Introduction
The existence of organizations like the IMF and The World Bank could not bring about generous change on the development of the nations especially in the south and the East. The Foreign Policy in Focus columnist and a senior analyst at the Bangkok-based research and advocacy institute Focus on the Global South, Walden Bello, explained the destruction of globalization as follows.
The current global downturn, the worst since
the Great Depression 70 years ago, pounded the last nail into the coffin of
globalization. Already beleaguered by evidence that showed global poverty and
inequality increasing, even as most poor countries experienced little or no
economic growth, globalization has been terminally discredited in the last two
years. As the much-heralded process of financial and trade interdependence went
into reverse, it became the transmission belt not of prosperity but of economic
crisis and collapse (W. Bello, The Virtues of De-globalization, 2009)
According to the meltez commission
proposal, there are quite influential reasons which reported the weaknesses and
failures of the International Monetary fund and the World Bank and other
regional financial organizations. These are some of the failures the report
mentioned in relation to the IMF and the World Bank (Report at p.23)
1.
Mismatch between the economic situation that
gave rise to the International Financial Institutions considered in the Report
and the current realities of the global economy.
2.
An overlap of duties and tasks, which cuts down
on the efficiency of each institution
3.
Noting a lack of accountability for the
institutions
4.
Instead of promoting economic growth, the IMF
institutionalizes economic stagnation
5.
The World Bank is irrelevant rather than central
to the goal of eliminating global poverty
6.
Both institutions are to a great extent driven
by the interest of key political and economic institutions in the G-7 countries-
particularly, the US government and the US financial interests
7.
The dynamics of both institutions drive not so
much from external demands of poverty alleviation or promoting growth as from
the internal imperative of bureaucratic empire building.
8.
Failure of the institutions to enforce
commitments by borrowers, and then continuing to lend to countries that do not honour their commitments
Antonia
Juhasz also described global corporate as a means to manage and lead
international financial systems which leads for the implementation of a trickle-down theory. He affirmed that the heart of the globalization model is a
commitment to global corporations acting as the engines of economic growth and
a belief that the wealth they create will trickle down to the rest of society.
Instead, its policies lock wealth at the top, decreasing returns to ‘unskilled’
versus ‘skilled’ labour increasing the number of people dislocated from their
traditional livelihoods, decreasing access to food and vital social services,
decreasing access of developing countries to the tools necessary to improve
their social condition and strangling democracy (A.Juhasz, The Failure of Globalization. pp.1).
According
to Walden Bello, the international organizations such as the World Bank and
International Monetary Fund are not capable of changing the global poverty in
the way the world needs. He said, since the corporate are moving in accordance
with the interests of the developed nations and specially the United States,
they often tend to implement a biased policies and programs. it is also said
that their objective of ensuring a stable global financial order was spoiled by
its prescription of indiscriminate capital account liberalization for the
countries of East Asia, its habit of assembling financial rescue packages that
simply encouraged ‘Moral hazard’ of irresponsible lending and speculative
investment, and its prescribing tight fiscal and momentary policies that merely
worsened the situation in the countries hit by the Asian financial crisis
instead of reversing it (W. Bello, pp. 93).
Thus,
the world needs to follow a different system which can help for the improvement
of human life, for the equality of nations and people at least to the extent
they could share common grounds. This is possible only when the world starts to
follow the De-globalization system for the future.
Advantages of
The
first and foremost point De-globalization bring to an end is the system which favours the few rich and prosperous to grow more affluent but the majority of
the poor to stay deprived and keep enjoying
from the scrapes thrown by the wealthy ones. According to Evan E.
Hillebrand, in his journal, De-globalization scenarios stated that even if De-globalization has a chance to create a decrease on income, in many non-OECD countries, the
cut in imports from the rest of the world increases the share of manufacturing
and in 61 countries raises the share of income going to the poor. This creates
the chance of equality with the riches (E. Hillebrand, pp.14)
Financial
inequality in every nation can also be guaranteed through the implementation of
the trade policies by the government of each nation. According to Walden Bello,
trade policy — that is, quotas and tariffs — should be used to protect the
local economy from destruction definitely caused by corporate-subsidized
commodities with artificially low prices. This helps the local market to stand
competent against the imported commodities of the corporate (W.Bello, p.6).
He
further mentioned that De-globalization is not about withdrawing from the
international economy. It is about reorienting economies from the emphasis on
production for export to production for the local market. It is about drawing
most of the country’s financial resources for development from within rather
than becoming dependent on foreign investment and foreign financial markets.
Similarly, he talked about carrying out the long-postponed measures of income
redistribution and land redistribution to create a vibrant internal market that
would be the anchor of the economy and create the financial resources for
investment (W.Bello, pp.113)
De-globalization further guaranteed the sustainable
development of a community with the application of primary principles of
subsidiary. The local entrepreneurs and farmers can be subsidized to the extent
they will be capable of handling the local market and compete with others at
the regional level. Since the free trade principles do not allow nations to
apply subsidy at any level, local markets of the developing nations will be
forced to remain weak. However, de-globalization is a means to preserved this
system so that encouraging production of goods at the level of the community
and at the national level can be done at reasonable cost in order to preserve
community (W. Bello, pp.114)
Walden Bello further explained the advantage of de-globalization as a means for future democratic system of a country in which
all the citizens can actively participate and would suggest whether policies to
be implemented or not. Since the system of de-globalization de-emphasize the
development of national growth but improve the equality citizens in terms of
income, the Strategic economic decisions cannot be left to the market or to
technocrats. Instead, the scope of democratic decision-making in the economy will
be expanded so that all vital questions become subject to democratic discussion
and choice (W. Bello. pp. 113)
Similarly, W. Bello explained the way how the
development of a nation from the south can be achieved. As most of the
developing nations around the world are dependent on foreign aid for any sort
of development activities, Bello suggested the way out as followed. He stated
that de-globalization helps a developing nation to draw most of the country’s
financial resources for the development from within the nation itself rather
than becoming dependent on foreign investment and foreign financial markets.
Conclusion
Discussions
over the advantages and disadvantages of globalization have been going
alongside the development of ideas for de-globalization Since the famous Filipino
author, academic, and political analyst, a professor of sociology and public
administration Walden Bello has written a book, De-globalization ideas for a
New World Economy, the challenges for globalization have been growing from time
to time.
As far as globalization has caused global
crisis in relation to the growing of hunger, degradation of social services,
eliminating tools of development, strangling democracy- the need for change,
its acceptance in the future has been diminished the radical increase of
unemployment, unbalanced distribution of wealth are also some of the factors
which undermine globalization in the near future (A. Juhasz, pp. 416).
As
Walden Bello explained, the context for the discussion of de-globalization is
the increasing evidence these days not only of the poverty, inequality and
stagnation that have accompanied the spread of globalization and globalization systems of production but also of their non-sustainability and fragility (W.
Bello, pp. 112).
He also
mentions that de-globalization paves the way for the improvement of a democratic
system of a nation in the way that all the citizens would be able to actively
participate directly in the implementation of policies and programs concerning
the overall development of the nation. this is usually because of the economic
equality caused by de-globalization which makes citizens not to give their
interest to the market or to technocrats which is common in the globalization system these days (W. Bello, pp.113).
Therefore,
the need for De-globalization is the prior choice of many nations in order to
fix their national problem resulted from globalization. De-globalization helps
nations to provide relatively more equal wealth distribution at the national
level. Governments can sort out the unemployment problems within the countries.
It also helps them to de-emphasize growth and maximize equity in order to
radically reduce environmental equilibrium. De-globalization also helps
governments not only to leave strategic economic decisions to the market but
also it helps to make them subject to democratic choice (W. Bello: 112).
Sources
Evan E.
Hillebrand (2010). De-globalization Scenarios: Who Wins? Who Loses? Global Economy
Journal. University
of Kentucky.
Walden Bello (2004). De-globalization Ideas for a
New World Economy. Bangladesh: the university press Ltd, Red Crescent Bld.
Antonia
Juhasz (2003). The Failures of Globalization: International Forum on
Globalization. Cambridge Review, USA.
Leslie
Sklair (1999). Competing Conception of Globalization. JWSR publishers, Volume
V.
No comments:
Post a Comment