economic globalization today essay

Trade and Globalization

How did international trade and globalization change over time? What is the structure today? And what is its impact?

By Esteban Ortiz-Ospina, Diana Beltekian and Max Roser

This page was first published in 2014 and last revised in April 2024.

On this topic page, you can find data, visualizations, and research on historical and current patterns of international trade, as well as discussions of their origins and effects.

Other research and writing on trade and globalization on Our World in Data:

• Is globalization an engine of economic development?
• Is trade a major driver of income inequality?

Related topics

Economic Growth

See all our data, visualizations, and writing on economic growth.

Economic Inequality

See all our data, visualizations, and writing on economic inequality.

See all our data, visualizations, and writing on migration.

See all interactive charts on Trade and Globalization ↓

Trade has changed the world economy

Trade has grown remarkably over the last century.

One of the most important developments of the last century has been the integration of national economies into a global economic system. This process of integration, often called globalization, has resulted in a remarkable growth in trade between countries.

The chart here shows the growth of world exports over more than the last two centuries. These estimates are in constant prices (i.e. have been adjusted to account for inflation) and are indexed at 1913 values.

The chart shows an extraordinary growth in international trade over the last couple of centuries: Exports today are more than 40 times larger than in 1913.

You can switch to a logarithmic scale under ‘Settings’. This will help you see that, over the long run, growth has roughly followed an exponential path.

The increase in trade has even outpaced economic growth

The chart above shows how much more trade we have today relative to a century ago. But what about trade relative to total economic output?

Over the last couple of centuries the world economy has experienced sustained positive economic growth , so looking at changes in trade relative to GDP offers another interesting perspective.

The next chart plots the value of traded goods relative to GDP (i.e. the value of merchandise trade as a share of global economic output).

Up to 1870, the sum of worldwide exports accounted for less than 10% of global output. Today, the value of exported goods around the world is around 25%. This shows that over the last hundred years, the growth in trade has even outpaced rapid economic growth.

Trade expanded in two waves

The first "wave of globalization" started in the 19th century, the second one after ww2.

The following visualization presents a compilation of available trade estimates, showing the evolution of world exports and imports as a share of global economic output .

This metric (the ratio of total trade, exports plus imports, to global GDP) is known as the “openness index”. The higher the index, the higher the influence of trade transactions on global economic activity. 1

As we can see, until 1800 there was a long period characterized by persistently low international trade – globally the index never exceeded 10% before 1800. This then changed over the course of the 19th century, when technological advances triggered a period of marked growth in world trade – the so-called “first wave of globalization”.

This first wave came to an end with the beginning of World War I, when the decline of liberalism and the rise of nationalism led to a slump in international trade. In the chart we see a large drop in the interwar period.

After World War II trade started growing again. This new – and ongoing – wave of globalization has seen international trade grow faster than ever before. Today the sum of exports and imports across nations amounts to more than 50% of the value of total global output. 2

Before the first wave of globalization, trade was driven mostly by colonialism

Over the early modern period, transoceanic flows of goods between empires and colonies accounted for an important part of international trade. The following visualizations provide a comparison of intercontinental trade, in per capita terms, for different countries.

As we can see, intercontinental trade was very dynamic, with volumes varying considerably across time and from empire to empire.

Leonor Freire Costa, Nuno Palma, and Jaime Reis, who compiled and published the original data shown here, argue that trade, also in this period, had a substantial positive impact on the economy. 3

The first wave of globalization was marked by the rise and collapse of intra-European trade

The following visualization shows a detailed overview of Western European exports by destination. Figures correspond to export-to-GDP ratios (i.e. the sum of the value of exports from all Western European countries, divided by the total GDP in this region). You can use “Settings” to switch to a relative view and see the proportional contribution of each region to total Western European exports.

This chart shows that growth in Western European trade throughout the 19th century was largely driven by trade within the region: In the period 1830-1900 intra-European exports went from 1% of GDP to 10% of GDP, and this meant that the relative weight of intra-European exports doubled over the period. However, this process of European integration then collapsed sharply in the interwar period.

After the Second World War trade within Europe rebounded, and from the 1990s onwards exceeded the highest levels of the first wave of globalization. In addition, Western Europe then started to increasingly trade with Asia, the Americas, and to a smaller extent Africa and Oceania.

The next graph, using data from Broadberry and O'Rourke (2010) 4 , shows another perspective on the integration of the global economy and plots the evolution of three indicators measuring integration across different markets – specifically goods, labor, and capital markets.

The indicators in this chart are indexed, so they show changes relative to the levels of integration observed in 1900. This gives us another perspective on how quickly global integration collapsed with the two World Wars. 5

The second wave of globalization was enabled by technology

The worldwide expansion of trade after the Second World War was largely possible because of reductions in transaction costs stemming from technological advances, such as the development of commercial civil aviation, the improvement of productivity in the merchant marines, and the democratization of the telephone as the main mode of communication. The visualization shows how, at the global level, costs across these three variables have been going down since 1930.

Reductions in transaction costs impacted not only the volumes of trade but also the types of exchanges that were possible and profitable.

The first wave of globalization was characterized by inter-industry trade. This means that countries exported goods that were very different from what they imported – England exchanged machines for Australian wool and Indian tea. As transaction costs went down, this changed. In the second wave of globalization, we are seeing a rise in intra -industry trade (i.e. the exchange of broadly similar goods and services is becoming more and more common). France, for example, now both imports and exports machines to and from Germany.

The following visualization, from the UN World Development Report (2009) , plots the fraction of total world trade that is accounted for by intra-industry trade, by type of goods. As we can see, intra-industry trade has been going up for primary, intermediate, and final goods.

This pattern of trade is important because the scope for specialization increases if countries are able to exchange intermediate goods (e.g. auto parts) for related final goods (e.g. cars).

Trade and trade partners by country

Above, we examined the broad global trends over the last two centuries. Let's now examine country-level trends over this long and dynamic period.

This chart plots estimates of the value of trade in goods, relative to total economic activity (i.e. export-to-GDP ratios).

These historical estimates obviously come with a large margin of error (in the measurement section below we discuss the data limitations); yet they offer an interesting perspective.

You can edit the countries and regions selected. Each country tells a different story. 7

In the next chart we plot, country by country, the regional breakdown of exports. India is shown by default, but you can edit the countries and regions shown.

When switching to displaying relative values under ‘Settings’, we see the proportional contribution of purchases from each region. For example, we see that more than a third of Indian exports went to Asian countries in recent decades.

This gives us an interesting perspective on the changing nature of trade partnerships. In India, we see the rising importance of trade with Africa—a pattern that we discuss in more detail below .

Trade around the world today

How much do countries trade, trade openness around the world.

The metric trade as a share of GDP gives us an idea of global integration by capturing all incoming and outgoing transactions of a country.

The charts shows that countries differ a lot in the extent to which they engage in trade. Trade, for example, is much less important to the US economy than for other rich countries.

If you press the play button on the map, you can see changes over time. This reveals that, despite the great variation between countries, there is a common trend: over the last couple of decades trade openness has gone up in most countries.

Exports and imports in real dollars

Expressing the value of trade as a share of GDP tells us the importance of trade in relation to the size of economic activity. Let's now take a look at trade in monetary terms – this tells us the importance of trade in absolute, rather than relative terms.

The chart shows the value of exports (goods plus services) in dollars, country by country.

The main takeaway here is that the trend towards more trade is more pronounced than in the charts showing shares of GDP. This is not surprising: most countries today produce more than a couple of decades ago , and at the same time they trade more of what they produce. 8

What do countries trade?

Trade in goods vs. trade in services.

Trade transactions include goods (tangible products that are physically shipped across borders by road, rail, water, or air) and services (intangible commodities, such as tourism, financial services, and legal advice).

Many traded services make merchandise trade easier or cheaper—for example, shipping services, or insurance and financial services.

Trade in goods has been happening for millennia , while trade in services is a relatively recent phenomenon.

In some countries services are today an important driver of trade: in the UK services account for around half of all exports; and in the Bahamas, almost all exports are services.

In other countries, such as Nigeria and Venezuela, services account for a small share of total exports.

Globally, trade in goods accounts for the majority of trade transactions. But as this chart shows, the share of services in total global exports has slightly increased in recent decades. 9

How are trade partnerships changing?

Bilateral trade is becoming increasingly common.

If we consider all pairs of countries that engage in trade around the world, we find that in the majority of cases, there is a bilateral relationship today: most countries that export goods to a country also import goods from the same country.

The interactive visualization shows this. 10 In the chart, all possible country pairs are partitioned into three categories: the top portion represents the fraction of country pairs that do not trade with one another; the middle portion represents those that trade in both directions (they export to one another); and the bottom portion represents those that trade in one direction only (one country imports from, but does not export to, the other country).

As we can see, bilateral trade is becoming increasingly common (the middle portion has grown substantially). However, many countries still do not trade with each other at all.

South-South trade is becoming increasingly important

The next visualization here shows the share of world merchandise trade that corresponds to exchanges between today's rich countries and the rest of the world.

The 'rich countries' in this chart are: Australia, Austria, Belgium, Canada, Cyprus, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Iceland, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Japan, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Norway, Portugal, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, United Kingdom and the United States. 'Non-rich countries' are all the other countries in the world.

As we can see, up until the Second World War, the majority of trade transactions involved exchanges between this small group of rich countries. But this has changed quickly over the last couple of decades, and today, trade between non-rich countries is just as important as trade between rich countries.

In the past two decades, China has been a key driver of this dynamic: the UN Human Development Report (2013) estimates that between 1992 and 2011, China's trade with Sub-Saharan Africa rose from $1 billion to more than $140 billion. 11

The majority of preferential trade agreements are between emerging economies

The last few decades have not only seen an increase in the volume of international trade, but also an increase in the number of preferential trade agreements through which exchanges take place. A preferential trade agreement is a trade pact that reduces tariffs between the participating countries for certain products.

The visualization here shows the evolution of the cumulative number of preferential trade agreements in force worldwide, according to the World Trade Organization (WTO). These numbers include notified and non-notified preferential agreements (the source reports that only about two-thirds of the agreements currently in force have been notified to the WTO) and are disaggregated by country groups.

This figure shows the increasingly important role of trade between developing countries (South-South trade), vis-a-vis trade between developed and developing countries (North-South trade). In the late 1970s, North-South agreements accounted for more than half of all agreements – in 2010, they accounted for about one-quarter. Today, the majority of preferential trade agreements are between developing economies.

Trading patterns have been changing quickly in middle-income countries

An important change in the composition of exported goods in these countries has accompanied the increase in trade among emerging economies over the last half century.

The next visualization plots the share of food exports in each country's total exported merchandise. These figures, produced by the World Bank, correspond to the Standard International Trade Classification, in which 'food' includes, among other goods, live animals, beverages, tobacco, coffee, oils, and fats.

Two points stand out. First, the relative importance of food exports has substantially decreased in most countries since the 1960s (although globally, it has gone up slightly more recently). Second, this decrease has been largest in middle-income countries, particularly in Latin America.

Regarding levels, as one would expect, in high-income countries, food still accounts for a much smaller share of merchandise exports than in most low- and middle-income-countries.

Trade generates efficiency gains

The raw correlation between trade and growth.

Over the last couple of centuries, the world economy has experienced sustained positive economic growth , and over the same period, this process of economic growth has been accompanied by even faster growth in global trade .

In a similar way, if we look at country-level data from the last half century we find that there is also a correlation between economic growth and trade: countries with higher rates of GDP growth also tend to have higher rates of growth in trade as a share of output. This basic correlation is shown in the chart here, where we plot the average annual change in real GDP per capita, against growth in trade (average annual change in value of exports as a share of GDP). 12

Is this statistical association between economic output and trade causal?

Among the potential growth-enhancing factors that may come from greater global economic integration are: competition (firms that fail to adopt new technologies and cut costs are more likely to fail and be replaced by more dynamic firms); economies of scale (firms that can export to the world face larger demand, and under the right conditions, they can operate at larger scales where the price per unit of product is lower); learning and innovation (firms that trade gain more experience and exposure to develop and adopt technologies and industry standards from foreign competitors). 13

Are these mechanisms supported by the data? Let's take a look at the available empirical evidence.

Evidence from cross-country differences in trade, growth, and productivity

When it comes to academic studies estimating the impact of trade on GDP growth, the most cited paper is Frankel and Romer (1999). 14

In this study, Frankel and Romer used geography as a proxy for trade to estimate the impact of trade on growth. This is a classic example of the so-called instrumental variables approach . The idea is that a country's geography is fixed, and mainly affects national income through trade. So if we observe that a country's distance from other countries is a powerful predictor of economic growth (after accounting for other characteristics), then the conclusion is drawn that it must be because trade has an effect on economic growth. Following this logic, Frankel and Romer find evidence of a strong impact of trade on economic growth.

Other papers have applied the same approach to richer cross-country data, and they have found similar results. A key example is Alcalá and Ciccone (2004). 15

This body of evidence suggests trade is indeed one of the factors driving national average incomes (GDP per capita) and macroeconomic productivity (GDP per worker) over the long run. 16

Evidence from changes in labor productivity at the firm level

If trade is causally linked to economic growth, we would expect that trade liberalization episodes also lead to firms becoming more productive in the medium and even short run. There is evidence suggesting this is often the case.

Pavcnik (2002) examined the effects of liberalized trade on plant productivity in the case of Chile, during the late 1970s and early 1980s. She found a positive impact on firm productivity in the import-competing sector. She also found evidence of aggregate productivity improvements from the reshuffling of resources and output from less to more efficient producers. 17

Bloom, Draca, and Van Reenen (2016) examined the impact of rising Chinese import competition on European firms over the period 1996-2007 and obtained similar results. They found that innovation increased more in those firms most affected by Chinese imports. They also found evidence of efficiency gains through two related channels: innovation increased and new existing technologies were adopted within firms, and aggregate productivity also increased because employment was reallocated towards more technologically advanced firms. 18

Trade does not only increase efficiency gains

Overall, the available evidence suggests that trade liberalization does improve economic efficiency. This evidence comes from different political and economic contexts and includes both micro and macro measures of efficiency.

This result is important because it shows that there are gains from trade. But of course, efficiency is not the only relevant consideration here. As we discuss in a companion article , the efficiency gains from trade are not generally equally shared by everyone. The evidence from the impact of trade on firm productivity confirms this: "reshuffling workers from less to more efficient producers" means closing down some jobs in some places. Because distributional concerns are real it is important to promote public policies – such as unemployment benefits and other safety-net programs – that help redistribute the gains from trade.

Trade has distributional consequences

The conceptual link between trade and household welfare.

When a country opens up to trade, the demand and supply of goods and services in the economy shift. As a consequence, local markets respond, and prices change. This has an impact on households, both as consumers and as wage earners.

The implication is that trade has an impact on everyone. It's not the case that the effects are restricted to workers from industries in the trade sector; or to consumers who buy imported goods. The effects of trade extend to everyone because markets are interlinked, so imports and exports have knock-on effects on all prices in the economy, including those in non-traded sectors.

Economists usually distinguish between "general equilibrium consumption effects" (i.e. changes in consumption that arise from the fact that trade affects the prices of non-traded goods relative to traded goods) and "general equilibrium income effects" (i.e. changes in wages that arise from the fact that trade has an impact on the demand for specific types of workers, who could be employed in both the traded and non-traded sectors).

Considering all these complex interrelations, it's not surprising that economic theories predict that not everyone will benefit from international trade in the same way. The distribution of the gains from trade depends on what different groups of people consume, and which types of jobs they have, or could have. 19

The link between trade, jobs and wages

Evidence from chinese imports and their impact on factory workers in the us.

The most famous study looking at this question is Autor, Dorn and Hanson (2013): "The China syndrome: Local labor market effects of import competition in the United States". 20

In this paper, Autor and coauthors examined how local labor markets changed in the parts of the country most exposed to Chinese competition. They found that rising exposure increased unemployment, lowered labor force participation, and reduced wages. Additionally, they found that claims for unemployment and healthcare benefits also increased in more trade-exposed labor markets.

The visualization here is one of the key charts from their paper. It's a scatter plot of cross-regional exposure to rising imports, against changes in employment. Each dot is a small region (a 'commuting zone' to be precise). The vertical position of the dots represents the percent change in manufacturing employment for the working-age population, and the horizontal position represents the predicted exposure to rising imports (exposure varies across regions depending on the local weight of different industries).

The trend line in this chart shows a negative relationship: more exposure goes along with less employment. There are large deviations from the trend (there are some low-exposure regions with big negative changes in employment); but the paper provides more sophisticated regressions and robustness checks, and finds that this relationship is statistically significant.

This result is important because it shows that the labor market adjustments were large. Many workers and communities were affected over a long period of time. 21

But it's also important to keep in mind that Autor and colleagues are only giving us a partial perspective on the total effect of trade on employment. In particular, comparing changes in employment at the regional level misses the fact that firms operate in multiple regions and industries at the same time. Indeed, Ildikó Magyari found evidence suggesting the Chinese trade shock provided incentives for US firms to diversify and reorganize production. 22

So companies that outsourced jobs to China often ended up closing some lines of business, but at the same time expanded other lines elsewhere in the US. This means that job losses in some regions subsidized new jobs in other parts of the country.

On the whole, Magyari finds that although Chinese imports may have reduced employment within some establishments, these losses were more than offset by gains in employment within the same firms in other places. This is no consolation to people who lost their jobs. But it is necessary to add this perspective to the simplistic story of "trade with China is bad for US workers".

Evidence from the expansion of trade in India and the impact on poverty reductions

Another important paper in this field is Topalova (2010): "Factor immobility and regional impacts of trade liberalization: Evidence on poverty from India". 23

In this paper, Topalova examines the impact of trade liberalization on poverty across different regions in India, using the sudden and extensive change in India's trade policy in 1991. She finds that rural regions that were more exposed to liberalization experienced a slower decline in poverty and lower consumption growth.

Analyzing the mechanisms underlying this effect, Topalova finds that liberalization had a stronger negative impact among the least geographically mobile at the bottom of the income distribution and in places where labor laws deterred workers from reallocating across sectors.

The evidence from India shows that (i) discussions that only look at "winners" in poor countries and "losers" in rich countries miss the point that the gains from trade are unequally distributed within both sets of countries; and (ii) context-specific factors, like worker mobility across sectors and geographic regions, are crucial to understand the impact of trade on incomes.

Evidence from other studies

• Donaldson (2018) uses archival data from colonial India to estimate the impact of India’s vast railroad network. He finds railroads increased trade, and in doing so they increased real incomes (and reduced income volatility). 24
• Porto (2006) looks at the distributional effects of Mercosur on Argentine families, and finds this regional trade agreement led to benefits across the entire income distribution. He finds the effect was progressive: poor households gained more than middle-income households because prior to the reform, trade protection benefitted the rich disproportionately. 25
• Trefler (2004) looks at the Canada-US Free Trade Agreement and finds there was a group who bore "adjustment costs" (displaced workers and struggling plants) and a group who enjoyed "long-run gains" (consumers and efficient plants). 26

The link between trade and the cost of living

The fact that trade negatively affects labor market opportunities for specific groups of people does not necessarily imply that trade has a negative aggregate effect on household welfare. This is because, while trade affects wages and employment, it also affects the prices of consumption goods. So households are affected both as consumers and as wage earners.

Most studies focus on the earnings channel and try to approximate the impact of trade on welfare by looking at how much wages can buy, using as a reference the changing prices of a fixed basket of goods.

This approach is problematic because it fails to consider welfare gains from increased product variety, and obscures complicated distributional issues such as the fact that poor and rich individuals consume different baskets so they benefit differently from changes in relative prices. 27

Ideally, studies looking at the impact of trade on household welfare should rely on fine-grained data on prices, consumption, and earnings. This is the approach followed in Atkin, Faber, and Gonzalez-Navarro (2018): "Retail globalization and household welfare: Evidence from Mexico". 28

Atkin and coauthors use a uniquely rich dataset from Mexico, and find that the arrival of global retail chains led to reductions in the incomes of traditional retail sector workers, but had little impact on average municipality-level incomes or employment; and led to lower costs of living for both rich and poor households.

The chart here shows the estimated distribution of total welfare gains across the household income distribution (the light-gray lines correspond to confidence intervals). These are proportional gains expressed as a percent of initial household income.

As we can see, there is a net positive welfare effect across all income groups; but these improvements in welfare are regressive, in the sense that richer households gain proportionally more (about 7.5 percent gain compared to 5 percent). 29

Evidence from other countries confirms this is not an isolated case – the expenditure channel really seems to be an important and understudied source of household welfare. Giuseppe Berlingieri, Holger Breinlich, Swati Dhingra, for example, investigated the consumer benefits from trade agreements implemented by the EU between 1993 and 2013; and they found that these trade agreements increased the quality of available products, which translated into a cumulative reduction in consumer prices equivalent to savings of €24 billion per year for EU consumers. 30

Implications of trade’s distributional effects

The available evidence shows that, for some groups of people, trade has a negative effect on wages and employment opportunities; at the same time, it has a large positive effect via lower consumer prices and increased product availability.

Two points are worth emphasizing.

For some households, the net effect is positive. But for some households that's not the case. In particular, workers who lose their jobs can be affected for extended periods of time, so the positive effect via lower prices is not enough to compensate them for the reduction in earnings.

On the whole, if we aggregate changes in welfare across households, the net effect is usually positive. But this is hardly a consolation for the worse off.

This highlights a complex reality: There are aggregate gains from trade , but there are also real distributional concerns. Even if trade is not a major driver of income inequalities , it's important to keep in mind that public policies, such as unemployment benefits and other safety-net programs, can and should help redistribute the gains from trade.

Explaining trade patterns: Theory and Evidence

Comparative advantage, theory: what is 'comparative advantage' and why does it matter to understand trade.

In economic theory, the 'economic cost' – or the 'opportunity cost' – of producing a good is the value of everything you need to give up in order to produce that good.

Economic costs include physical inputs (the value of the stuff you use to produce the good), plus forgone opportunities (when you allocate scarce resources to a task, you give up alternative uses of those resources).

A country or a person is said to have a 'comparative advantage' if it can produce something at a lower opportunity cost than its trade partners.

The forgone opportunities of production are key to understanding this concept. It is precisely this that distinguishes absolute advantage from comparative advantage.

To see the difference between comparative and absolute advantage, consider a commercial aviation pilot and a baker. Suppose the pilot is an excellent chef, and she can bake just as well, or even better than the baker. In this case, the pilot has an absolute advantage in both tasks. Yet the baker probably has a comparative advantage in baking, because the opportunity cost of baking is much higher for the pilot.

The freely available economics textbook The Economy: Economics for a Changing World explains this as follows: "A person or country has comparative advantage in the production of a particular good, if the cost of producing an additional unit of that good relative to the cost of producing another good is lower than another person or country’s cost to produce the same two goods."

At the individual level, comparative advantage explains why you might want to delegate tasks to someone else, even if you can do those tasks better and faster than them. This may sound counterintuitive, but it is not: If you are good at many things, it means that investing time in one task has a high opportunity cost, because you are not doing the other amazing things you could be doing with your time and resources. So, at least from an efficiency point of view, you should specialize on what you are best at, and delegate the rest.

The same logic applies to countries. Broadly speaking, the principle of comparative advantage postulates that all nations can gain from trade if each specializes in producing what they are relatively more efficient at producing, and imports the rest: “do what you do best, import the rest”. 31

In countries with a relative abundance of certain factors of production, the theory of comparative advantage predicts that they will export goods that rely heavily upon those factors: a country typically has a comparative advantage in those goods that use its abundant resources. Colombia exports bananas to Europe because it has comparatively abundant tropical weather.

Is there empirical support for comparative-advantage theories of trade?

The empirical evidence suggests that the principle of comparative advantage does help explain trade patterns. Bernhofen and Brown (2004) 32 , for instance, provide evidence using the experience of Japan. Specifically, they exploit Japan’s dramatic nineteenth-century move from a state of near complete isolation to wide trade openness.

The graph here shows the price changes of the key tradable goods after the opening up to trade. It presents a scatter diagram of the net exports in 1869 graphed in relation to the change in prices from 1851–53 to 1869. As we can see, this is consistent with the theory: after opening to trade, the relative prices of major exports such as silk increased (Japan exported what was cheap for them to produce and which was valuable abroad), while the relative price of imports such as sugar declined (they imported what was relatively more difficult for them to produce, but was cheap abroad).

Trade diminishes with distance

The resistance that geography imposes on trade has long been studied in the empirical economics literature – and the main conclusion is that trade intensity is strongly linked to geographic distance.

The visualization, from Eaton and Kortum (2002), graphs 'normalized import shares' against distance. 33 Each dot represents a country pair from a set of 19 OECD countries, and both the vertical and horizontal axes are expressed on logarithmic scales.

The 'normalized import shares' in the vertical axis provide a measure of how much each country imports from different partners (see the paper for details on how this is calculated and normalized), while the distance in the horizontal axis corresponds to the distance between central cities in each country (see the paper and references therein for details on the list of cities). As we can see, there is a strong negative relationship. Trade diminishes with distance. Through econometric modeling, the paper shows that this relationship is not just a correlation driven by other factors: their findings suggest that distance imposes a significant barrier to trade.

The fact that trade diminishes with distance is also corroborated by data on trade intensity within countries. The visualization here shows, through a series of maps, the geographic distribution of French firms that export to France's neighboring countries. The colors reflect the percentage of firms that export to each specific country.

As we can see, the share of firms exporting to each of the corresponding neighbors is the largest close to the border. The authors also show in the paper that this pattern holds for the value of individual-firm exports – trade value decreases with distance to the border.

Institutions

Conducting international trade requires both financial and non-financial institutions to support transactions. Some of these institutions are fairly obvious (e.g. law enforcement); but some are less obvious. For example, the evidence shows that producers in exporting countries often need credit in order to engage in trade.

The scatter plot, from Manova (2013), shows the correlation between levels in private credit (specifically exporters’ private credit as a share of GDP) and exports (average log bilateral exports across destinations and sectors). 35 As can be seen, financially developed economies – those with more dynamic private credit markets – typically outperform exporters with less evolved financial institutions.

Other studies have shown that country-specific institutions, like the knowledge of foreign languages, for instance, are also important to promote foreign relative to domestic trade. 36

Increasing returns to scale

The concept of comparative advantage predicts that if all countries had identical endowments and institutions, there would be little incentive for specialization because the opportunity cost of producing any good would be the same in every country.

So you may wonder: why is it then the case that in the last few years, we have seen such rapid growth in intra-industry trade between rich countries?

The increase in intra-industry between rich countries seems paradoxical under the light of comparative advantage because in recent decades we have seen convergence in key factors, such as human capital , across these countries.

The solution to the paradox is actually not very complicated: Comparative advantage is one, but not the only force driving incentives to specialization and trade.

Several economists, most notably Paul Krugman, have developed theories of trade in which trade is not due to differences between countries, but instead due to "increasing returns to scale" – an economic term used to denote a technology in which producing extra units of a good becomes cheaper if you operate at a larger scale.

The idea is that specialization allows countries to reap greater economies of scale (i.e. to reduce production costs by focusing on producing large quantities of specific products), so trade can be a good idea even if the countries do not differ in endowments, including culture and institutions.

These models of trade, often referred to as “New Trade Theory”, are helpful in explaining why in the last few years we have seen such rapid growth in two-way exchanges of goods within industries between developed nations.

In a much-cited paper, Evenett and Keller (2002) show that both factor endowments and increasing returns help explain production and trade patterns around the world. 37

You can learn more about New Trade Theory, and the empirical support behind it, in Paul Krugman's Nobel lecture .

Measurement and data quality

There are dozens of official sources of data on international trade, and if you compare these different sources, you will find that they do not agree with one another. Even if you focus on what seems to be the same indicator for the same year in the same country, discrepancies are large.

Such differences between sources can also be found in rich countries where statistical agencies tend to follow international reporting guidelines more closely.

There are also large bilateral discrepancies within sources: the value of goods that country A exports to country B can be more than the value of goods that country B imports from country A.

Here we explain how international trade data is collected and processed, and why there are such large discrepancies.

What data is available?

The data hubs from several large international organizations publish and maintain extensive cross-country datasets on international trade. Here's a list of the most important ones:

• World Bank Open Data
• WTO Statistics
• UN Comtrade
• UNCTAD World Integrated Trade Solutions

In addition to these sources, there are also many other academic projects that publish data on international trade. These projects tend to rely on data from one or more of the sources above, and they typically process and merge series in order to improve coverage and consistency. Three important sources are:

• The Correlates of War Project . 38
• The NBER-United Nations Trade Dataset Project .
• The CEPII Bilateral Trade and Gravity Data Project . 39

How large are the discrepancies between sources?

In the visualization here, we compare the data published by several of the sources listed above, country by country, from 1955 to today.

For each country, we exclude trade in services, and we focus only on estimates of the total value of exported goods, expressed as shares of GDP. 40

As this chart clearly shows, different data sources often tell very different stories. If you change the country or region shown you will see that this is true, to varying degrees, across all countries and years.

Constructing this chart was demanding. It required downloading trade data from many different sources, collecting the relevant series, and then standardizing them so that the units of measure and the geographical territories were consistent.

All series, except the two long-run series from CEPII and NBER-UN, were produced from data published by the sources in current US dollars and then converted to GDP shares using a unique source (World Bank).

So, if all series are in the same units (share of national GDP) and they measure the same thing (value of goods exported from one country to the rest of the world), what explains the differences?

Let's dig deeper to understand what's going on.

Why doesn't the data add up?

Differences in guidelines used by countries to record and report trade data.

Broadly speaking, there are two main approaches used to estimate international merchandise trade:

• The first approach relies on estimating trade from customs records , often complementing or correcting figures with data from enterprise surveys and administrative records associated with taxation. The main manual providing guidelines for this approach is the International Merchandise Trade Statistics Manual (IMTS).
• The second approach relies on estimating trade from macroeconomic data , typically National Accounts . The main manual providing guidelines for this approach is the Balance of Payments and International Investment Position Manual (BPM6), which was drafted in parallel with the 2008 System of National Accounts of the United Nations (SNA 2008). The idea behind this approach is to record changes in economic ownership. 41

Under these two approaches, it is common to distinguish between 'traded merchandise' and 'traded goods'. The distinction is often made because goods simply being transported through a country (i.e., goods in transit) are not considered to change a country's stock of material resources and are hence often excluded from the more narrow concept of 'merchandise trade'.

Also, adding to the complexity, countries often rely on measurement protocols developed alongside approaches and concepts that are not perfectly compatible to begin with. In Europe, for example, countries use the 'Compilers guide on European statistics on international trade in goods'.

Measurement error and other inconsistencies

Even when two sources rely on the same broad accounting approach, discrepancies arise because countries fail to adhere perfectly to the protocols.

In theory, for example, the exports of country A to country B should mirror the imports of country B from country A. But in practice this is rarely the case because of differences in valuation. According to the BPM6, imports, and exports should be recorded in the balance of payments accounts on a ' free on board (FOB) basis', which means using prices that include all charges up to placing the goods on board a ship at the port of departure. Yet many countries stick to FOB values only for exports, and use CIF values for imports (CIF stands for 'Cost, Insurance and Freight', and includes the costs of transportation). 42

The chart here gives you an idea of how large import-export asymmetries are. Shown are the differences between the value of goods that each country reports exporting to the US, and the value of goods that the US reports importing from the same countries. For example, for China, the figure in the chart corresponds to the “Value of merchandise imports in the US from China” minus the “Value of merchandise exports from China to the US”.

The differences in the chart here, which are both positive and negative, suggest that there is more going on than differences in FOB vs. CIF values. If all asymmetries were coming from FOB-CIF differences, then we should only see positive values in the chart (recall that, unlike FOB values, CIF values include the cost of transportation, so CIF values are larger).

What else may be going on here?

Another common source of measurement error relates to the inconsistent attribution of trade partners. An example is failure to follow the guidelines on how to treat goods passing through intermediary countries for processing or merchanting purposes. As global production chains become more complex, countries find it increasingly difficult to unambiguously establish the origin and final destination of merchandise, even when rules are established in the manuals. 43

And there are still more potential sources of discrepancies. For example differences in customs and tax regimes, and differences between "general" and "special" trade systems (i.e. differences between statistical territories and actual country borders, which do not often coincide because of things like 'custom free zones'). 44

Even when two sources have identical trade estimates, inconsistencies in published data can arise from differences in exchange rates. If a dataset reports cross-country trade data in US dollars, estimates will vary depending on the exchange rates used. Different exchange rates will lead to conflicting estimates, even if figures in local currency units are consistent.

A checklist for comparing sources

Asymmetries in international trade statistics are large and arise for a variety of reasons. These include conceptual inconsistencies across measurement standards and inconsistencies in the way countries apply agreed-upon protocols. Here's a checklist of issues to keep in mind when comparing sources.

• Differences in underlying records: is trade measured from National Accounts data rather than directly from custom or tax records?
• Differences in import and export valuations: are transactions valued at FOB or CIF prices?
• Inconsistent attribution of trade partners: how is the origin and final destination of merchandise established?
• Difference between 'goods' and 'merchandise': how are re-importing, re-exporting, and intermediary merchanting transactions recorded?
• Exchange rates: how are values converted from local currency units to the currency that allows international comparisons (most often the US-$)?
• Differences between 'general' and 'special' trade system: how is trade recorded for custom-free zones?
• Other issues: Time of recording, confidentiality policies, product classification, deliberate mis-invoicing for illicit purposes.

Many organizations producing trade data have long recognized these factors. Indeed, international organizations often incorporate corrections in an attempt to improve data quality.

The OECD's Balanced International Merchandise Trade Statistics , for example, uses its own approach to correct and reconcile international merchandise trade statistics. 45

The corrections applied in the OECD's 'balanced' series make this the best source for cross-country comparisons. However, this dataset has low coverage across countries, and it only goes back to 2011. This is an important obstacle since the complex adjustments introduced by the OECD imply we can't easily improve coverage by appending data from other sources. At Our World in Data we have chosen to rely on CEPII as the main source for exploring long-run changes in international trade, but we also rely on World Bank and OECD data for up-to-date cross-country comparisons.

There are two key lessons from all of this. The first lesson is that, for most users of trade data out there, there is no obvious way of choosing between sources. And the second lesson is that, because of statistical glitches, researchers and policymakers should always take analyses of trade data with a pinch of salt. For example, in a recent high-profile report , researchers attributed mismatches in bilateral trade data to illicit financial flows through trade mis-invoicing (or trade-based money laundering). As we show here, this interpretation of the data is not appropriate, since mismatches in the data can, and often do arise from measurement inconsistencies rather than malfeasance. 46

Hopefully, the discussion and checklist above can help researchers better interpret and choose between conflicting data sources.

Interactive charts on Trade and Globalization

The openness index, when calculated for the world as a whole, includes double-counting of transactions: When country A sells goods to country B, this shows up in the data both as an import (B imports from A) and as an export (A sells to B).

Indeed, if you compare the chart showing the global trade openness index and the chart showing global merchandise exports as a share of GDP , you find that the former is almost twice as large as the latter.

Why is the global openness index not exactly twice the value reported in the chart plotting global merchandise exports? There a three reasons.

First, the global openness index uses different sources. Second, the global openness index includes trade in goods and services, while merchandise exports include goods but not services. And third, the amount that country A reports exporting to country B does not usually match the amount that B reports importing from A.

We explore this in more detail in our measurement section below .

Klasing and Milionis (2014), one of the sources in the chart, published an additional set of estimates under an alternative specification. Similarly, for the period 1960-2015, the World Bank's World Development Indicators published an alternative set of estimates similar but not identical to those included from the Penn World Tables (9.1). You find all these alternative overlapping sources in this comparison chart .

Leonor Freire Costa, Nuno Palma, and Jaime Reis (2015) – The great escape? The contribution of the empire to Portugal's economic growth, 1500–1800 Leonor Freire Costa Nuno Palma Jaime Reis European Review of Economic History, Volume 19, Issue 1, 1 February 2015, Pages 1–22, https://doi.org/10.1093/ereh/heu019

Broadberry and O'Rourke (2010) - The Cambridge Economic History of Modern Europe: Volume 2, 1870 to the Present. Cambridge University Press.

Integration in the goods markets is measured here through the 'trade openness index', which is defined by the sum of exports and imports as a share of GDP. In our interactive chart you can explore trends in trade openness over this period for a selection of European countries.

Broadberry and O'Rourke (2010) - The Cambridge Economic History of Modern Europe: Volume 2, 1870 to the Present. Cambridge University Press. The graph depicts the “evolution of three indicators measuring integration in commodity, labor, and capital markets over the long run. Commodity market integration is measured by computing the ratio of exports to GDP. Labor market integration is measured by dividing the migratory turnover by population. Financial integration is measured using Feldstein–Horioka estimators of current account disconnectedness.”

We also have the same chart but showing imports .

We also have the same chart, but showing imports .

This interactive chart shows trade in services as a share of GDP across countries and regions.

This chart was inspired by a chart from Helpman, E., Melitz, M., & Rubinstein, Y. (2007). Estimating trade flows: Trading partners and trading volumes (No. w12927). National Bureau of Economic Research.

We also have the same data, but as a stacked-area chart .

There are different ways of capturing this correlation. I focus here on all countries with data over the period 1945-2014. You can find a similar chart using different data sources and time periods in Ventura, J. (2005). A global view of economic growth. Handbook of economic growth, 1, 1419-1497. Online here .

The textbook The Economy: Economics for a Changing World explains this in more detail.

Frankel, J. A., & Romer, D. H. (1999). Does trade cause growth? American Economic Review, 89(3), 379-399.

Alcalá, F., & Ciccone, A. (2004). Trade and productivity . The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 119(2), 613-646.

There are many papers that try to answer this specific question with macro data. For an overview of papers and methods see: Durlauf, S. N., Johnson, P. A., & Temple, J. R. (2005). Growth econometrics. Handbook of economic growth, 1, 555-677.

Pavcnik, N. (2002). Trade liberalization, exit, and productivity improvements: Evidence from Chilean plants . The Review of Economic Studies, 69(1), 245-276.

Bloom, N., Draca, M., & Van Reenen, J. (2016). Trade induced technical change? The impact of Chinese imports on innovation, IT and productivity. The Review of Economic Studies, 83(1), 87-117. Available online here .

You can read more about these economic concepts, and the related predictions from economic theory, in Chapter 18 of the textbook The Economy: Economics for a Changing World .

David, H., Dorn, D., & Hanson, G. H. (2013). The China syndrome: Local labor market effects of import competition in the United States . American Economic Review, 103(6), 2121-68.

It's important to mention here that the economist Jonathan Rothwell wrote a paper suggesting these findings are the result of a statistical illusion. Rothwell's critique received some attention from the media , but Autor and coauthors provided a reply , which I think successfully refutes this claim.

Magyari, I. (2017). Firm Reorganization, Chinese Imports, and US Manufacturing Employment . US Census Bureau, Center for Economic Studies.

Topalova, P. (2010). Factor immobility and regional impacts of trade liberalization: Evidence on poverty from India . American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, 2(4), 1-41.

Donaldson, D. (2018). Railroads of the Raj: Estimating the impact of transportation infrastructure . American Economic Review, 108(4-5), 899-934.

Porto, G (2006). Using Survey Data to Assess the Distributional Effects of Trade Policy. Journal of International Economics 70 (2006) 140–160.

Trefler, D. (2004). The long and short of the Canada-US free trade agreement . American Economic Review, 94(4), 870-895.

See: (i) Feenstra, R. C., & Weinstein, D. E. (2017). Globalization, markups, and US welfare . Journal of Political Economy, 125(4), 1040-1074. (ii) Fajgelbaum, P. D., & Khandelwal, A. K. (2016). Measuring the unequal gains from trade . The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 131(3), 1113-1180.

Atkin, David, Benjamin Faber, and Marco Gonzalez-Navarro. "Retail globalization and household welfare: Evidence from Mexico." Journal of Political Economy 126.1 (2018): 1-73.

In the paper, Atkin and coauthors explore the reasons for this and find that the regressive nature of the distribution is mainly due to richer households placing higher weight on the product variety and shopping amenities on offer at these new foreign stores.

Berlingieri, G., Breinlich, H., & Dhingra, S. (2018). The Impact of Trade Agreements on Consumer Welfare—Evidence from the EU Common External Trade Policy. Journal of the European Economic Association.

Nobel laureate Paul Samuelson (1969) was once challenged by the mathematician Stanislaw Ulam: "Name me one proposition in all of the social sciences which is both true and non-trivial." It was several years later than he thought of the correct response: comparative advantage. "That it is logically true need not be argued before a mathematician; that is is not trivial is attested by the thousands of important and intelligent men who have never been able to grasp the doctrine for themselves or to believe it after it was explained to them."

(NB. This is an excerpt from https://www.wto.org/english/res_e/reser_e/cadv_e.htm)

Bernhofen, D., & Brown, J. (2004). A Direct Test of the Theory of Comparative Advantage: The Case of Japan. Journal of Political Economy, 112(1), 48-67. doi:1. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.1086/379944 doi:1

Eaton, J., & Kortum, S. (2002). Technology, geography, and trade. Econometrica, 70(5), 1741-1779.

Crozet, M., & Koenig, P. (2010). Structural Gravity Equations with Intensive and Extensive Margins. The Canadian Journal of Economics / Revue Canadienne D'Economique, 43(1), 41-62. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/40389555

Manova, Kalina. "Credit constraints, heterogeneous firms, and international trade." The Review of Economic Studies 80.2 (2013): 711-744.

Melitz, J. (2008). Language and foreign trade. European Economic Review, 52(4), 667-699.

Evenett, S. J., & Keller, W. (2002). On theories explaining the success of the gravity equation . Journal of Political Economy, 110(2), 281-316.

For more information on how the COW trade datasets were constructed see: (i) Barbieri, Katherine, and Omar M. G. Omar Keshk. 2016. Correlates of War Project Trade Data Set Codebook, Version 4.0. Available at http://correlatesofwar.org and (ii) Barbieri, Katherine, Omar M. G. Keshk, and Brian Pollins. 2009. TRADING DATA: Evaluating our Assumptions and Coding Rules. Conflict Management and Peace Science, 26(5): 471–491.

Further information on CEPII's methodology can be found in their working paper .

The chart includes series labeled by the sources as 'merchandise trade' and 'goods trade'. As we explain below, part of the asymmetries in trade data comes from the fact that, although 'merchandise' and 'goods' are equivalent in the dictionary, these two terms often measure related but different things.

For example, if there is no change in ownership (e.g. a firm exports goods to its factory in another country for processing, and then re-imports the processed goods) the manual says that statistical agencies should only record the net difference in value. You can find more details about this in an OECD Statistics Briefing .

This issue is actually also a source of disagreement between National Accounts data and customs data. You can read more about it in this report: Harrison, Anne (2013) FOB/CIF Issue in Merchandise Trade/Transport of Goods in BPM6 and the 2008 SNA, Twenty-Fifth Meeting of the IMF Committee on Balance of Payments Statistics, Washington, D.C .

Precisely because of the difficulty that arises when trying to establish the origin and final destination of merchandise, some sources distinguish between national and dyadic (i.e. 'directed') trade estimates.

For more details about general and special trade see the Eurostat glossary .

The OECD approach consists of four steps, which they describe as follows: "First, data are collected and organized, and imports are converted to FOB prices to match the valuation of exports. Secondly, data are adjusted for several specific large problems known to drive asymmetries. Presently these include “modular” adjustments for unallocated and confidential trade; for exports by Hong Kong, China; for Swiss non-monetary gold; and for clear-cut cases of product misclassifications. The list of modules is expected to grow over time. In the third step, adjusted data are balanced using a “Symmetry Index” that weights exports and imports. As the final step, the data are also converted to Classification of Products by Activity (CPA) products to better align with National Accounts statistics, such as in national Supply-Use tables." You can read more about it here . In addition to the OECD, other sources also use corrections. The IMF's DOTS dataset, for example, uses a 6 percent rule for converting import valuations (in CIF) into export values (in FOB). More information can be found in the IMF's (2018) working paper on 'New Estimates for Direction of Trade Statistics'.

For more details on this see Forstater, M. (2018) Illicit Financial Flows, Trade Misinvoicing, and Multinational Tax Avoidance: The Same or Different? , CGD Policy Paper 123.

Cite this work

Our articles and data visualizations rely on work from many different people and organizations. When citing this topic page, please also cite the underlying data sources. This topic page can be cited as:

BibTeX citation

Reuse this work freely

All visualizations, data, and code produced by Our World in Data are completely open access under the Creative Commons BY license . You have the permission to use, distribute, and reproduce these in any medium, provided the source and authors are credited.

The data produced by third parties and made available by Our World in Data is subject to the license terms from the original third-party authors. We will always indicate the original source of the data in our documentation, so you should always check the license of any such third-party data before use and redistribution.

All of our charts can be embedded in any site.

Our World in Data is free and accessible for everyone.

Help us do this work by making a donation.

Globalization and Economic Growth

• Living reference work entry
• First Online: 14 April 2021
• Cite this living reference work entry

• Ishak Demir 7 , 10 ,
• Mehmet Canakci 8 &
• Taha Egri 9  

Part of the book series: Encyclopedia of the UN Sustainable Development Goals ((ENUNSDG))

482 Accesses

1 Citations

Economic Growth , Integration and growth , Economic development.

Definitions

Globalization, or the increased interconnectedness and interdependence of peoples, companies, institutions and countries. It is generally understood to include two inter-related elements: the opening of international borders to increasingly fast flows of goods, services, finance, investment, people, information, ideas and technology; and the changes in institutions and policies at national and international levels that facilitate or promote such flows (WHO 2020 ). Globalization process has impacts on economies, prosperity, development of societies, political systems, environment, and cultures around the world.

Economic globalization can be defined as the increasing interdependence of world economies as a result of the growing scale of cross-border trade of commodities and services, flow of international capital and wide and rapid spread of technologies. It reflects the continuing expansion and mutual...

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Institutional subscriptions

Alesina A et al (1994) The political economy of capital controls. In: Leiderman L, Razin A (eds) Capital mobility: the impact on consumption, investment and growth. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 289–321

Google Scholar  

Bauman Z (1998) Globalization the human consequences. Columbia University Press, New York

Berger PL (1997) Four faces of global culture. Nat Int 49:23–29

Brenner N (1999) Beyond state-centrism? Space, territoriality, and geographical scale in globalization studies. Theory Soc 28(1):39–78

Article   Google Scholar  

Castells M (2000) Materials for an exploratory theory of the network society. Br J Soc 51(1):5–24

Demirguc-Kunt A, Levine R (2008) Finance, financial sector policies, and long-run growth. The World Bank

Dollar D (1992) Outward-oriented developing economies really do grow more rapidly: evidence from 95 LDCs. Econ Dev Cult Chang 40(3):523–544

Dowrick S, DeLong JB (2003) Globalization and convergence. In: Bordo MD et al (eds) Globalization in historical perspective. University of Chicago Press, pp 191–226

Dreher A (2006) Does globalization affects growth? Empirical evidence from a new index. Appl Econ 38(10):1091–1110

Easterly W (2004) Channels from globalization to inequality: productivity world vs factor world. Paper presented at the Brookings Trade Forum on Globalization, Poverty and Inequality, 13–14 May, Washington, DC

Edwards S (1998) Openness, productivity and growth: what do we really know? Econ J 108:383–398

Edwards S (2005) Capital controls, sudden stops, and current account reversals. NBER Working Paper No. 11170. https://www.nber.org/papers/w11170.pdf . Accessed 15 May 2020

Falk R (1999) Predatory globalization: a critique. Polity Press, Cambridge

Fouquin M, Hugot J (2016) Two centuries of bilateral trade and gravity data: 1827–2014. CEPII Working Paper, 2016–14. http://www.cepii.fr/pdf_pub/wp/2016/wp2016-14.pdf . Accessed 15 May 2020

Frankel JA, Romer DH (1999) Does trade cause growth? Am Econ Rev 89(3):379–399

Gao S (2000) Economic globalization: trends, risks and risk prevention. CDP Background Papers 001, United Nations, Department of Economics and Social Affairs

Georgantzas N, Katsamakas E, Solowiej D (2010) Giddens’ globalization: exploring dynamic implications. Syst Res Behav Sci 27(6):622–638

Giddens A (1990) Consequences of modernity. Standford University Press, Standford

Gilpin R (2000) The challenge of global capitalism: the world economy in the 21 st century. Princeton University Press, Princeton

Book   Google Scholar  

Gu XH, Dong BM (2011) A theory of financial liberalisation: why are developing countries so reluctant? World Econ 34:1106–1123

Held D et al (1999) Global transformations: politics, economics and cultures. Polity Press, Cambridge

Hernández RA (2003) Neoclassical and endogenous growth models: theory and practice. Warwick University. https://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.1.5069.1600

Hirst P, Thompson G (2001) Globalization in question: the international economy and the possibilities of governance

Intriligator MD (2004) Globalization of the world economy: potential benefits and costs and a net assessment. J Policy Model 26(4):485–498

Lane DC, Husemann E (2008) Steering without Circe: attending to reinforcing loops in social systems. Syst Dyn Rev 24(1):27–61

Levine R (2001) International financial liberalization and economic growth. Rev Int Econ 9:688–702

Luhmann N (1982) The world society as a social system. Int J Gen Syst 8(3):131–138

Nissanke M, Thorbecke E (2007) The impact of globalization on the world’s poor: transmission mechanisms. Palgrave Macmillan

Nye J (2002) The paradox of American power: why the world’s only superpower can’t go it alone. Oxford University Press, New York

OECD (2002) Foreign direct investment for development: maximising benefits, minimising costs. OECD Publications

Rodriguez F, Rodrik D (2000) Trade policy and economic growth: a sceptic’s guide to the cross-national evidence. NBER Mac Ann 15:261–325

Stiglitz J (2003) Globalization and growth in emerging markets and the new economy. J Policy Model

Stiglitz J (2007) Making globalization work. Penguin Books, New York

Wallerstein I (2016) The scholarly mainstream and reality: we at a turning point. In: Wallerstein I (ed) Modern world-system in the longue Duree. Routledge, London\New York

World Health Organizations (2020) www.who.int/topics/globalization/en (visited on 25.05.2020)

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

University of Lincoln, Lincoln, UK

Ishak Demir

Inonu University, Battalgazi/Malatya, Turkey

Mehmet Canakci

Kirklareli University, Merkez/Kırklareli, Turkey

Ekonomi Arastirmalari Platformu, Istanbul, Turkey

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ishak Demir .

Editor information

Editors and affiliations.

European School of Sustainability, Hamburg University of Applied Sciences, Hamburg, Hamburg, Germany

Walter Leal Filho

Center for Neuroscience & Cell Biology, University of Coimbra, Coimbra, Portugal

Anabela Marisa Azul

Faculty of Engineering and Architecture, Passo Fundo University Faculty of Engineering and Architecture, Passo Fundo, Brazil

Luciana Brandli

HAW Hamburg, Hamburg, Hamburg, Germany

Amanda Lange Salvia

International Centre for Thriving, University of Chester, Chester, UK

Section Editor information

Polimoda Fashion Institute, Florence, Italy

Marco Tortora

Fair Association, Florence, Italy

School of Economics and Management, University of Florence, Florence, Italy

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2021 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this entry

Cite this entry.

Demir, I., Canakci, M., Egri, T. (2021). Globalization and Economic Growth. In: Leal Filho, W., Azul, A.M., Brandli, L., Lange Salvia, A., Wall, T. (eds) Decent Work and Economic Growth. Encyclopedia of the UN Sustainable Development Goals. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-71058-7_90-1

Download citation

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-71058-7_90-1

Received : 29 May 2020

Accepted : 29 May 2020

Published : 14 April 2021

Publisher Name : Springer, Cham

Print ISBN : 978-3-319-71058-7

Online ISBN : 978-3-319-71058-7

eBook Packages : Springer Reference Earth and Environm. Science Reference Module Physical and Materials Science Reference Module Earth and Environmental Sciences

• Publish with us

Policies and ethics

• Find a journal
• Track your research

This website uses cookies.

By clicking the "Accept" button or continuing to browse our site, you agree to first-party and session-only cookies being stored on your device to enhance site navigation and analyze site performance and traffic. For more information on our use of cookies, please see our Privacy Policy .

• Journal of Economic Literature

Inequality and Globalization: A Review Essay

• Martin Ravallion
• Article Information

Additional Materials

• Author Disclosure Statement(s) (26.59 KB)

JEL Classification

• F63 Economic Impacts of Globalization: Economic Development

• SUGGESTED TOPICS
• The Magazine
• Newsletters
• Managing Yourself
• Managing Teams
• Work-life Balance
• The Big Idea
• Data & Visuals
• Reading Lists
• Case Selections
• HBR Learning
• Topic Feeds
• Account Settings
• Email Preferences

The State of Globalization in 2023

• Steven A. Altman
• Caroline R. Bastian

Data disproves the notion that the world has become more regionalized in recent years.

Plummeting flows of trade, capital, and people at the beginning of the Covid-19 pandemic prompted a wave of speculation about the end of globalization, and Russia’s invasion of Ukraine brought even more predictions of a retreat toward national self-sufficiency. But, according to research for the latest DHL Global Connectedness Index, international flows show no signs of a sustained downturn. The data shows a broad pattern of decoupling between the U.S. and China, but the flows of countries that are geopolitically aligned with the U.S. and China do not — at least yet — indicate a broader split between rival blocs. Nor is there evidence that globalization is giving way to regionalization. While companies do need to adjust for heightened geopolitical tensions, they should not abandon global strategies. Corporate deglobalization, in fact, could be a riskier path than making focused adjustments to mitigate geopolitical risks.

Three key questions lie at the heart of debates about whether global crises and escalating geopolitical tensions have begun to reverse globalization: Has the growth of cross-border trade, capital, information and people flows gone into reverse? Are geopolitical tensions fracturing the world economy into rival blocs? And is globalization giving way to regionalization? The answer to all three questions — despite evidence of U.S.-China decoupling — is still “no.”

• Steven A. Altman is a senior research scholar, adjunct assistant professor, and director of the DHL Initiative on Globalization at the NYU Stern Center for the Future of Management .
• CB Caroline R. Bastian is a research scholar at the DHL Initiative on Globalization.

Partner Center

ENCYCLOPEDIC ENTRY

Globalization.

Globalization is a term used to describe the increasing connectedness and interdependence of world cultures and economies.

Anthropology, Sociology, Social Studies, Civics, Economics

Freight Trains

Freight trains waiting to be loaded with cargo to transport around the United Kingdom. This cargo comes from around the world and contains all kinds of goods and products.

Photograph by Bloomberg

Globalization is a term used to describe how trade and technology have made the world into a more connected and interdependent place. Globalization also captures in its scope the economic and social changes that have come about as a result. It may be pictured as the threads of an immense spider web formed over millennia, with the number and reach of these threads increasing over time. People, money, material goods, ideas, and even disease and devastation have traveled these silken strands, and have done so in greater numbers and with greater speed than ever in the present age. When did globalization begin? The Silk Road, an ancient network of trade routes across China, Central Asia, and the Mediterranean used between 50 B.C.E. and 250 C.E., is perhaps the most well-known early example of exchanging ideas, products, and customs. As with future globalizing booms, new technologies played a key role in the Silk Road trade. Advances in metallurgy led to the creation of coins; advances in transportation led to the building of roads connecting the major empires of the day; and increased agricultural production meant more food could be trafficked between locales. Along with Chinese silk, Roman glass, and Arabian spices, ideas such as Buddhist beliefs and the secrets of paper-making also spread via these tendrils of trade. Unquestionably, these types of exchanges were accelerated in the Age of Exploration, when European explorers seeking new sea routes to the spices and silks of Asia bumped into the Americas instead. Again, technology played an important role in the maritime trade routes that flourished between old and newly discovered continents. New ship designs and the creation of the magnetic compass were key to the explorers’ successes. Trade and idea exchange now extended to a previously unconnected part of the world, where ships carrying plants, animals, and Spanish silver between the Old World and the New also carried Christian missionaries. The web of globalization continued to spin out through the Age of Revolution, when ideas about liberty , equality , and fraternity spread like fire from America to France to Latin America and beyond. It rode the waves of industrialization , colonization , and war through the eighteenth, nineteenth, and twentieth centuries, powered by the invention of factories, railways, steamboats, cars, and planes. With the Information Age, globalization went into overdrive. Advances in computer and communications technology launched a new global era and redefined what it meant to be “connected.” Modern communications satellites meant the 1964 Summer Olympics in Tokyo could be watched in the United States for the first time. The World Wide Web and the Internet allowed someone in Germany to read about a breaking news story in Bolivia in real time. Someone wishing to travel from Boston, Massachusetts, to London, England, could do so in hours rather than the week or more it would have taken a hundred years ago. This digital revolution massively impacted economies across the world as well: they became more information-based and more interdependent. In the modern era, economic success or failure at one focal point of the global web can be felt in every major world economy. The benefits and disadvantages of globalization are the subject of ongoing debate. The downside to globalization can be seen in the increased risk for the transmission of diseases like ebola or severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS), or in the kind of environmental harm that scientist Paul R. Furumo has studied in microcosm in palm oil plantations in the tropics. Globalization has of course led to great good, too. Richer nations now can—and do—come to the aid of poorer nations in crisis. Increasing diversity in many countries has meant more opportunity to learn about and celebrate other cultures. The sense that there is a global village, a worldwide “us,” has emerged.

Media Credits

The audio, illustrations, photos, and videos are credited beneath the media asset, except for promotional images, which generally link to another page that contains the media credit. The Rights Holder for media is the person or group credited.

Production Managers

Program specialists, specialist, content production, last updated.

March 6, 2024

User Permissions

For information on user permissions, please read our Terms of Service. If you have questions about how to cite anything on our website in your project or classroom presentation, please contact your teacher. They will best know the preferred format. When you reach out to them, you will need the page title, URL, and the date you accessed the resource.

If a media asset is downloadable, a download button appears in the corner of the media viewer. If no button appears, you cannot download or save the media.

Text on this page is printable and can be used according to our Terms of Service .

Interactives

Any interactives on this page can only be played while you are visiting our website. You cannot download interactives.

Related Resources

Home — Essay Samples — Sociology — Globalization

Essays on Globalization

Hook examples for globalization essays, "the global village" metaphor hook.

"In the age of globalization, our world has transformed into a 'global village.' Explore the implications of this metaphor and how it has reshaped our understanding of interconnectedness and cultural exchange."

The Impact of Digital Connectivity Hook

"In an era where a single tweet can reach millions, digital connectivity has revolutionized globalization. Delve into the profound impact of the internet, social media, and technology on global interactions."

The Paradox of Local vs. Global Hook

"Globalization blurs the lines between local and global identities. Analyze the paradox of preserving cultural heritage while embracing the globalized world and how this tension shapes our societies."

The Global Marketplace Hook

"Globalization has ushered in an era of unprecedented trade and economic interconnectedness. Explore the dynamics of the global marketplace, from multinational corporations to supply chains spanning continents."

Cultural Fusion and Identity Hook

"Globalization has led to a melting pot of cultures, but what happens to cultural identities in the process? Investigate how globalization impacts the preservation and evolution of cultural identities."

The Challenges of Globalization Hook

"While globalization offers numerous benefits, it also presents challenges. Examine issues such as income inequality, cultural homogenization, and environmental concerns that arise in a globalized world."

The Future of Globalization Hook

"As we stand on the brink of a globalized future, what can we expect? Join me in exploring the potential trajectories of globalization, from its impact on politics to the role of emerging technologies."

The Best Globalization Essay Topics

• The Impact of Globalization on Local Cultures: Integration or Erasure?
• The Impact of Globalization on Cultural Identity in Anthropological Studies
• Globalization and Economic Inequality: Bridging the Gap Between Rich and Poor
• The Role of Technology in Advancing Globalization and Its Social Implications
• Environmental Consequences of Globalization: Challenges and Sustainable Solutions
• Analyzing the Advantages and Disadvantages of Globalization
• The Influence of Globalization on Education and Cross-Cultural Exchanges
• Global Political Dynamics: How Globalization Affects Sovereignty and Governance
• Globalization and Health: The Spread of Diseases and Global Health Initiatives
• Consumer Culture and Globalization: The Homogenization of Global Markets

Globalization: Its Advantages and Disadvantages

Sociological imagination am i supposed to, made-to-order essay as fast as you need it.

Each essay is customized to cater to your unique preferences

+ experts online

Importance of Global Interdependence

The effects of globalization on developing countries and its advantages and disadvantages, the impact of globalization to cultural identity, globalization, its causes and effects on the world, let us write you an essay from scratch.

• 450+ experts on 30 subjects ready to help
• Custom essay delivered in as few as 3 hours

Good and Bad Impact of Globalization

History of globalization and its benefits for society, financial, social and political effects of globalization, globalization: global concerns of global development, get a personalized essay in under 3 hours.

Expert-written essays crafted with your exact needs in mind

Globalization's Theories and Effects in The Modern World

The effects of globalization on health and medicine, a study on globalization and its various sides, overview of five articles about globalization, globalization: two sides of the arguments both for and against, globalization and its positive and negative sides for india, the advantages and disadvantages of the globalization process based on real-life examples, criticism and controversial benefits of globalization, globalization: importance of english nowadays, the impact of globalization, nationalism and protectionism on india, an overview of the overall impact of globalization, research of effects of globalization on the media in the world, globalisation as an economical, political and cultural process, pro globalist and anti globalist view from developed country perspective, how global issues impact individual states, electronic commerce in the globalization era, the effect of globalization and americanization on mass media, components of globalization: concept sociocultural and social globalizations, how the impact of globalization on illicit drug trafficking has affected international security, discussion of whether globalization is good or bad for the indian economy.

1. Halliday, T. C., & Osinsky, P. (2006). Globalization of law. Annu. Rev. Sociol., 32, 447-470. (https://www.annualreviews.org/doi/abs/10.1146/annurev.soc.32.061604.123136) 2. Fischer, S. (2003). Globalization and its challenges. American Economic Review, 93(2), 1-30. (https://www.aeaweb.org/articles?id=10.1257/000282803321946750) 3. Lang, M. (2006). Globalization and its history. The Journal of Modern History, 78(4), 899-931. (https://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/abs/10.1086/511251?journalCode=jmh) 4. Spring, J. (2008). Research on globalization and education. Review of educational research, 78(2), 330-363. (https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.3102/0034654308317846?journalCode=rera) 5. Scott, A., & Storper, M. (2003). Regions, globalization, development. Regional studies, 37(6-7), 579-593. (https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/0034340032000108697a) 6. Jameson, F. (1998). Notes on globalization as a philosophical issue. In The cultures of globalization (pp. 54-78). Duke University Press. (https://www.degruyter.com/document/doi/10.1515/9780822378426-005/html?lang=de) 7. Frankel, J. A. (2003). The environment and globalization. (https://www.nber.org/papers/w10090) 8. Teeple, G. (2000). What is globalization?. Globalization and its discontents, 9-23. (https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1057/9780333981610_2)

Relevant topics

• Sociological Imagination
• Modern Society
• Social Change
• Sociological Perspective
• Stereotypes
• American Identity
• Social Justice
• Effects of Social Media

By clicking “Check Writers’ Offers”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy policy . We’ll occasionally send you promo and account related email

No need to pay just yet!

Bibliography

We use cookies to personalyze your web-site experience. By continuing we’ll assume you board with our cookie policy .

• Instructions Followed To The Letter
• Deadlines Met At Every Stage
• Unique And Plagiarism Free

Economic Globalization: Advantages and Disadvantages

One of the three major dimensions of globalization, alongside political and cultural dimensions, is economic globalization. It represents the process involved in the accelerated cross-border movements of goods, services, information or knowledge, technology, and capital that have resulted in the expansion of global markets and international trade.

Advancements in long-distance transportation, developments in telecommunication, and other advances in science and technology have enabled the integration and interdependence across global economies. The obvious advantage of economic globalization centers on its positive contributions to economic progress across the world.

However, critics have also slammed the entire process of globalization due to its negative impacts and unintended consequences transpiring at the macroeconomic and microeconomic levels. Several studies have also examined the limited benefits of economic globalization due to the global prevalence of poverty and income inequality.

Advantages of Economic Globalization: Positive Contributions in Global Economies

1. expansion of global markets and international trade.

Globalization has integrated most of the economies of the world into a single global economy. Even China has recognized the need to participate in the global markets and international trade after learning from its failures during the early years of Chinese communism and the disastrous outcome of its Great Leap Forward economic program.

Of course, it is important to note that international trade has been existing long before the invention of the word ” economic globalization.” However, due to innovations in transportation, communication, and other facets of science and technology, the economies of nations and states have become increasingly integrated and interdependent, thus lowering trade barriers .

The interdependence of these economies has been evident from the establishments of international organizations such as the European Union and the Eurozone , the Association of Southeast Asian Nations, the Gulf Cooperation Council, the World Trade Organization, the World Bank, and the International Monetary Fund, among others.

Understanding further the role of economic globalization in expanding global markets and international trade requires an appreciation of the roles and responsibilities of international government organizations and international non-government organizations. Note that these institutions are global actors with considerable influence and authority.

To be specific, these global actors are responsible for designing and implementing policies, negotiating and enforcing treaties, developing and deploying strategies, creating benchmarks and standards, and promoting the equitable distribution of capital, among others, needed to fuel global markets and strengthen international trade.

2. Encouraging the Comparative Advantage of Countries

Another specific advantage of economic globalization centers on its role in enabling countries to build and focus on their comparative advantage. British political economist David Ricardo developed the classical theory of comparative advantage in 1817 to explain generally why countries participate in international trade.

Comparative advantage is fundamentally the ability of an economy to produce a particular good or service at a lower opportunity cost than other economies, especially its trading partner. It argues that countries engage in trade with one another by exporting goods or services that they have a relative advantage in. This advantage stems from cost-efficiency.

Nevertheless, with regard to economic globalization, comparative advantage explains that countries can achieve mutual benefit through cooperation and voluntary participation in international trade. This is specifically true for countries with trade agreements. Globalization opens doors for countries to achieve a comparative advantage.

An example would be Country A and Country B entering a trade agreement. Country A is efficient at producing corn, although it also has the capabilities to produce sugar. However, Country B is more efficient at producing sugar and has the resources to produce corn. Both will minimize opportunity costs if they trade corns and sugars instead.

3. Macroeconomic and Microeconomic Benefits

A working paper by Fredrick Erixon of the European Centre for International Political Economy highlighted the specific macroeconomic benefits of economic globalization. His report noted that it has boosted output in the Western economy by enabling businesses to specialize while increasing innovativeness and expanding access to capital.

It has also allowed new businesses to compete with old incumbents, thereby lowering the barriers to entry and evening out the playing field. Because the process has fueled further international trade, the trade sector has increased employment rates through competitive and productive exportation and importation activities of trade participants.

Erixon also discussed the positive microeconomic impacts of globalization. These include reducing high inflation rates while increasing real wages by lowering the cost of consumption, reducing gender-wage discrimination and opening new opportunities for women, improving the management capabilities of businesses, and improving working conditions.

Other economic indicators also provide further insights. A 2001 report from the International Monetary Fund by D. Dollar and A. Kraay mentioned that per capita GDP growth jumped from 1.4 percent a year in the 1960s to 2.9 percent in the 1970s and further to 3.5 percent in the 1980s. Per capita GDP growth was at 5.0 percent in the 1990s.

4. Specific Business Impacts of Economic Globalization

A number of businesses have also benefitted from the integration and interdependence of the global economy. Remember that Erixon explained that emerging firms can relatively compete against bigger and more established ones because economic globalization has opened opportunities for innovating, improving processes, and reaching new markets.

Consider outsourcing as an example. Companies in the West outsourced manufacturing and operational capabilities in other regions of the world. Examples include Nike and Apple , which have outsourced manufacturing in Asian countries, as well as other firms, which have outsourced their business processes in countries such as India and the Philippines.

Globalization has also been instrumental in the creation of multinational companies and the further expansion of businesses to other regional markets. McDonald’s is a prime example. This American fast-food chain has expanded in over 100 countries across more than 35000 outlets through a franchising business model .

Amazon is also another notable example. Note that part of its strategy for its Amazon Web Services is to build and maintain regional databases and servers to maximize its global customer reach for its on-demand cloud computing services and platforms while ensuring minimal server downtime and overall service reliability.

The number of mergers and acquisitions , as well as joint ventures has also grown as economies become more integrated. American technology companies have acquired startups outside their borders. Financial services providers such as banks and insurance companies have either acquired or merged with regional competitors to increase their reach and expand their customer bases.

5. Assistance to Underdeveloped and Developing Countries

Remember that the interdependence of countries and other international actors is evident from the creation of numerous international organizations and consortiums. Without a doubt, another advantage of economic globalization is the creation of institutions aimed at extending assistance to underdeveloped and developed countries.

The World Bank has been providing loans and grants to the governments of low-income to middle-income countries aimed at pursuing capital projects. The United Nations have numerous projects and programs aimed at addressing social problems in impoverished countries including poverty and hunger, as well as low literacy rates.

A 2007 Data from the World Bank showed that it provided a total of USD 113.3 million in loans and grants for supporting businesses and other institutions, another USD 335.4 million for rural development and USD 261.2 million for urban development, USD 1.292 billion for electricity infrastructure, and a total of USD 4.654 billion for road transportation projects.

Several large companies have also extended financial and economic assistance to communities across the world through their corporate social responsibility programs. Microsoft has been partnering with local and international non-governmental organizations to promote inclusive economic opportunity and advance access to technology and related services.

Disadvantages of Economic Globalization: Limitations, Negative Impacts, and Criticisms

1. limited economic benefits in other countries.

It is true that economic globalization has positive impacts on global economies. However, these benefits seem limited. A 2014 empirical study by P. Samimi and H. S. Jenatabadi that investigated economic growth in the Organization of Islamic Cooperation countries showed that the economic benefit of globalization depends on income level.

Specifics of the findings further revealed that high-income and middle-income benefited the most while low-income countries did not experience significant gains. It is interesting to note that these low-income countries must first reach an appropriate income level before they can receive the supposed economic gains from globalization.

The Trilemma of the Global Economy Theory developed and proposed by Dani Rodrick in his 2000 paper also explains why some countries are not benefitting from economic globalization. The theory states that countries can only have two of the three options available: international economic integration, democracy, and the nation-state.

If a country opts to participate in the global economy, it would need to comply with the policies set by supranational organizations, thereby making it impossible for it to maintain either its democratic status or its sovereignty as a nation-state. Pursuing nation-state and global economic integration would result in its citizens losing decision-making capacity.

An analysis by M. L. Fernández referenced the European Debt Crisis to support the merits of the Trilemma of the Global Economy Theory. He explained that the crisis that affected countries such as Spain and Greece resulted from a dictatorship market in which citizens have lost some level of their democratic rights to meet international economic needs.

Fernández concluded that international economic integration is not complete yet. The dictatorship market has created more inconveniences for several countries. However, he noted that the impacts of economic globalization remain positive albeit limited due to the problems stemming from inconveniences and heterogeneous results.

2. Increases Exposures to Risks from Localized Crises

A look into some of the major events in modern history would reveal numerous instances of economic crises transpiring either at the industrial or global levels. From an industrial level, consider the 2020-2022 Global Chip Shortage as an example, which has affected the consumer electronics and automotive industries, among others.

The shortage is primarily a supply chain problem in which demand for integrated circuits is higher than the supply. The commonly cited causes of the shortage include the global COVID-19 pandemic, the trade war between the United States and China, numerous severe weather incidents, and internal problems in some manufacturers.

An analysis by Goldman Sachs revealed that the shortage has affected more than 169 industries in different sectors across the world. Specific impacts include lower production outputs, increases in manufacturing costs and end-use prices, and significant losses. Nevertheless, the issue demonstrates the offshoot of a globally integrated supply chain.

Global economic crises are also prime examples of risks associated with economic globalization. The 2008 Financial Crisis , which stemmed from housing and subprime mortgage problems in the United States, had impacted businesses and economies with significant exposure to American commercial and investment banks, and other financial institutions.

The Eurozone Debt Crisis , which started around 2008 and 2009, stemmed from excessive borrowing from selected European Union governments and structural problems in some of these countries, as well as exposure from the 2008 Financial Crisis, which began in the United States. The crisis affected the rest of the European Union and other exposed countries.

3. Capital Flight and Brain Drain in Other Countries

The integration of economies has made it easier for investors to access financial markets outside their home countries. Hence, another disadvantage of economic globalization is that it eases the process of capital flight. Note that in economics, capital flight occurs money or assets flow out of a country due to localized or internal economic, as well as sociopolitical issues.

While individual and institutional investors are free to invest their assets in most countries, capital flight has negative consequences. These include the disappearance of wealth in a particular country and the subsequent drop in the exchange rate, thus resulting in the devaluation of the local currency, inflation , and the loss of purchasing power of the citizens.

The economic crisis in Argentina, which transpired in 2001, was partly a result of massive capital flight. Local investors felt the need to channel their assets outside their home country out of fear that their government would default on its external debt, as well as concerns over the artificially low fixed exchange rate and large levels of reserved foreign currency.

Apart from the flight of financial assets from a particular country, another similar phenomenon is human capital flight, which transpires due to the emigration or immigration of individuals from their home countries to foreign countries. These home countries experience a so-called brain drain while the receiving countries can experience a so-called brain gain.

Globalization has made migration easier for individuals. Note that in the Philippines, several white-collar and blue-collar professionals have decided to work in foreign countries due to better career opportunities that provide better salaries. In some situations, the negative effect of human capital flight centers on how it depletes the local labor market.

4. Economic Globalization and Impacts on Sustainability

Remember that one of the notable advantages of economic globalization is that it has been instrumental for businesses to achieve unprecedented economic growth, particularly due to international trade, cross-border exchange of resources and capabilities, and expansion of their local operations and market reach into international markets.

However, as these business organizations strive to sustain the gains they have received from their participation in the global economy, they have also ramped up the need to maximize profitability by increasing productivity and expanding their market reach while lowering the costs and taking into consideration existing competitors and new entrants.

The phenomenon called “race to the bottom” has been considered as an offshoot of globalization. In their attempt to maximize profitability, several businesses establish operations and presence in regions or countries with less stringent environmental regulations. The phenomenon undeniably creates sustainability issues.

Findings from a 2020 cross-sectoral analysis by O. Taherzadeh, M. Bithell, and K. Richards involving 189 countries revealed that economic globalization has affected the security of global supply chains due to the overexploitation of land, water, and energy resources. Countries that participate in international trade exhibit greater exposure to resource risks.

Critics have noted that businesses and economies have exploited naturals resources for short-term gains. Some of the more specific negative environmental impacts of economic globalization include increased emissions, destruction of habitats, illegal deforestation and overfishing in coastal areas, dependence on cash crops, and decreased biodiversity.

FURTHER READINGS AND REFERENCES

• Dollar, D. and Kraay, A. 2011. “Trade, Growth, and Poverty.” Finance & Development: A Quarterly Magazine of the IMF . Available online
• Erixon, F. 2018. The Economic Benefits of Globalization for Business and Consumers . European Centre for International Political Economy. Available online
• Fernández, M. L. 2016. “Challenges of Economic Globalization.” Revista de Relaciones Internacionales, Estrategia y Seguridad . 12(1): 23-50. DOI: 18359/ries.2462
• Ricardo, D. 1817. On The Principles of Political Economy and Taxation . John Murray
• Rodrick, D. 2000. “How Far Will International Economic Integration Go?” Journal of Economic Perspectives . 14(1): 177-186. DOI: 1257/jep.14.1.177
• Samimi, P. and Jenatabadi, H. S. 2014. “Globalization and Economic Growth: Empirical Evidence on the Role of Complementarities.” PLOS One . 9(4): e87824. DOI: 1371/journal.pone.0087824
• Taherzadeh, O., Bithell, M., and Richards, K. 2021. “Water, Energy, and Land Insecurity in Global Supply Chains.” Global Environmental Change . 67: 102158. DOI: 1016/j.gloenvcha.2020.102158

As globalization unwinds, the world is still growing more unequal

You’re reading an excerpt from the Today’s WorldView newsletter. Sign up to get the rest free , including news from around the globe and interesting ideas and opinions to know, sent to your inbox every weekday.

A year ago, White House national security adviser Jake Sullivan announced the advent of a new “Washington consensus.” The speech he delivered at a think tank then was something of a bombshell in the foreign policy community — a declaration by a senior U.S. official that the world’s leading superpower wanted to move on from decades of economic orthodoxy and unfettered globalization to a different arrangement between nations and their societies.

The old “Washington consensus” was shorthand for a set of neoliberal policies and prescriptions put forward in the last decades of the 20th century by the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank, its sister organization. The diktats of these Washington-based institutions — mandating austerity, deregulation and privatization — prefigured a wave of globalization that crested into the 21st century. They undergirded a sense of the world bound together by commerce and trade, and lifted up by a shared prosperity, that became a kind of dogma for political elites in the West and elsewhere.

Such convictions are no longer commonly held. In the West, political leaders now speak of globalization in pejorative terms — a legacy of economic policy that made some rich while weakening the middle classes of their own societies, where manufacturing jobs dried up, wages stagnated and life grew more precarious. Sullivan pointed to the Biden administration’s embrace of industrial policy and major stimulus spending as a major paradigm shift — and a key cog in the United States' plans to compete with China in the decades to come.

The world was not “flat,” Sullivan seemed to argue, but bumpy. And it was up to governments and alliances of like-minded states to smooth out the disturbances and disruptions caused by shocks such as the pandemic, the ambitions of rising great powers like China and wars that snarl global supply chains. Move over, laissez faire capitalism — welcome back, mercantilism and protectionism.

Even as the contours of the new orthodoxy are still taking shape, some underlying global realities remain the same — perhaps, even more pronounced. As the IMF and World Bank staged their annual meetings this week in Washington, officials and economists put forward somewhat gloomy prognostications. The IMF projected annual global growth at levels still below what took place before the pandemic, and warned of longer-term troubles ahead.

“Rising geopolitical risks, including signs of a global trading system dividing into separate blocs oriented around the United States and China, are also troubling fund officials,” my colleague David Lynch reported . “If that split widens, nations could suffer ‘large output losses’ as goods and capital move around the world less efficiently, the fund warned in its flagship World Economic Outlook.”

This sluggishness has major ramifications for the West’s graying societies, but it’s all the more concerning for poorer nations in the developing world. The ambitious programs of stimulus and subsidies put forward by the United States and the European Union may cut against investment and opportunities elsewhere. “Poorer and less-developed countries could be deprived of the benefits of globalization as the major economies turn inward and as trade and financial flows fragment and fall in line with deepening geopolitical fissures,” Eswar Prasad, an international trade expert at Cornell University, told Bloomberg News .

Many countries, especially in sub-Saharan Africa and Latin America, are also buckling under crippling public debt burdens and struggling to chart a way out. “With growth being slow, the chances to catch up are actually worsened,” IMF managing director Kristalina Georgieva said earlier this year. “You have countries that are truly facing life or death, economic, social difficulties.”

To some in the Global South, institutions like the IMF and World Bank remain part of the problem . A new analysis by Oxfam found that “income inequality is high or increasing” in 60 percent of low- and middle-income countries that receive grants or loans from the IMF and World Bank. That’s in part due to enforced cuts in public spending that impact the lives of ordinary citizens in these countries.

Grieve Chelwa , a Zambian economist based in the United Arab Emirates, pointed to his country’s recent experience, where IMF mandates have hobbled social spending, contributed to a rise in food prices and exacerbated a cost of living crisis. “IMF-enforced austerity,” he told me, may “lead to another lost generation for Zambia and Zambians.”

“More than ever, the U.S. and other rich nations must wake up the reality that that these institutions, as they function, have not only outlived their usefulness, but fallen into a destructive obsolescence,” said Ndongo Samba Sylla, a Senegalese development economist, speaking at an event hosted by Oxfam in Washington this week.

While Americans and citizens of other wealthy nations face their own economic headwinds, people in poorer countries find themselves trapped in situations where their governments sometimes have their hands tied. The strength of the U.S. dollar and the whims of foreign credit ratings agencies have as much impact on their lives as the policies of their own states.

In the more competitive era hailed by Sullivan, Western governments appear to be reducing their development assistance to poorer nations , at ruinous cost. Mohamed Nasheed, former president of the Maldives and the head of a bloc of nations known as Climate Vulnerable Forum, which represents some of the nations most threatened by the effects of global warming, said that the 68 economies in this bloc lost more than half a trillion dollars in wealth over the past two decades thanks to climate change, though they contributed only about 4 percent of global greenhouse gas emissions.

But many of these countries find themselves grappling with high levels of external sovereign debt, and the obligation to service these debts to lenders like the IMF “are crowding out the ability of governments to make the investments required to achieve their climate change and development goals,” Nasheed told me.

The leaders of the IMF and World Bank are keen that their institutions — which emerged at a time when much of the world was still the province of fading European empires — evolve for the needs of the 21st century. Western officials are also trying to address widening inequalities both within countries and between them. In Washington, the finance ministers of France and Brazil jointly revealed plans to crack down on tax avoidance by the wealthy. These proposals may pick up steam in the coming months as Brazil takes charge of this year’s meetings involving the Group of 20 major economies.

But to many in the Global South, the “new” Washington consensus still registers as the old one. “That advanced economies are now openly pursuing industrial strategy is a shift — yet the same international financial institutions that rich countries dominate are still prescribing a heavy dose of the Washington Consensus to developing countries,” Adriana Abdenur, a policy adviser at the office of Brazilian President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva, said at the Oxfam event, while speaking in a personal capacity. “The system is fueling inequality rather than fighting it.”

Advantages and Disadvantages of Globalization Essay

When discussing the drawbacks and benefits of globalization, essays tend to be on the longer side. The example below is a brief exploration of this complex subject. Learn more in this concise globalization pros and cons essay.

Introduction

• Benefits and Disadvantages of Globalization

Reducing Negative Effects

In today’s world, globalization is a process that affects all aspects of people’s lives. It also has a crucial impact on businesses and governments as it provides opportunities for development while causing significant challenges. This paper discusses the advantages and disadvantages of globalization using evidence from academic sources. The report also suggests how governments and companies may implement to reduce the negative impact of the process.

Benefits and Drawbacks of Globalization

Globalization is a complex concept that can be defined by the process of interaction between organizations, businesses, and people on an international scale, which is driven by international trade. Some people may associate it with uniformity, while others can perceive it as the cause of diversification. The reason for such a difference in public opinion is that globalization has both advantages and disadvantages that should be analyzed.

The most significant positive aspects of globalization include global economic growth, the elimination of barriers between nations, and the establishment of competition between countries, which can potentially lead to a decrease in prices. Globalization supports free trade, creates jobs, and helps societies to become more tolerant towards each other. In addition, this process may increase the speed of financial and commercial operations, as well as reduce the isolation of poor populations (Burlacu, Gutu, & Matei, 2018; Amavilah, Asongu, & Andrés, 2017).

The disadvantages of globalization are that it causes the transfer of jobs from developed to lower-cost countries, a decrease in the national intellectual potential, the exploitation of labor, and a security deficit. Moreover, globalization leads to ecological deficiency (Ramsfield, Bentz, Faccoli, Jactel, & Brockerhoff, 2016). In addition, this process may result in multinational corporations influencing political decisions and offering unfair working conditions to their employees.

Firms and governments can work on eliminating the negative effects of globalization in the following ways. For example, countries should work on microeconomic policies, such as enhancing opportunities for education and career training and establishing less rigid labor markets. In addition, governments can build the necessary institutional infrastructure to initiate economic growth. To solve the problem of poor working conditions, it is vital to establish strict policies regarding minimum wages and the working environment for employees. A decrease in the national intellectual potential may be addressed by offering a broad range of career opportunities with competitive salaries, as well as educating future professionals on how their skills can solve problems on the local level.

Companies, in their turn, may invest in technologies that may lead to more flexible energy infrastructure, lower production costs, and decrease carbon emissions. They can also establish strong corporate cultures to support their workers and provide them with an opportunity to share their ideas and concerns. Such an approach may eliminate employees’ migration to foreign organizations and increase their loyalty to local organizations. It is vital for companies to develop policies aimed at reducing a negative impact on the environment as well by using less destructive manufacturing alternatives and educating their employees on ecology-related issues.

Globalization has a significant impact on companies, governments, and the population. It can be considered beneficial because it helps to eliminate barriers between nations, causes competition between countries, and initiates economic growth. At the same time, globalization may result in a decrease in the national intellectual potential, the exploitation of labor, and ecology deficiency. To address these problems, organizations and governments can develop policies to enhance the population’s education, improve working conditions, and reduce carbon emissions.

Amavilah, V., Asongu, S. A., & Andrés, A. R. (2017). Effects of globalization on peace and stability: Implications for governance and the knowledge economy of African countries. Technological Forecasting and Social Change , 122 (C), 91-103.

Burlacu, S., Gutu, C., & Matei, F. O. (2018). Globalization – Pros and cons. Calitatea , 19 (S1), 122-125.

Ramsfield, T. D., Bentz, B. J., Faccoli, M., Jactel, H., & Brockerhoff, E. G. (2016). Forest health in a changing world: Effects of globalization and climate change on forest insect and pathogen impacts. Forestry , 89 (3), 245-252.

• Chicago (A-D)
• Chicago (N-B)

IvyPanda. (2023, October 29). Advantages and Disadvantages of Globalization Essay. https://ivypanda.com/essays/advantages-and-disadvantages-of-globalization/

"Advantages and Disadvantages of Globalization Essay." IvyPanda , 29 Oct. 2023, ivypanda.com/essays/advantages-and-disadvantages-of-globalization/.

IvyPanda . (2023) 'Advantages and Disadvantages of Globalization Essay'. 29 October.

IvyPanda . 2023. "Advantages and Disadvantages of Globalization Essay." October 29, 2023. https://ivypanda.com/essays/advantages-and-disadvantages-of-globalization/.

1. IvyPanda . "Advantages and Disadvantages of Globalization Essay." October 29, 2023. https://ivypanda.com/essays/advantages-and-disadvantages-of-globalization/.

Bibliography

IvyPanda . "Advantages and Disadvantages of Globalization Essay." October 29, 2023. https://ivypanda.com/essays/advantages-and-disadvantages-of-globalization/.

• Soil Ecology and Restoration Science
• The Ecology of the Family
• Vitamin D Deficiency: Causes and Consequences
• The ecology of tigers
• Curbing Iron Deficiency Anaemia
• Testosterone deficiency for male health
• Discussion: Ecology and Capitalism
• Disease Ecology Definition
• Ecology of Commerce: Green Taxes
• The American Black Bear's Ecology
• Managing Multinational Operations
• Multinational Corporations Economic Implications
• Globalisation and Labour Market
• Impact of Globalisation on Labour
• The Origins of the Modern World

Freedom for the Wolves

Neoliberal orthodoxy holds that economic freedom is the basis of every other kind. That orthodoxy, a Nobel economist says, is not only false; it is devouring itself.

A ny discussion of freedom must begin with a discussion of whose freedom we’re talking about. The freedom of some to harm others, or the freedom of others not to be harmed? Too often, we have not balanced the equation well: gun owners versus victims of gun violence; chemical companies versus the millions who suffer from toxic pollution; monopolistic drug companies versus patients who die or whose health worsens because they can’t afford to buy medicine.

Understanding the meaning of freedom is central to creating an economic and political system that delivers not only on efficiency, equity, and sustainability but also on moral values. Freedom—understood as having inherent ties to notions of equity, justice, and well-being—is itself a central value. And it is this broad notion of freedom that has been given short shrift by powerful strands in modern economic thinking—notably the one that goes by the shorthand term neoliberalism , the belief that the freedom that matters most, and from which other freedoms indeed flow, is the freedom of unregulated, unfettered markets.

F. A. Hayek and Milton Friedman were the most notable 20th-century defenders of unrestrained capitalism. The idea of “unfettered markets”—markets without rules and regulations—is an oxymoron because without rules and regulations enforced by government, there could and would be little trade. Cheating would be rampant, trust low. A world without restraints would be a jungle in which only power mattered, determining who got what and who did what. It wouldn’t be a market at all.

Nonetheless, Hayek and Friedman argued that capitalism as they interpreted it, with free and unfettered markets, was the best system in terms of efficiency, and that without free markets and free enterprise, we could not and would not have individual freedom. They believed that markets on their own would somehow remain competitive. Remarkably, they had already forgotten—or ignored—the experiences of monopolization and concentration of economic power that had led to the Sherman Antitrust Act (1890) and the Clayton Antitrust Act (1914). As government intervention grew in response to the Great Depression, Hayek worried that we were on “the road to serfdom,” as he put it in his 1944 book of that title; that is, on the road to a society in which individuals would become subservient to the state.

Rogé Karma: Why America abandoned the greatest economy in history

My own conclusions have been radically different. It was because of democratic demands that democratic governments, such as that of the U.S., responded to the Great Depression through collective action. The failure of governments to respond adequately to soaring unemployment in Germany led to the rise of Hitler. Today, it is neoliberalism that has brought massive inequalities and provided fertile ground for dangerous populists. Neoliberalism’s grim record includes freeing financial markets to precipitate the largest financial crisis in three-quarters of a century, freeing international trade to accelerate deindustrialization, and freeing corporations to exploit consumers, workers, and the environment alike. Contrary to what Friedman suggested in his 1962 book, Capitalism and Freedom , this form of capitalism does not enhance freedom in our society. Instead, it has led to the freedom of a few at the expense of the many. As Isaiah Berlin would have it: Freedom for the wolves; death for the sheep.

I t is remarkable that , in spite of all the failures and inequities of the current system, so many people still champion the idea of an unfettered free-market economy. This despite the daily frustrations of dealing with health-care companies, insurance companies, credit-card companies, telephone companies, landlords, airlines, and every other manifestation of modern society. When there’s a problem, ordinary citizens are told by prominent voices to “leave it to the market.” They’ve even been told that the market can solve problems that one might have thought would require society-wide action and coordination, some larger sense of the public good, and some measure of compulsion. It’s purely wishful thinking. And it’s only one side of the fairy tale. The other side is that the market is efficient and wise, and that government is inefficient and rapacious.

Mindsets, once created, are hard to change. Many Americans still think of the United States as a land of opportunity. They still believe in something called the American dream, even though for decades the statistics have painted a darker picture. The rate of absolute income mobility—that is, the percentage of children who earn more than their parents—has been declining steadily since the Second World War. Of course, America should aspire to be a land of opportunity, but clinging to beliefs that are not supported by today’s realities—and that hold that markets by themselves are a solution to today’s problems—is not helpful. Economic conditions bear this out, as more Americans are coming to understand. Unfettered markets have created, or helped create, many of the central problems we face, including manifold inequalities, the climate crisis, and the opioid crisis. And markets by themselves cannot solve any of our large, collective problems. They cannot manage the massive structural changes that we are going through—including global warming, artificial intelligence, and the realignment of geopolitics.

All of these issues present inconvenient truths to the free-market mindset. If externalities such as these are important, then collective action is important. But how to come to collective agreement about the regulations that govern society? Small communities can sometimes achieve a broad consensus, though typically far from unanimity. Larger societies have a harder go of it. Many of the crucial values and presumptions at play are what economists, philosophers, and mathematicians refer to as “primitives”—underlying assumptions that, although they can be debated, cannot be resolved. In America today we are divided over such assumptions, and the divisions have widened.

The consequences of neoliberalism point to part of the reason: specifically, growing income and wealth disparities and the polarization caused by the media. In theory, economic freedom was supposed to be the bedrock basis for political freedom and democratic health. The opposite has proved to be true. The rich and the elites have a disproportionate voice in shaping both government policies and societal narratives. All of which leads to an enhanced sense by those who are not wealthy that the system is rigged and unfair, which makes healing divisions all the more difficult.

Chris Murphy: The wreckage of neoliberalism

As income inequalities grow, people wind up living in different worlds. They don’t interact. A large body of evidence shows that economic segregation is widening and has consequences, for instance, with regard to how each side thinks and feels about the other. The poorest members of society see the world as stacked against them and give up on their aspirations; the wealthiest develop a sense of entitlement, and their wealth helps ensure that the system stays as it is.

The media, including social media, provide another source of division. More and more in the hands of a very few, the media have immense power to shape societal narratives and have played an obvious role in polarization. The business model of much of the media entails stoking divides. Fox News, for instance, discovered that it was better to have a devoted right-wing audience that watched only Fox than to have a broader audience attracted to more balanced reporting. Social-media companies have discovered that it’s profitable to get engagement through enragement. Social-media sites can develop their algorithms to effectively refine whom to target even if that means providing different information to different users.

N eoliberal theorists and their beneficiaries may be happy to live with all this. They are doing very well by it. They forget that, for all the rhetoric, free markets can’t function without strong democracies beneath them—the kind of democracies that neoliberalism puts under threat. In a very direct way, neoliberal capitalism is devouring itself.

Not only are neoliberal economies inefficient at dealing with collective issues, but neoliberalism as an economic system is not sustainable on its own. To take one fundamental element: A market economy runs on trust. Adam Smith himself emphasized the importance of trust, recognizing that society couldn’t survive if people brazenly followed their own self-interest rather than good codes of conduct:

The regard to those general rules of conduct, is what is properly called a sense of duty, a principle of the greatest consequence in human life, and the only principle by which the bulk of mankind are capable of directing their actions … Upon the tolerable observance of these duties, depends the very existence of human society, which would crumble into nothing if mankind were not generally impressed with a reverence for those important rules of conduct.

For instance, contracts have to be honored. The cost of enforcing every single contract through the courts would be unbearable. And with no trust in the future, why would anybody save or invest? The incentives of neoliberal capitalism focus on self-interest and material well-being, and have done much to weaken trust. Without adequate regulation, too many people, in the pursuit of their own self-interest, will conduct themselves in an untrustworthy way, sliding to the edge of what is legal, overstepping the bounds of what is moral. Neoliberalism helps create selfish and untrustworthy people. A “businessman” like Donald Trump can flourish for years, even decades, taking advantage of others. If Trump were the norm rather than the exception, commerce and industry would grind to a halt.

We also need regulations and laws to make sure that there are no concentrations of economic power. Business seeks to collude and would do so even more in the absence of antitrust laws. But even playing within current guardrails, there’s a strong tendency for the agglomeration of power. The neoliberal ideal of free, competitive markets would, without government intervention, be evanescent.

We’ve also seen that those with power too often do whatever they can to maintain it. They write the rules to sustain and enhance power, not to curb or diminish it. Competition laws are eviscerated. Enforcement of banking and environmental laws is weakened. In this world of neoliberal capitalism, wealth and power are ever ascendant.

Neoliberalism undermines the sustainability of democracy—the opposite of what Hayek and Friedman intended or claimed. We have created a vicious circle of economic and political inequality, one that locks in more freedom for the rich and leaves less for the poor, at least in the United States, where money plays such a large role in politics.

Read: When Milton Friedman ran the show

There are many ways in which economic power gets translated into political power and undermines the fundamental democratic value of one person casting one vote. The reality is that some people’s voices are much louder than others. In some countries, accruing power is as crude as literally buying votes, with the wealthy having more money to buy more votes. In advanced countries, the wealthy use their influence in the media and elsewhere to create self-serving narratives that in turn become the conventional wisdom. For instance, certain rules and regulations and government interventions—tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans, deregulation of key industries—that are purely in the interest of the rich and powerful are also, it is said, in the national interest. Too often that viewpoint is swallowed wholesale. If persuasion doesn’t work, there is always fear: If the banks are not bailed out, the economic system will collapse, and everyone will be worse off. If the corporate tax rate is not cut, firms will leave and go to other jurisdictions that are more business-friendly.

Is a free society one in which a few dictate the terms of engagement? In which a few control the major media and use that control to decide what the populace sees and hears? We now inhabit a polarized world in which different groups live in different universes, disagreeing not only on values but on facts.

A strong democracy can’t be sustained by neoliberal economics for a further reason. Neoliberalism has given rise to enormous “rents”—the monopoly profits that are a major source of today’s inequalities. Much is at stake, especially for many in the top one percent, centered on the enormous accretion of wealth that the system has allowed. Democracy requires compromise if it is to remain functional, but compromise is difficult when there is so much at stake in terms of both economic and political power.

A free-market, competitive, neoliberal economy combined with a liberal democracy does not constitute a stable equilibrium—not without strong guardrails and a broad societal consensus on the need to curb wealth inequality and money’s role in politics. The guardrails come in many forms, such as competition policy, to prevent the creation, maintenance, and abuse of market power. We need checks and balances, not just within government, as every schoolchild in the U.S. learns, but more broadly within society. Strong democracy, with widespread participation, is also part of what is required, which means working to strike down laws intended to decrease democratic participation or to gerrymander districts where politicians will never lose their seats.

Whether America’s political and economic system today has enough safeguards to sustain economic and political freedoms is open to serious question.

U nder the very name of freedom, neoliberals and their allies on the radical right have advocated policies that restrict the opportunities and freedoms, both political and economic, of the many in favor of the few. All these failures have hurt large numbers of people around the world, many of whom have responded by turning to populism, drawn to authoritarian figures like Trump, Jair Bolsonaro, Vladimir Putin, and Narendra Modi.

Perhaps we should not be surprised by where the U.S. has landed. It is a country now so divided that even a peaceful transition of power is difficult, where life expectancy is the lowest among advanced nations, and where we can’t agree about truth or how it might best be ascertained or verified. Conspiracy theories abound. The values of the Enlightenment have to be relitigated daily.

There are good reasons to worry whether America’s form of ersatz capitalism and flawed democracy is sustainable. The incongruities between lofty ideals and stark realities are too great. It’s a political system that claims to cherish freedom above all else but in many ways is structured to deny or restrict freedoms for many of its citizens.

I do believe that there is broad consensus on key elements of what constitutes a good and decent society, and on what kind of economic system supports that society. A good society, for instance, must live in harmony with nature. Our current capitalism has made a mess of this. A good society allows individuals to flourish and live up to their potential. In terms of education alone, our current capitalism is failing large portions of the population. A good economic system would encourage people to be honest and empathetic, and foster the ability to cooperate with others. The current capitalist system encourages the antithesis.

But the key first step is changing our mindset. Friedman and Hayek argued that economic and political freedoms are intimately connected, with the former necessary for the latter. But the economic system that has evolved—largely under the influence of these thinkers and others like them—undermines meaningful democracy and political freedom. In the end, it will undermine the very neoliberalism that has served them so well.

For a long time, the right has tried to establish a monopoly over the invocation of freedom , almost as a trademark. It’s time to reclaim the word.

This article has been adapted from Joseph E. Stiglitz’s new book, The Road to Freedom: Economics and the Good Society .

​When you buy a book using a link on this page, we receive a commission. Thank you for supporting The Atlantic.

Support for this project was provided by the William and Flora Hewlett Foundation.

The latest on the US economy, and other economics stories to read

The latest on US growth, Japanese interest rates and other economics stories. Image:  REUTERS/Kim Kyung-Hoon

.chakra .wef-1c7l3mo{-webkit-transition:all 0.15s ease-out;transition:all 0.15s ease-out;cursor:pointer;-webkit-text-decoration:none;text-decoration:none;outline:none;color:inherit;}.chakra .wef-1c7l3mo:hover,.chakra .wef-1c7l3mo[data-hover]{-webkit-text-decoration:underline;text-decoration:underline;}.chakra .wef-1c7l3mo:focus,.chakra .wef-1c7l3mo[data-focus]{box-shadow:0 0 0 3px rgba(168,203,251,0.5);} Joe Myers

• This weekly round-up brings you the latest news from the world of economics and finance.
• Top economy stories: Lastest on the US economy; Bank of Japan keeps interest rates steady; Warning over incomes in Sub-Saharan Africa.

1. US economy sees slowest quarter in two years

Economic growth in the United States hit a 1.6% annualized rate last quarter, its slowest pace in two years, according to data from the Commerce Department's Bureau of Economic Analysis.

Despite cooler gross domestic product (GDP) growth than economists had predicted, domestic demand was strong, Reuters reports. The economy grew at 3.4% in the fourth quarter and continues to expand quicker than the 1.8% rate that US central bank officials regard as the non-inflationary growth rate.

The International Monetary Fund (IMF) has recently increased its 2024 forecast for US GDP growth to 2.7% from 2.1% in its January outlook.

The Q1 growth figure accompanies a cooling of US business activity in April, while inflation rates slowed slightly.

The financial services industry is facing several future risks, including vulnerabilities to cyberattacks due to artificial intelligence and new financial products creating debt.

The World Economic Forum’s Centre for Financial and Monetary Systems works with the public and private sectors to design a more sustainable, resilient, trusted and accessible financial system worldwide.

Learn more about our impact:

• Net zero future: Our Financing the Transition to a Net Zero Future initiative is accelerating capital mobilization in support of breakthrough decarbonization technologies to help transition the global economy to net zero emissions.
• Green Building Principles: Our action plan for net zero carbon buildings offers a roadmap to help companies deliver net zero carbon buildings and meet key climate commitments.
• Financing biodiversity: We are convening leading financial institutions to advance the understanding of risks related to biodiversity loss and the opportunities to adopt mitigation strategies through our Biodiversity Finance initiative.

Want to know more about our centre’s impact or get involved? Contact us .

2. Bank of Japan keeps rates low

The Bank of Japan (BoJ) has kept interest rates around zero and indicated inflation is on track to reach its 2% target in the coming years, suggesting rate rises are on the agenda.

However, the yen declined due to a lack of clarity over potential future rate hikes , reports Reuters, falling to a 34-year low against the US dollar.

The BoJ maintained its short-term investment rate target at a rate of 0-0.1% - a figure set a month ago.

"Underlying inflation is likely to be at a level that is generally consistent with our price target" around late 2025 through 2026, the bank's quarterly outlook report said.

3. News in brief: Stories on the economy from around the world

Leaders of 10 multilateral development banks have committed to action across five critical areas, including additional lending capacity of up to $400 billion over the coming decade.

Singapore's key measure of consumer prices rose 3.1% in March on a yearly basis, slower than economists' predictions.

Inflation in Sri Lanka dropped to 2.5% in March, down from 5.1% in February.

Business sentiment in Germany has reached a one-year high , according to the latest Ifo institute data, Bloomberg reports.

However, a study by the German Economic Institute expects the number of unemployed workers in the country to rise to its highest level in almost a decade.

The South Korean economy grew at its fastest pace in nearly two years in the first quarter of 2024. GDP was 1.3% higher January-through-March than the previous three months on a seasonally adjusted basis, according to Bank of Korea data.

The IMF has warned that incomes in Sub-Saharan Africa are falling behind the rest of the world against a backdrop of a "tepid" economic recovery.

Russia's economy ministry has improved its forecast for 2024 GDP growth from 2.3% to 2.8%. The IMF has also raised its forecast for the country, up to 3.2% from 2.6% in January.

4. More on finance and the economy from Agenda

The World Bank and IMF's annual spring meetings were held in Washington last week. Here’s a roundup of all you need to know.

Pedro Conceição , the Director of the Human Development Report Office at the United Nations Development Programme, explores the gap between economic fact and sentiment – and how we can bridge it.

The scale of distrust among global top powers is already very high. Here, Bruce Jones, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution, and Susana Malcorra, a former Argentinian foreign minister, look at the importance of "middle powers" in geopolitics .

Related topics:

We've detected unusual activity from your computer network

To continue, please click the box below to let us know you're not a robot.

Why did this happen?

Please make sure your browser supports JavaScript and cookies and that you are not blocking them from loading. For more information you can review our Terms of Service and Cookie Policy .

For inquiries related to this message please contact our support team and provide the reference ID below.