Khan: Making Globalization Work

Khan, H. 2008. Making Globalization Work: Towards Global Economic Justice.

"Globalization as a corporate-led process has come under much justifiable criticism. This paper attempts to give the term analytic content distinct from its more ideological formulations. It then focuses on a normative analysis of globalization from the capabilities perspective. A freedom-centered perspective such as the capabilities approach emphasizes policies and institutions that can enhance freedom globally and locally. A global governance structure based on transparent principles of both economic efficiency and social justice is shown to be a desirable state of affairs; however, the present fractured process of globalization is more likely to end up in a fragmenting regionalism or even national protectionism and rivalry. Multilateral cooperation on the basis of the framework advanced here is an urgent necessity. To this end the creation of international regimes of cooperation in areas ranging from trade and finance to ecological and women's and minorities rights issues must be put on the international and national social and political agendas" (1).

How is it possible to move towards regionalism if the overall stated goal of globalization is to increase international cooperation and openness? "The main argument offered is that there is a contradiction in the heart of the current US and the IFIs-led globalization that stems from their seeming refusal to understand the implications of unevenness in the real world. This also has led to their neglect of some vital principles of global justice" (2).

Globalization has become a term that is tossed about with abandon in certain circles; its meaning has become amorphous. The effects of increased international openness are not universally felt, for example, standard H-O models would claim that the global south should find itself increasing parity with the global north and less-skilled positions move in that direction while less skilled workers in the global north should expect to suffer. The empirical evidence of this is not at all clear. Some call this a fractured-globalism.

"In this paper globalization is conceptualized as asset of cross-cutting economic, technological, cultural and communicative processes that have grown enormously since the end of WWII. In simple terms globalization refers to the integration of the world economy in such a way that what is unfolding in one part of the world has clear, sustained and observable repercussions on the socioeconomic environment and lifestyles of individuals and communities elsewhere" (5).

In an earlier work, the author highlighted 5 areas where global justice can take root within the globalization debate: international trade and monetary regimes; international capital flows; international ecological considerations; asset redistribution and human development; and gender issues (6-7).

"Capabilities can be construed as general powers of human body and mind that can be acquired, maintained, nurtured and developed" (9). There is then a reproduction of Crocker's taxonomy of both Sen and Nussbaum's capabilities approach (9-10).

"Regarding the intense discussion on the effect of globalization on the welfare and economic growth of developing countries, the dominant view appears to be that closer economic integration will enhance the flow of goods and services as well as factors of production, and hence promote economic growth and the welfare of all people. It is believed that globalization will result in a better division of labor, allowing developing countries...to specialize in labor intensive commodities while permitting developing countries to use their workers in more productive ways...Others...reject this argument and contend that globalization and regionalization has largely benefited the powerful economic entities, thereby marginalizing weak regions and nations. It is argues that globalization, while increasing the importance of service industries and skilled labor, also reduces the importance of primary commodities and unskilled labor...Consequently, countries which were once considered wealthy, endowed with natural resources, are no more in the list of rich countries...In modern economy, technology, knowledge and skills stand as the only course of comparative advantage" (12-3).

The Asian Financial Crisis of the late 90s is explored as an example of the contradiction of globalization.

"Globalization has obviously had some positive impacts such as the transfer of technology, raising of productivity in specific sectors, and the improvement of the living standard of some people in developing and developed countries. However, current type of globalization generally, while benefiting certain regions or groups, is marginalizing and distressing the vulnerable and disadvantaged regions and people. This type of corporate-led globalization is also forging imbalances among different human needs by privileging the acquisition of material wealth over human and spiritual values, resulting in violence, alienation and despair" (18).