In the intellectual debates and discourses
in the social sciences, for almost three decades now, 'globalisation'
has been a much stalked and bitterly contested theme. It has both been
praised and pilloried in substantial measure, and there is little reason
to believe that the dust will settle in the foreseeable future. Partly
such as outcome is an inevitable consequence of irreconcilable perspectives
and concerns, but it also has to do with the fact that globalization is
a moving target and thus we have a spectrum of trajectories and a plurality
of meanings. Nonetheless, it may not be off the mark to suggest that the
recent experiences of globalization have largely been contextualized within
the ideology and policy regime of laissez faire, or, to use a phrase much
in currency these days, ‘market fundamentalism’. It is quite apt to characterize,
as many researchers do, such a globalization as neoliberal globalization.
As regards the balance sheet, in terms of economic outcomes, of neoliberal
globalization over the last three decades, most observers would agree
that the debit side of the ledger has started causing much concern even
to the cheer leaders (of globalistion), and there is a growing list of
mainstream economists voicing their discomfort for several reasons. For
instance, just to name a couple of eminent economists who have joined
the bandwagon in the recent times: Paul Samuelson’s worry is that the
interests of the United States of America have been hurt badly by a globalised
China; Lawrence Summers, (nick-named as “Mr Globalisation’ by Dani Rodrik
for his earlier ardent advocacy), has now ‘discovered’ the risk of globalization
driven race to the bottom through dilution of national regulations; Alan
Blinder has expressed serious concern about the economic battering confronting
the labour force in the US; and so on. [Readers interested in further
discussion on growing critique of globalisation within mainstream economists
and policy makers may like to read a recent piece by Dani Rodrik: The
Death of Globalization Consensus, July 25, 2008, on ‘Policy Innovations’
– The Carnegie Council’s online magazine for a fairer globalization].
However, as should be evident, the concerns cited above, although important,
are very selective and hence also inadequate reflections. Arguably, within
the mainstream, the Nobel Prize winning economist Joseph Stiglitz has
had an incomparable intellectual appetite for sustained and comprehensive
critical engagement with globalization. In an earlier work, Globalisation
and its Discontents (published in 2002), he offered a trenchant critique
of the models of globalization pushed by the developed countries largely
through the powerful institutions like the IMF, the World Bank and the
WTO. Given his pedigree – having served as a member of the Council of
Economic Advisers of President Clinton and as a top official of the World
Bank, but above all as a most distinguished theorist in the mainstream
of the profession – it is hardly surprising that the above mentioned book
assumed the status of a classic in no time.
Making Globalisation Work, is a worthy sequel to the author’s earlier
work, as it carries forward a no-holds-barred frontal attack on (neoliberal)
globalization; [the adjective has been put in the bracket as Stiglitz
may have obvious reservations with it]. Quoting approvingly a few lines
from the 2004 report of the World Commissions on the Social Dimensions
of Globalisation, of which he was a member, the author highlights some
of his core concerns: ‘The current process of globalization is generating
unbalanced outcomes, both between and within countries. Wealth is being
created, but too many countries and people are not sharing in its benefits.
They also have little or no voice in shaping the process. Seen through
the eyes of the vast majority of women and men, globalization has not
met their simple and legitimate aspirations for decent jobs and a better
future for their children. Many of them live in the limbo of the informal
economy without formal rights and in a swathe of poor countries that subsist
precariously on the margins of the global economy. Even in economically
successful countries some workers and communities have been adversely
affected by globalization. Meanwhile the revolutions in global communications
heightens awareness of these disparities … these global imbalances are
morally unacceptable and politically unsustainable. (page 8).
The author goes on to argue that such outcomes were almost inevitable
for several reasons, the important ones among which include: (a) the rules
of the game governing globalization are unfair, as these are designed
to serve interests of the advanced industrial countries; (b) the way globalization
has been pressed into service has resulted in loss of sovereignty for
most developing countries – infact in some cases it has essentially been
imposed from outside – and this has obviously crippled the abilities of
relevant governments to take decisions central to the well-being of citizens;
and, (c) much of the globalization, an any case, is theoretically rooted
in market fundamentalism, or a sort of voodoo economics.
These (and many more) arguments are substantiated with rigour and persuasion,
and illustrations are drawn from several economies in many parts of the
world. Furthermore, like his above mentioned earlier book, this one too
is written in manner that makes the arguments accessible to non-professional
economists as well.
Sure enough, as the title of the book suggests, Stiglitz is not against
globalization per se; on the contrary, he is of the view that greater
integration of national economies, (or globalization), if properly managed,
can do a great deal to benefit both the developing and the developed countries
of the world. In fact the thrust of the book is to set out and elaborate
the rules of the game (at least the more important ones) which can contribute
to a trajectory of globalization that is better/fairer. The author’s underlying
economic philosophy to shape such a path of globalization may be summed
up as: ‘Development is about transforming the lives of people, not just
transforming economies’ (p. 50); and that markets, governments, individuals
and communities – all these are important ‘pillars of successful development
strategy’ (p. 51).
Towards his vision of a desirable globalization, the author makes a spirited
and powerful case for policy overhauls, through detailed proposals, in
a whole range of specific areas as well as the overall global economic
framework. Some of the critical themes covered in the book include: policies
to make international trade fair for the developing countries; measures
to curb excessive greed underlying the current patent regimes to ensure
that the fruits of technological and scientific advances are affordable
to the masses and serve the needy; ways of dealing with the crippling
indebtedness of developing countries; suggestions towards equitable access
to global natural resources and their use in ways that save our threatened
planet (for instance, from the scourge of global warming); and a proposal
for a new system of global reserves, (reminiscent of the ‘bancor’ proposal
by J.M. Keynes towards the end of the Second World War), to overcome international
financial instability. As is well-known, these themes have been at the
centre stage of globalization debates, and Stiglitz’s accounts of the
contentions issues, not surprisingly, are outstanding. Furthermore, his
diagnosis and prescriptions are as compelling as any serious economic
policy discourse. Also, as mentioned earlier, the analyses and arguments
are presented in a manner that even non-economists will be able to follow.
Thus, on the whole, coming from the stable of professional economists,
this book is in the category of ‘must read’ on the nature and consequences
of contemporary globalization and, what the author prescribes as ‘the
next steps to global justice’.
However, it is with reference to the possibility of ‘such steps’ (and
not their unquestionable desirability), that the readers may find this
otherwise excellent study not quite convincing. As the author stresses
frequently, for globalization to move in a desirable direction, the reform
of global institutions, such as the World Bank, the IMF, the WTO etc.,
powerful economic entities such as the multinational corporations as well
as the vested interest groups in advanced (and developing) countries,
is a necessary condition. Sure enough – but how does it happen? Who will
bell the cat and how? The author, in the concluding sentences of the last
chapter, says: ‘For much of the world, globalization as it has been managed
seems like a pact with the devil’ (p. 292). Then he goes on to add: ‘This
is not how it has to be’ (ibid). If this claim has to go beyond a wishful
assertion, one has to spell out the processes and agencies by which the
dominant powers are persuaded/forced to look beyond their nose. To extend/rephrase
Stiglitz’s metaphor, the neoliberal globalization that the world has seen
is not a ‘pact with the devil’ as much as a ‘pact among the devils and
for the devils’. It is difficult to see how the powerful economic interests,
which control the levers of power and rule-making arrangements in the
global economy, can be persuaded to renounce their grip on the global
architecture of power. Those nursing such prospects only need to recall
what the most powerful, and possibly the most vicious among the rouge
states in the recent times, namely the one in the USA under the sway of
neoconservatives, has done in Iraq, basically to grab oil, to the utter
horror and dismay of the overwhelming majority of humanity across the
globe. As is well-acknowledged, the crude drama of ‘liberating Iraq from
its monstrous dictator and saving other countries from the weapons of
mass destruction’, that was enacted prior to the attack, showed total
contempt for norms of civilized discourse in an almost fabricated 'conflict'
situation.
Sure enough, there may not be easy answers to the questions as regards
how to redress problems of huge inequities – economic, social and political
– across and within countries. But not confronting these questions directly
can hardly take us in the direction of a fair and just globalization.
About the Author
Praveen Jha is on the faculty of the Centre for Economic Studies and Planning,
Jawaharlal Nehru University