Another important aspect of the free trading model is the principle of Most Favored Nation which basically requires all members of trading agreements to treat other members equally. Nowadays, the biggest promoter of Free Trade is the World Trade Organization, which claims that removing trade barriers would lead to the end of poverty around the world. The WTO argues that in opposition to free trade, protectionism doesn’t help promoting economic expansion. Free trade policies, it is argued by the WTO and major developed countries, promote growth. The free trade model is used by the WTO to rescue developing countries and help them develop economically more efficiently. This means that in order to receive money from the WTO, developing countries are required to follow â€Å"adjustment policies†, also know as â€Å"structural adjustments†. Those policies all push towards economic liberalization. They include cutting back on social spending, devaluation of the currency, trade liberalization, removing price control and subsidies and privatization, better governance and elimination of corruption. The WTO argues that the benefits that the countries will get from free trade outweigh those costs, which include poverty and environmental costs just to name a few. The WTO actually admits that in the short-term, free trade will lead to inequalities but in the end, the wealth accumulated by the big businesses will trickle down and most people will benefit from the free trade model. However, as J. W. Smith argues: â€Å"That current free trade is just as unequal as the mercantilist trade it replaced is easily demonstrated. The structural adjustments imposed upon weak nations as necessary for free trade are the opposite policies under which every successful nation developed. That they developed under the philosophies of Adam Smith is a myth designed to hide a continuation of plunder through unequal trades. †[1] The paradox here is that, more and more, the developed countries who promote free trade actually practice protectionism. The problem is that free trade can only lead to fair trade if every country practices it, especially core countries that have the means to practice free trade. Nowadays, however, developed countries promote free trade and force developing countries to practice it but they themselves hypocritically practice protectionism. This penalizes poor countries who are not ready for the global market yet. It is also often noted that even if poor countries practice free trade, it won’t necessary lead to major successes. It obviously results in higher income but social inequalities remain in most cases. This can be called â€Å"Growth without social development†, and free trade is obviously not solving this tendency. Protectionism: A Regulatory Economic Policy Protectionism is an economic policy which restricts trade between countries by imposing economic barriers and policies. You read "Trade vs. Protectionism" in category "Papers" We usually tend to believe that protectionism is only a question of tariffs. However, government do have ccess to many other tools to protect their industries, including quotas, government regulations such as anti-dumping laws to protect domestic industries from competition of foreign enterprises, trade restrictions and exchange rate manipulation. Those policies make the production of goods cheaper for the industry that is granted the money or the preferential treatment. Domestic industries can therefore sell their product outside of the country for cheaper. In tha t perspective, pprotectionism is an isolationist doctrine which, some argue, leads to unfair competition. The main goal of protectionism is to handicap foreign industry. This economic model is associated with neo-mercantilism, which main objective is to maintain a positive trade balance. Protectionism is often practiced by countries that seem to be free-traders, such as the United States and the UK, in order to protect their favorite or influential industries. â€Å"Rich countries’ protectionism† includes subsidies to local industries such as agriculture and textiles. Core countries have the funds to practice that kind of protectionism while developing countries that would actually benefit from protectionism are asked to deregulate their economy. â€Å"UNCTAD estimated that rolling back [rich country] protectionism in this area could create additional export earnings of up to $700 billion for developing countries, to be realizable over a 10-year period. This is less than 5 per cent of the combined GDP of industrial countries, but could absorb an important part of unemployed labour in the South and generate a vent for surplus†[2]. It is often argued that developed countries are taking away from developing countries what helped them develop their own economy: protectionism policies. Protectionism is necessary to economic development in the sense that it helps build a strong foundation for a strong economy. Protectionism is essential for any developing countries to help their infant industries develop; become mature and competitive for the international market. It is hard for countries to enter market if they are forced to practice free trade; they may need help of protectionism policies in order to protect their infant new industries. The United States’ economy is a perfect example of what â€Å"rich countries’ protectionism† is. By examining its situation, it is easy to understand how developed countries show the face of a free trading nation but practice protectionism interiorly. The United States: The Face of a Free Trading Nation? The United States have always been a model of a Free Trade economy and have always promoted economic liberalization all around the world. When we observe the country’s practices and economic policies from the outside, it is clear that the USA is a firm believer in free trade. Indeed, the country is involved in many free trade agreements all around the world. Those include Free Trade agreements with Australia (2004), CAFTA-DR (2005), with numerous Latin American countries such as Chile (2004) and Columbia (2006), without forgetting NAFTA (1994). United States take great pride in its participation in international trade and promoting free trade between countries. Presently, international trade is primordial to the economy of the country and accounts for around a quarter of the USA’s GDP as it was mentioned by the Conference on a New Architecture for the U. S. National Accounts in 2004. Governmental economists all agree that Free trade agreements are necessary in order to promote rapid economic growth by increasing competition, cooperation between countries, and specialization. The United States follows Germany as the second most economically open country in the world. Inside a Free Trading Nation: A Hidden Protectionist Economy The United States takes good pride in proclaiming themselves as a non-discriminatory economy and a promoter of open global markets. While USA gives the image to the world of being a pure liberal economy, the country practices protectionism regularly, which shocks many trading partners and developing countries. This can be called the problem of the â€Å"Double Standard†. Rich countries promote the free trade ideology but in practice, they protect their own industry. This situation of double standard and of the USA promoting free trade but practicing protectionism was explained by the eleventh president of the World Bank, Robert Zoellick: â€Å"In order to promote free trade, the US has to manage the home front and the international front. And on the home front the only way that we can continue to get support from the American people for open markets and trade is to use our domestic and international laws to the fullest. †[3] For a society that calls itself a free-trading one, it is quite ironical and even hypocrite that, in 2002, Bush announced the imposition of new tariffs on several influential industries such as the steel industry and the agricultural sector. While developing countries, in order to please foreign investors and international economic agencies, keep on lowering their trade barriers, the USA has, over the last two years, increased its subsidies to farmers, raised tariffs on steel imports, and still hasn’t agreed to sign the WTO agreement to the patent rights of its pharmaceutical companies. Since the election of George W. Bush, the economy of the United States has proven to be quite protectionist: â€Å"The steel tariff and the farm bill attracted the most attention, but they are part of a broader picture that includes the punitive (and almost completely unjustified) tariff on Canadian softwood lumber and the revocation of Caribbean trade privileges. When it comes to free trade, the Bush administration is all for it — unless there is some political cost, however small, to honoring its alleged principles†[4] Let us examine more in details the three most important policies of the last decade that can help us understand how the United States is giving an image of a free-trade economy but is actually practicing protectionism. The first and very striking example of this protectionism is the Bush administration deciding to protect its steel industry which has been facing very important economic problems because of the European Union competition. The second example would be the case of the automobile industry. The Japanese automobile industry has always been a strong competitor for the USA industry. This is why the United States imposed, from â€Å"In May 1981, with the American auto industry mired in recession, Japanese car makers agreed to limit exports of passenger cars to the United States. This â€Å"voluntary export restraint† (VER) program, initially supported by the Reagan administration, allowed only 1. 68 million Japanese cars into the U. S. each year. The cap was raised to 1. 85 million cars in 1984, and to 2. 30 million in 1985, before the program was terminated in 1994. †[5] The Farm Bill of 2002 also reflects very well the protectionist tendencies of the country. This Bill distributed more than $190 billion to USA farmers and agriculture businesses around the country, and this over the next 10 years. This Bill was passed in order to help the agricultural sector overcome the difficulties it faced due to international competition. Those subsidies will make it harder for foreign producers to compete against the agricultural industry: â€Å"Third World producers will find it harder to sell to the US market and, since the USA exports 25 per cent of its farm production, they will find it harder to sell in other international markets or to resist competition from US products in their home markets. The disposal of increased US surpluses as ‘food aid’ is likely to compound the loss of livelihoods. †[6] While rich countries such as the United States can afford to practice protectionism, developing nations are forced to open their economy to free trade. Pakistan, the second country we will analyze in this essay is the perfect example of a country that would benefit from protectionism policies but is forced to liberalize their economy in order to receive funds from the WTO. The United States and Pakistan have been interacting on the international scene since the late 1950s, soon after Pakistan’s independence. This relationship has been successful but has also suffered from intermittent political conflicts, which reflects pretty well the complexity of the geopolitics of South East Asian region. After the events of September 11, Pakistan and the United States became even closer than before because the Bush administration relied on the help of Musharraf’s military dictatorship to eliminate terrorism in the region, mainly in Afghanistan which has a common border with Pakistan. The main difference between the United States during its early stage of development (1880s) and Pakistan’s development phase (late 1990s, 21st century) is that the United States weren’t dominated and repressed economically by major powers and international trade organization such as the IMF and the WTO, imposing economic liberalization and tariff limits on them. The United States weren’t subject to neo-colonialism like Pakistan is today. Protectionism in Pakistan: A Focus on the Textile Industry South Asia has long been seen as one of the most protectionist region in the world. As the World Bank states in the calculations of the GDP growth rates in the World Development Indicators, trade within the region accounts for less than 2% of the GDP which is minimal compared to 20% in East Asia. The region lacks diversity within the market and the products that are traded. In addition, most countries of the region, including Pakistan, still used up until recently import-substitution policies which limited trade possibilities within the region and outside the region. Trade was also hampered by political tensions, especially between India and Pakistan. Protectionism is Pakistan is mostly directed towards one of the most important industry in the country: the textile industry which accounts for more than 60% of the country’s exports. Pakistan under Musharraf saw the introduction of few protectionist policies concentrated towards this influential industry. In the policy speech of 2005-2006, the Minister of Commerce announced that all textile exporters that would â€Å"register their products with Pakistani Trade marks in foreign countries for export purposes will be provided subsidy equal to 50% of official fees of such registrations. [7]. Support to this important industry was instituted to help local businesses improve the quality of their product and compete against foreign industries in order to increase the Pakistanis textile industry’s market share. This protectionist policy was put in practice to reassure the industry, which was afraid after the quota restrictions were removed in 2005. It was also introduced to protect the industry from potential job losses and the loss of potential export if the textile industry wouldn’t reinvent itself. The 2005-2006 trade policy speech focused on alleviating costs for Pakistanis businesses in order to make the local industries more competitive on the international scene. Protectionism can also be practiced in the form of tax exemption for local industries. Musharaf’s government in the Federal Budget of 2005-2006 granted tax cuts to prominent industries in the country, including textile industry, sports goods, carpet industry, leather, and surgical instruments. In addition, the imports of necessary materials for these industries are also exempted from duties. Pakistan’s Economy: A Forced Free Trading nation Trade liberalization in Pakistan began in the late 1980s and developed even more during the 1990s under Musharraf’s military government. Today, Pakistan is part of various trade agreements, all leading to economic liberalization. Those include the Pakistan-Malaysia Free Trade Agreement, Pakistan-China Free Trade Agreement, Pakistan-Sri Lanka Free Trade Agreement, Pakistan-Malaysia Early Harvest Program, Pakistan-China Early Harvest Program and Pakistan-Iran agreement. When I briefly presented free trade, I mentioned the â€Å"growth without development† problem that developing countries face nowadays. This is a tendency to grow economically but without promoting social development. It is the result of free trade and is perfectly well illustrated by Pakistan’s situation. The more recent budget of Pakistan is mirrors this tendency, by showing commitment to neo-liberal policies, IMF led-policies. The budget focuses on pleasing the developed countries and on macro-economics rather than on developing the country itself. The budget focuses on the military which accounts for 20% and repaying the debt, 31%. Trade liberalization has been, since Musharraf’s entry in power, another priority within the budget. As the World Bank argues, liberalizing the Pakistanis economy would lead to an increase of 8$ billion if trade barriers were lifted. â€Å"Annual trade between India and Pakistan, the bulk of which is routed through Dubai, is currently estimated at US$1 billion, but could be as great as US$9 billion if barriers are lifted. †[8] In 1999, the Asian Development Bank granted a 300$ million loan to support the Government’s Trade, Export Promotion and Industry (TEPI) Program. This program was approved by the ADB, the World Bank and the IMF because it was based on liberalization of trade in Pakistan. TEPI is based on the elimination of nontariff barriers and on the increased access for exporters to the Pakistani market. This program was basically created to end import substitution policies and promote exports by giving as many advantages to local industries as to foreign companies. This program focuses on the privatization of industries and meets all criteria stated by the World Bank concerning quotas, subsidies, and customs. This facilitates foreign investors and promotes economic growth, proven by the fact that â€Å"After more than three decades of near stagnation in per-capita incomes during 1950–80, South Asia showed signs of growth beginning in the 1980s that accelerated in the 1990s and beyond. †[9] Pakistan’s economy used to be based on import substitution and was very little diversified. Taking into consideration those obstacles to trade, the Pakistani ministry of Commerce instituted a program based on diversification of exports and market opening for an increased access to facilitate trade. Pakistani economy has continuously followed WTO required adjustment of liberalization in order to remove trade barriers and obstacles to import. Following the WTO rhetoric, the government argues in favor of opening the market because in order to increase its exports, the country has to encourage imports as well as stated in the trade policy speech of 2005-2006: â€Å"It must be realized that no country has been able to enhance its exports significantly without liberalizing its import regime. †[10] Following this path, exports did increase consistently as well as imports which reached $20. 23 billion at the end of last year according to that same Trade Policy Speech. The irony that we face after having analyzed the economic situation of both countries is that the now-developed countries benefited during their development from an active state that helped them build their industries and protect. As the 1995 OECD Report showed, developed countries achieved growth starting in the 1 950s under very protectionist states. â€Å"The unprecedented growth in per capita income in several developed countries during the period 1950-1973, was also achieved under activist states. When they followed the ‘bad’ policies of establishing full welfare states with stricter financial market regulations, corporatist wage bargaining institutions, investment co-ordination and in some cases nationalized industries, even the now developed countries saw an exponential increase in their own growth. †[11] However, countries that wish to develop nowadays are required not only to practice free trade but not to use protectionism policies. This is unfair in the sense that they have to develop in an environment that doesn’t promote or help their growth. Developing countries would benefit and even need higher tariffs and trade barriers in order to protect their industry from the more and more competitive and aggressive trading environment. This current tendency is referred to as â€Å"kicking away the ladder†. Core countries act the way they do to ensure their domination over developing nations and keep the poor countries in a vicious circle, as they remain dependant on export of primary and raw materials, not being able to move up the trade ladder. This harms developing countries that struggle in this free trade world economy. In addition, imposing free trade on developing nations actually illustrates the focus of the WTO on short-term benefits and forgetting about the importance of long-term goals such as deepening the industrialization of the periphery countries. The imposed policies of the WTO prevent the developing countries of using protectionist policies to help their industries develop. Several experiences have already proven that the pressures to liberalize countries’ economy can do more harm than good to new economies. Nonetheless, the WTO continues to force developing countries to open their market and reduce their trade barriers. Liberalization and free trade, although they have great outcomes for developed countries, also lead to greater inequality between the core and the periphery. â€Å"According to one estimate, the Uruguay Round’s combined liberalization increased global economic welfare by $75 billion, of which almost $70 billion went to developed countries, $5 billion to Newly Industrialized Economies (NIEs; Korea, Singapore and Taiwan), and none to developing countries taken together. [12]. Even with such numbers, developing countries are still forced to join the free trade movement and the WTO and developed countries continue to promote the benefits of free trading. Today, while the IMF and the WTO force developing countries around the world to practice free trade by reducing trade barriers, Pakistan included, the USA keeps on to implementing protectionist policies in order to s ave industries in danger or suffering from temporary discomfort. This leads to a greater gap between the productivity of developed and developing countries. The factor that is important to note here is that today’s developed countries once protected their industries behind protectionist policies, but are now promoting free trade in countries that are trying, just like they did, to succeed economically. The developed countries of today reached their economic prosperity through protectionism economic policies, and then started practicing free trade. This irony now rules international trade. It is clear that there is a problem concerning trade between countries in the sense that there is an inequality in the terms of trade imposed on developed countries and developing countries. Free trade can only lead to prosperity if all countries benefit from equal treatment. Even then however free trade can lead to economic prosperity but won’t necessarily lead to social development, which is what developing countries need the most. How to cite Trade vs. Protectionism, Papers

Marketing Research On Tourism industry †MyAssignmenthelp.com

Question: Discuss about the Marketing Research On Tourism industry. Answer: Tourism industry has strength to cut across number of sectors of the Australian economy such as accommodation and food services, retail trade, arts, recreation services and transports that being the most obvious[1]. This report will demonstrates the information from the tourism report and summarize the relevant aspects. Various techniques will be described to improve the process. Organizational policies are necessary to evaluate the performance of the company that is why two organizational policies and communication plan will be discussed in this report. Analyze the information and summarise the relevant aspects The information can be consisted from the tourism report is to evaluate the growth of tourism, economic contribution of tourism and direct tourism employment. It has been found from the tourism report that the growth of the GDP due to tourism has been increased by 6.1 %. The information has been accumulated from the tourism report that economic contribution of tourism in 2016-17 is appreciated as it contributed into construction, mining, manufacturing, health care and social assistance, agriculture and forestry[2]. It has been evaluated that nearly 5% of Australian Jobs are in tourism. More than 200,000 people are employed in food services which comprise the cafes, takeaways and pubs. The GDP has increased by approximately 5% in real terms. In 2016-17 tourism accounted for a 3.2% share of total GDP up from a 3.1% share in 201516. It has been found that the construction and mining are having the highest position in the context of economic contribution of tourism. The leading employers within tourism have included accommodation and retail trade where more than 80,000 workers are employed in accommodation and more than 95,000 workers are employed in retail trade. Report : Introduction There are major three information has been analyzed such as the growth of tourism, economic contribution of tourism and direct tourism employment. The report will be presented to the CEO of the organization. The growth of tourism The growth of tourism has increased and viewed over a longer timeframe that the tourism industry of Australia is often sensitive to global threats and in the context of amending economic conditions, however, the nature of the tourism industry is considered as flexible and the impacts due to flexibility are not long lasting. Economic contribution of tourism Tourism industry is found as the biggest contributor to the economy of the country in comparison of agriculture. GVA (Gross value added) is considered as the accurate indicator of economic activity. Construction, mining, health care and social assistance are the major contributor in the economy of the country[3]. Direct tourism employment The industry of tourism is able to cover the various ranges of activities and offers a significant contribution to the economy of Australia. The ration of employment in this industry has grown significantly in 2016-17, amplifying by 3% during the year. Tourism industry provides the high part time as well as female employment, it has been analyzed that in 2016-17, there were 322,200 females employed in the tourism industry. The number of employed males in 2016-17 was 275,900 which are lower in comparison of females. It shows that the tourism industry has given number of employment to the number of people especially females which are good starting towards diminishing the discrimination[4]. Conclusion It has been concluded that that growth of tourism industry is rapid which provide the employment to the number of people. The discussion has been made on the growth of tourism, contribution of tourism in economic and direct tourism employment. Active listening and questioning techniques Active listening is considered as the way to listen and respond to another person for making mutual understanding. Questioning is considered as the fundamental to successful communication. The techniques can be comprised measure knowledge, assess comprehension, promote analysis, encourage synthesis and foster solution. Active listening has number of advantages as it can build trust and establish rapport. Questioning technique is the powerful way of learning, managing and coaching which is fundamental to successful communication. These techniques make enable employees to understand the information of the organization. Analyse numerical information There are number of information mentioned in themarketing document. As it is predicted by Tourism Research Australia that the total tourism spend will be able to provide a $225 billion in the progress of Australians economy. Visitor consumption spend on tourism products are mentioned in the document that defines the accurate point of visitors consumption on international as well as domestic basis. It shows that the current and potential situation of tourism industry which would be helpful for the organization to take important step in the context of progress[5]. Two organisational policies There can be two organizational policies such as confidentiality policy and operational policy. Confidentially policy should be followed by every organization because it facilitates company to keep safe confidential information of the employee as well as the company which increase the trust of the customers[6]. Operational policy is consisted client complaint, inventory control and shift scheduling which helps organization to know about the ongoing activities of the company. I will follow it to understand the conflicts of the customers and resolve them as soon as possible. The main purpose of this policy is to provide the framework for making sound decisions and to ensure that the appointment system of organization is optimized continuously and the fair treatment is considered in the organization with employees[7]. Communication plan Activity Priority Medium Frequency Responsible Person Notes Training and conversion High Meeting Monthly Human resource manager It would be helpful for the company to understand the way of performance within the organization. Confidential information about the projects High E-mail Monthly Project manager It will be helpful to make aware about the confidentiality. Presentation about the done activities by the employees. Medium PPT Weekly Team leads It will bring the attentiveness in the employee towards accomplishing the task. Market research results and two ways to improve the processes It has been resulted that tourism industry has reached at peak position where it is able to increase the employment and contribute to the economy of the country. There are two ways to improve the processes such as market trends and SWOT analysis. Market trends should be analyzed by the company to evaluate the current position of the market and implement the strategy as same. The changes in market have come constantly and in such scenario only market research can facilitate to establish ongoing trends. SWOT analysis is strengthening to provide the information by taking help of its components such as strength, weaknesses, opportunity and threats. It would be helpful to tap opportunities and encourage communication. The market research can be done by taking help of primary research or secondary research[8]. Skill Test 2 Market research plan for implementation Research policies and procedures Research policies and procedures must include workplace health and safety practices, procedures, precautions and procedures. Privacy act 1988 is related to the handling of personal information about people. The Competition and Consumer Act 2010 is related to fair trading and consumer protection and it includes the national law guaranteeing consumer rights when buying goods and services[9]. This section may include the data collection, privacy, workplace health and safety and codes of practice. Data collection: market research should be conducted by keeping in the mind of reliability and validity. Data collection method is used of interviews, questionnaire and surveys. These methods are being opted because it is quiet easy to analyze, simple to manage, low cost and can give large sample and can obtain detailed information about from people[10]. Reliability is considered while gathering the data and reliability is there when something gets the similar results. Control should be considered in the place of trying and preventing extraneous variables. Privacy: it is vital for the company to do not reveal the personal information about any employee of the company and maintain the policy of confidentiality. The confidentiality of the company can be interlinked with accessing of records, storage and carriage of records, collection of customers personal information, and destruction of records and release of personal information. Workplace health and safety: there are number of different situation where organizations need to consider the policies, procedures and precautions. The company should evaluate the different activities of different people and set the principles of health and safety for entire employee of the company. Employers of the company should require providing a safe working environment that involves the safe premises, safe systems of work, training, information and supervision and a suitable working environment facility[11]. Codes of practice: the main objectives of the codes of practice are to make ensure that the business and customers have equal right to access the information of the products and services[12]. The risk will be minimized by applying the policies which would be helpful to prevent the breaching the Trade Practices Act 1974 and Spam Act 2003 or State fair trading legislation. Methods of the research The main purpose of this research is to evaluate the organizational requirements and prepare a market research plan for implementation. The requirement of policies and procedures to improve the process has been focused in themarketing plan. Number of methods is chosen for gathering the data to evaluate the organizational requirements. However, there are number of research methods but the kind of research method is completely depending on the resources and objectives. It would be helpful for the organization to understand the characteristics and preference of the customers. Opportunities for growth can be identified by implementing the market plan in an effective manner[13]. Methods: there are mixed approach of qualitative and quantitative is used to gather the information. Experimental research is chosen to gather the data because it has the advantage of controlling irrelevant variables and manipulating one or more variables that manipulate the process being executed. Focus groups, interviews, online research, questionnaire and surveys are taken in to consideration while gathering the data. Focus groups have able to gather the information of employees opinions and feelings and allow asking further question from them[14]. An interview is the method which is able to gather the entire information about the people and people are not attracted by other group members. The main feature of this method is that it is unable to influence by other group members. The help of questionnaire will be taken to analyze the situation because it is quiet easy. The cost of questionnaire is low and can give a large sample. The data can be analyzed by taking help of these meth ods and these methods are simple to manage, reliable source of information and cost effective. Execute processes to obtain required resources to implement market research project plan and work plans Required resources: Required resources are included funding, human resources, work environment and partnership with other organization. These resources are required to obtain in order to implement market research project plan. To implement the market research project plan and work plans, the research is required number of resources such as enough funds are required to conduct the market research. Work environment is analyzed of the organization to understand the requirement of changes. Various methods are helpful to understand the organizational requirement. Along with that liaison and negotiation with key stakeholders are also required to obtain resources. Organizational procedures and requirements are required to attain the resources as well as the written and oral submission for resources[15]. The requirements of resources are different for every situation such as attaining the human resource will be different to attain funding. Organization need to consider the profit and the res ources to attain the enough funding and provide the training and development program to each employee for maintaining the sustainability. Bibliography Australian Government,2017, Tourism Satellite Account, Available from https://www.tra.gov.au/ArticleDocuments/254/Tourism%20Satellite%20Account%202016-17.pdf.aspx?Embed=Y. [Accessed on 3rd Feb 2018]. Brown, A., Workplace Health and Safety. e.d.The Practice Manager's Law Handbook: A Ready Reference to the Law for Managers of Medical General Practices, pp.52-85. Gill, P., Stewart, K., Treasure, E. and Chadwick, B., 2008. Methods of data collection in qualitative research: interviews and focus groups. British dental journal, 204(6), p.291. Gokovali, U., 2010. Contribution of tourism to economic growth in Turkey. Anatolia, 21(1), pp.139-153. Hill, M. and Hupe, P., 2008. Implementing public policy: An introduction to the study of operational governance. Sage. McDaniel, C. and Gates, R., 2013. Marketing research. Singapore. McKernan, J., 2013. Curriculum action research: A handbook of methods and resources for the reflective practitioner. Routledge. Medlik, S., 2012. Dictionary of travel, tourism and hospitality. Routledge. Nosek, B.A., Alter, G., Banks, G.C., Borsboom, D., Bowman, S.D., Breckler, S.J., Buck, S., Chambers, C.D., Chin, G., Christensen, G. and Contestabile, M., 2015. Promoting an open research culture. Science, 348(6242), pp.1422-1425. Palmer, I., Dunford, R., Akin, G. and Buchanan, D.A., 2009. Managing organizational change: A multiple perspectives approach. New York: McGraw-Hill Irwin. Peltier, T.R., 2016. Information Security Policies, Procedures, and Standards: guidelines for effective information security management. CRC Press. Snyman, S.L., 2012. The role of tourism employment in poverty reduction and community perceptions of conservation and tourism in southern Africa. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 20(3), pp.395-416. Srivastava, A. and Thomson, S.B., 2009. Framework analysis: a qualitative methodology for applied policy research. Taylor, S.J., Bogdan, R. and DeVault, M., 2015. Introduction to qualitative research methods: A guidebook and resource. John Wiley Sons. Valle, E. and Yobesia, M.N., 2009. Economic contribution of tourism in Kenya. Tourism Analysis, 14(3), pp.401-414.