Cambridge A-Level Sociology: Global Inequality, Migration and Crime — Revision Notes (9699)

These notes condense heading 8 Contemporary issues of Cambridge International A Level Sociology (9699) Paper 4. The core argument in each sub-topic is the same: globalisation creates opportunities but distributes them unequally. Life chances may rise or fall (8.1), migration has winners and losers (8.2), and global crime benefits the powerful while victims are often poor, female or both (8.3). Essays should always weigh optimistic against critical perspectives.

Full explanations: global inequality, migration and crime study guide.

Syllabus coverage

9699 (2024–2026) Paper 4 Section A, heading 8: 8.1 Globalisation, poverty and inequalities; 8.2 Globalisation and migration; 8.3 Globalisation and crime.

Key terms

Term	Definition
Life chances	Opportunities for education, income, health and long life
Transnational organisation	Body operating across states, e.g. UN agencies, World Bank, IMF, international NGOs
Dependency theory	Poor countries are kept poor by exploitation by rich ones (Frank, 1966)
Post-colonialism	Continuing economic and cultural influence of former colonial powers
Net migration	Immigration minus emigration
Push / pull factors	Reasons for leaving / reasons for choosing a destination
Remittances	Money migrants send home
Brain drain	Emigration of skilled workers
Human trafficking	Recruitment or movement of people by force or deception for exploitation
Corporate crime	Crime by or for a company
Green crime	Crime and harm against the environment
Global criminal economy	Networked international crime (Castells, 1998)

8.1 Poverty and inequalities

Impact on life chances

Area	Positive	Negative
Education	Global goals expanded primary enrolment; online learning	Cuts linked to debt; girls still excluded in some regions
Income	Export jobs, investment, remittances	Low wages, insecure work; Rana Plaza (2013)
Health	Vaccines, global health programmes	Brain drain of doctors; pollution from relocated industry

Transnational organisations

• Supporters: Sachs, The End of Poverty (2005) — aid and investment break poverty traps; MDGs (2000–2015), SDGs (2015–2030).
• Critics: Moyo, Dead Aid (2009) — aid encourages corruption and dependency; Marxists — IMF and World Bank conditions serve Western capital.

Explanations of inequality

• Capitalism — Wallerstein’s core / semi-periphery / periphery.
• Colonialism — extraction of resources and labour.
• Post-colonialism — neo-colonial trade and debt relationships.
• Patriarchy — Mies (1986): women’s unpaid and low-paid labour subsidises global capitalism.

8.2 Migration

Causes: push (poverty, war, persecution, climate disaster); pull (jobs, wages, safety, family); global labour demand (care, construction, technology); tourism. Lee (1966) push–pull model; Castles and Miller (1993): migration globalised, accelerated, feminised.

Consequences

Positive	Negative
Cultural diversity	Concern over scarce resources (housing, health, schools)
Fills labour shortages	Exploitation of irregular migrants
Remittances to sending countries	Brain drain from sending countries
Entrepreneurship and innovation	Negative perceptions, racism, moral panics

Who benefits? Functionalist/neo-liberal: mutual benefit. Marxist: migrants as a reserve army of labour that lowers wages and divides workers. Feminist: global care chains (Hochschild).

8.3 Crime

Why global crime emerged: cheaper travel, global finance, internet, weak regulation in some states, demand in rich countries.

Crime	Example
Human trafficking	Defined by the UN Palermo Protocol (2000)
Corporate crime	Bhopal gas leak, Union Carbide, India (1984); Sutherland’s white-collar crime (1939)
Environmental crime	Illegal logging, wildlife trade, toxic waste; Deepwater Horizon (2010); White (2008)
Organised crime	Castells (1998); Glenny, McMafia (2008)

Who benefits? Marxist: corporations and elites profit and avoid prosecution. Feminist: trafficking and exploitation of women reflect patriarchy.

Policing: Interpol, Europol, International Criminal Court (2002), digital forensics, financial tracking. Challenges: jurisdiction, corruption, encryption, power of corporations.

Worked essay plan

Practice question: “Global crime mainly benefits the powerful.” Evaluate this view. [35]

1. Define global crime with examples (trafficking, corporate, green).
2. Marxist support: corporate and state-corporate crime; lenient treatment of powerful offenders.
3. Feminist support: trafficking and exploitation of women.
4. Against: many global crimes are committed by marginalised groups (drug couriers, small smugglers) who take high risks for little gain; some victims are the powerful (cyber fraud against corporations).
5. Policing: international cooperation is increasing, but enforcement favours prosecuting the weak.
6. Conclusion: the powerful usually gain most, but the picture varies by crime type.

Common mistakes and exam traps

• Writing about “development” without linking it to globalisation.
• Treating migration as only negative or only positive; the syllabus asks for both and for “who benefits”.
• Forgetting tourism and global labour patterns as causes of migration.
• Ignoring the policing bullet in 8.3.
• Using statistics you cannot source; use named events and studies instead.

Quick self-test

1. What did Frank mean by “development of underdevelopment”?
2. Give one argument from Moyo (2009).
3. Define net migration.
4. Name one feminist argument about migration.
5. Give two challenges in prosecuting global crime.

Frequently asked questions

Do I need statistics? Accurate, sourced figures help, but named examples (Rana Plaza, Bhopal, the SDGs) are safer than half-remembered numbers.

How do 8.1 and 7.1 connect? The “who benefits” perspectives in 7.1 supply the theory for 8.1’s inequality arguments.

Which theories suit 8.3 best? The syllabus names Marxist and feminist perspectives on who benefits, so build essays around them.

Related pages: global inequality, migration and crime practice questions | globalisation debates revision notes