Evaluate how globalisation affects the power and role of the nation-state, weighing interdependence against sovereignty and identity

What this dot point is asking

This theme prepares you for General Paper questions on globalisation's effect on the nation-state: whether it erodes sovereignty and identity, and how states, especially small ones, adapt. The central insight is that globalisation has not made the state powerless but has changed what states must do to thrive, constraining some powers while leaving others intact and even creating new opportunities for well-governed states. A strong answer weighs interdependence against enduring sovereignty and judges that the state's role has transformed rather than vanished.

The answer

How globalisation constrains the state

There are real limits on state power to acknowledge:

• Economic constraint. Mobile global capital and multinational firms limit how far a government can tax and regulate, and financial markets can discipline policy choices.
• Supranational rules. Trade agreements and international bodies bind states to commitments that narrow their freedom of action.
• Transnational problems. Pandemics, climate change, terrorism and cross-border crime exceed the reach of any single state, requiring cooperation that dilutes unilateral control.

How the state endures

Against the "powerless state" thesis stand the powers states retain:

• Core sovereign functions. States still control borders, law, security, taxation and education, the levers that most shape citizens' lives.
• Shaping globalisation's impact. Governments decide how open to be, what to attract and how to cushion the losers, so policy determines how globalisation affects a country.
• Effective small states. Far from being victims, several small states have thrived by positioning themselves within global flows, evidence that statehood and openness coexist.

Reframe: changed, not abolished

The strongest analytical move is to reframe the question. Globalisation has not abolished the nation-state; it has changed the job. States now compete for investment and talent, manage interdependence, and provide the stability and skills that make a country attractive in a global economy. The role has shifted from controlling a closed economy to navigating an open one, which is a transformation, not an elimination, of state power.

The cultural dimension

Globalisation also pressures national identity through global media, brands and migration. But here too the effect is contested: cultures often hybridise and adapt rather than simply dissolve, and states actively cultivate identity and cohesion. Acknowledging the cultural strand, alongside the economic and political, gives a fuller answer.

Examples in context

Example 1. Singapore as a small state thriving on openness. Singapore has deliberately used globalisation to overcome the limits of a tiny domestic market, attracting investment, talent and trade while maintaining strong sovereign control over its laws, security and economic policy. It is the clearest evidence that openness and effective statehood coexist: rather than being rendered powerless, a small, well-governed state can turn global interdependence into its greatest asset, which supports the argument that globalisation transforms rather than abolishes the state's role.

Example 2. Transnational problems and the limits of one state. Challenges such as climate change and the COVID-19 pandemic showed that no single state, however powerful, can solve problems that cross borders, forcing cooperation through global institutions and agreements. This evidences the constraint side of the debate, the genuine limits on unilateral state power, while also showing that states remain the essential actors that negotiate, implement and enforce any collective response, so their role is reshaped by interdependence rather than dissolved by it.

Try this

Q1. Identify two ways globalisation constrains state power. [2 marks]

• Cue. Mobile global capital and multinational firms limit how far a state can tax and regulate, and transnational problems such as climate change or pandemics exceed any single state's reach (also supranational rules and disciplining financial markets).

Q2. Explain why small states are not necessarily victims of globalisation. [2 marks]

• Cue. Globalisation lets them overcome small domestic markets by accessing global markets, capital and talent, so with good governance, openness can become a small state's greatest asset rather than a threat.

Q3. Explain why "globalisation has changed the state's role rather than abolished it" is a strong judgement. [3 marks]

• Cue. States still control core functions and shape how globalisation affects them, but now must compete for investment and manage interdependence, so the evidence supports transformation of the state's job rather than its elimination, which captures both the constraints and the enduring agency.