Globalization: 1900 to Today

Promoting environmental activism.

Regulating international trade.

Providing humanitarian aid.

Enforcing human rights laws.

A company that operates in only one country.

A company owned by multiple governments.

A company operating in multiple countries.

A company focused solely on environmental conservation.

Increased isolationism

Decreased international trade

Capitalism and democracy

Strict regulation of technology

The Spanish Flu had a greater impact on global security, while AIDS primarily affected economic systems.

The Spanish Flu primarily affected developed nations, while AIDS disproportionately impacted developing nations.

The Spanish Flu spread more rapidly and infected a larger percentage of the global population in a shorter time compared to AIDS.

The Spanish Flu led to significant environmental degradation, while AIDS did not have any environmental consequences.

It uniformly improved environmental conditions and increased food production.

It decreased food production while improving environmental conditions.

It increased food production but also had negative environmental consequences.

It had no impact on food production or environmental conditions.

Globalization has led to decreased deforestation due to increased environmental awareness.

Globalization has no impact on deforestation rates.

Deforestation drives globalization by creating new trade routes.

Globalization drives deforestation through agriculture and industrialization.

To fight bacterial infections

To increase agricultural output

To improve air travel

To enhance communication technologies

It decreased the speed of shipping goods.

It made shipping more expensive and less efficient.

It revolutionized shipping and global trade by making it faster and more efficient.

It had no significant impact on global trade.

Preservation of rainforests

Decreased carbon emissions

Climate change

Reduction in pollution

Both agreements successfully eliminated carbon emissions globally.

The Kyoto Protocol was more effective than the Paris Agreement due to stricter enforcement mechanisms.

The Paris Agreement is considered more comprehensive because it includes more countries and focuses on long-term goals compared to the Kyoto Protocol.

Neither agreement had any measurable impact on global carbon emissions.