Today i will discuss the topic of distributional aspects of globalization.My analysis is based on Nobel laurete Amartya Sen,s article "How To judge globalism.
First of all i would like to say that Globalization has braught unfettered prosperity and increase in the standard of living in the world during last 3 decades.Thus abolishing globalization is something like abolishing market mechanism. Globalization cannot be called a curse but one thing we need to understand that globalization doesn,t means global westernization neither globalization is a new phenomenon it is there from last 2 millenium.It was becauase of globalization that items like paper,gun-powder,compass and decimel system reached from india& china to western europe.The resistence of globalism on the basis that it is westernization is stupid,nonsence and irrational.
We have emperical records of many third world countries benefiting enormously after opening up the economy and enormously after opening up the economy and embracing global trade.The most important example being south-east asia which reduced its poverty enormously and acheived higher levels of growth after embracing globalization.
The main issue for me is that globalization is a wonderful concept but its benefits are not shared fairly and this problem should be tackled.Secondaly the most important reason why these benefits are not shared equitably is because the world trading system itself is discriminatory for developing countries.Centuries of colonialism has led to a system where developing countries are dependent on a narrow range of commodity exports which is prevalent even today.According to UNCTAD just 3 commodities account for 75% of total exports in each of 48 poorest nations.Trade liberalization worsens the matter because it encourages farmers to grow more for exports leading to over-production and lower prices and this is a cycle in which is added enormous debt by these countries thus they are forced by the world bank and IMF to do structural adjustments and increase there primary exports to pay off for there debts.
Third point i want to raise is massive subsidies given by the rich countries in sectors in which they don,t have comparative advantage like agriculture& labour intensive sectors like Garments,While developing countries farmers 3% of global GDP,they account for 43% of global employment and 64% of global value added in agriculture.The unfair global trading rules allows rich countries to protect and subsidize there by farms and food companies and at a same time pressurize developing countries to open there market to cheap food imports. Farm subsidies and import restrictions of developed countries depress the international prices of farm relative to non-farm products.We should understand this fact that still one-half of the population in developing countries are engaged in primary activities mostly agriculture thus we cannot expect to reduce the poverty to a significant level till these unfair trading rules are not altered.
Fourthly i would like to talk about the distribution of economic gains and losses from globalization.We have emperical evidences that globalization has braught extensive prosperity to many different areas of globe.In acheiving this prosperity the prosporous countries extensively used modern technology and international trade but the basic question is we should actually use this wonderful concept to increase the welfare of millions of poor and down-trodden in developing countries who have been excluded from the benefits of globalization.
Surely Most of the poor are gaining something from globalization like moving from an income of $1 a day to $ 2 a day.Current form of globalization has created wide economic disparities in many developing countries between the urban skilled elite and rural unskilled masses.Thus in future it can take the form of ethinic conflicts and violent uprising in many heteregenous developing countries.I am not saying that the poor should get exactly equal share but atleast they should get the share they deserve.
I would like to conclude by saying that there is a urgent need for both national & international reform to improve the distribution of benefits of globalization.At national level sound public policies in the fields of education,health,land-reforms,micro-credit and legal protection etc are needed while internationally we need fair trade,technological dissemination,ecological & environmental restraints and fair treatment of accumulated debts incurred by irresponsible military leaders of the past. we have also seen 2 different diverse experiences of 2 different regions that embraced globalism.The first one being east-asia which was successful because of adequate public policies and second being Latin-America which stagnated after embracing globalism due to insufficient public policies.
No comments:
Post a Comment