So it is best to be clear at the outset of this article that I shall primarily refer to economic globalization--the expansion of foreign trade and investment.
So it is best to be clear at the outset of this article that I shall primarily refer to economic globalization--the expansion of foreign trade and investment.Tags: Leadership Essay On MacbethDissertation Sur Le Colonel Chabert De BalzacLong Should Essay ParagraphsWriting Analytical Essays About LiteratureEssay About Values Of FamilyWriting Assignments For College StudentsExample Of Executive Summary Of A Business Plan
’s free newsletters."data-newsletterpromo-image="https://static.scientificamerican.com/sciam/cache/file/458BF87F-514B-44EE-B87F5D531772CF83_source.png"data-newsletterpromo-button-text="Sign Up"data-newsletterpromo-button-link="https:// origincode=2018_sciam_Article Promo_Newsletter Sign Up"name="article Body" itemprop="article Body" Globalization and the attendant concerns about poverty and inequality have become a focus of discussion in a way that few other topics, except for international terrorism or global warming, have.
Most people I know have a strong opinion on globalization, and all of them express an interest in the well-being of the world's poor.
Such changes have caused many hardships for the poor in developing countries but have also created opportunities that some nations utilize and others do not, largely depending on their domestic political and economic institutions. S., although the effects of globalization on rich countries are beyond the scope of this article.) The net outcome is often quite complex and almost always context-dependent, belying the glib pronouncements for or against globalization made in the opposing camps.
Understanding the complexities is essential to taking effective action.
Neither Plague nor Panacea THE CASE FOR FREE TRADE rests on the age-old principle of comparative advantage, the idea that countries are better off when they export the things they are best at producing, and import the rest.
Most mainstream economists accept the principle, but even they have serious differences of opinion on the balance of potential benefits and actual costs from trade and on the importance of social protection for the poor.In Indonesia the Green Revolution, macroeconomic policies, stabilization of rice prices and massive investment in rural infrastructure played a substantial role in the large reduction of rural poverty.Of course, globalization, by expanding employment in labor-intensive manufacturing, has helped to pull many Chinese and Indonesians out of poverty since the mid-1980s (though not yet as much in India, for various domestic institutional and policy reasons).Free traders believe that the rising tide of international specialization and investment lifts all boats.Others point out that many poor people lack the capacity to adjust, retool and relocate with changing market conditions.Between 19 the percentage of rural people living on less than 1 a day decreased from 79 to 27 percent in China, 63 to 42 percent in India, and 55 to 11 percent in Indonesia.But although the poorest are not, on the whole, getting poorer, no one has yet convincingly demonstrated that improvements in their condition are mainly the result of globalization.But it is only one factor among many accounting for the economic advances of the past 25 years.Those who are dubious of the benefits of globalization point out that poverty has remained stubbornly high in sub-Saharan Africa.In China the poverty trend could instead be attributed to internal factors such as the expansion of infrastructure, the massive 1978 land reforms (in which the Mao-era communes were disbanded), changes in grain procurement prices, and the relaxation of restrictions on rural-to-urban migration.In fact, a substantial part of the decline in poverty had already happened by the mid-1980s, before the big strides in foreign trade or investment.