By the time we are able to
conceptualize terms such as deterritorialization, interconnectedness and social
acceleration we shall then appreciate why "the processes of change which
underpin a transformation in the organization of human affairs by linking together
and expanding human activities across regions and continents" was referred
to as globalization (Held, McGrew, Goldblatt and perraton 1999,15).
Whatever happens
socio-economically in a particular metropolis for instance, could directly or
indirectly affect the people of another remote area within a short period of
time. Moreso, since both intended and uncalculated activities of nation-states
are not unconnected spartially in the modern time; we can therefore say that
man is not only globally homo-politicus but also, homo-economicus,
homo-socialis, homo-spiritualis and homo-scientificus.
Undeniably, botherless-world -
economically, socially, and in terms of foreign political policies, is
characterized with complexities in such a simultaneity with domestic
irreconcilable realities in the face of compulsory or indispensable
interrelationships among nations.
Originally, supra-national
institutions (IMF, World bank, IBRD and etc) that came into being after 1945
signified the commencement of an era where world actors (in any material
manner) could coexist peaceably and flourish, but the merits of such
intermeshing domestic whims via international ideals are the offshoots of a
'global world' whose rule of play is characterized with acute inequality, secrecy
and beclouded by unwritten lawlessness.
Consequent upon this, the world
gradually tilts towards multi-polarity from the post-Cold War unipolar system,
which is good in a way, because of the economic influence of Asians - Indian,
Koreans, Japan, Iran and China; and also detrimental at the same time, if
considered from the angles of rules of engagement and
interest articulations. World leaders cannot claim to be nescient of the
uniqueness of the kind of problem that would ensue when the platform with which
differences in propositions could be sorted is somehow
fragmented and could also be described to be systematically becoming inertia.
The above explanation is what was termed "the gridlock of
globalization" by David Held (July 3rd, 2018).
Trying to understand the
challenges of globalization from this perspective will reveal that, even, the
extension of domestic liberal democratic tenets to the international economic
system as espoused by some scholars cannot do much because of three reasons:
one, sovereignty is pure in relation to states, two, power is relative and
states are relatively possessive of the idea of power, and lastly,
globalization is not an end in itself but rather, a means to an end.
Globalization is not only
restricted to trade in commodities as many have put it. We also have services,
ideas and virtual information, all these, are reliant on people as the
determinant factor. Even the trade in focus is amazingly too voluminous, as
such, making supply chains indispensable, which is one of the risks staring us
in the face. Tourism as a type of service for instance, has the risk of
paralysing economies that depend on it in times such as "the great
lockdown" as this because tourists cannot leave their home countries or go
about. Information technology as a brand of product from any supplier could
also be useless when the consumers are incapacitated because of a pandemic like
coronavirus. These are some of the reasons Ian Golding, a professor of
globalization at Oxford University, said "risks have been allowed to
fester, they are the underbelly of globalization" (The butterfly Defects,
How Globalization Creates Systematic Risks And What To Do About It, 2014).
How then does globalization
affects the present world economy and what should we expect after coronavirus
must have subsided??
The type of globalization that is
in vogue is heavily reliant on unrestricted and unmeasured interconnectedness.
For me, what actually makes globalization dangerous to the various domestic
economies of the world is the volume, extent, rate, speed, dependency and the
ease with which so many life-involving activities are carried out at
profit-making intentions.
It is axiomatic that the world is
far more expanded and connected ideologically, in terms of trade, than what we
can see physically on the maps. One thing that such issue has brought to bear
is the fact that those who supply more of what is needed around the world
simply become more relevant, and at the same time, more dangerous, whether we
accord such status to them or not. According to Prof. Beata Javorcik, the chief
economist at the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development, for
instance, he said, "when we look back at 2003, at the SARS epidemic, China
accounted for 4% of the global outputs, now China accounts for four times as
much, 16%. So that means that whatever is happening to China affects the world
to a much larger extent".
The world has come to a point
where inflation, unemployment, scarcity, diseases, fashion, cultures, riots and
all sorts of physical and virtual elements could be imported or exported from
one country to another in the name of globalization. This explains why Covid-19
is more rapacious than Covid-2 of 2003. In fact, if actors in the international
environment do not identify, and also, treat with utmost seriousness, the
menace of uncontrolled dependency that we have sunk into as a global village,
the next disaster that will happen to one or more of the major players in the
international economic system is likely to have a more devastating effect on us
all than the credit crunch of 2008 and that of Covid-19 put together.
As it stands now, economies have
started nose-diving into recession. The U.S, Japan, South-Korea, India, Germany
and France to mention a few have already started coming up with bailouts that
could be deployed to cushion the effects of drops in their expected economic
growths. In 2019, IMF forecasted 3.3% growth of the world economy, but a total
reversal is what has happened just in the first quarter of 2020. 'The Fund' is
preparing for a 5.9% decline of the world economy, while the EU economy is
expected to shrink by 7.5% at the end of the year.
In the same vein, unemployment in
the USA is expected to jump to 10.4% while economic growth may shrink by 5.3%,
6.2%, 6.5%, 7.2%, 8% and 9.1% in Japan, Canada, U.K, Germany, Spain and Italy
respectively (IMF Quarterly Economic Report, March, 2020).
The implications of the
percentage shrink to the British economy for instance is that, the Bank of
England will be selling bonds worth £200b to the state. Tax relief of about
£30b will be granted to the masses. There will be an interest-free loans for a
period of 12 months for medium scale businesses, and the state shall bankroll
almost 6 million workers up to 90 days in wages and salaries after a subsidy of
£100b must have been injected into the economy. (British Treasury Quarterly
Reports, 2020).
Due to the adverse effects of the
Covid-19 pandemic on various economies around the world, we have come to
realize that there is a great imbalance in the current bases of world
production, e.g., 70% of the supply of intermediate health equipment came from
China; that is something to worry about. We can also, vividly point out new
positive trends in the sourcing of local raw materials, the idea of work from
home gained primacy, tasking of the local financial markets, and as well as the
adjustments of nation-state budgetary allocations to be in tandem with
obtainable realities. The lessons learnt from the above is that major players
in international trade should rely less on what is happening elsewhere in order
to determine what happens to them domestically.
The applicability of the new
values or lessons for instance, can be useful, in that, economies that are
mostly reliant on loans could actually plan (if they are indeed sincere and
serious with development and their people) without buying those
economy-wrecking loans. Apparently, it is bitter to digest, but China as a
major supplier of essential produce for example, made a lot of profit during
the pandemic while the rest of the world is still languishing in the trauma of
Covid-19. The same China is a major creditor country while those indebted to
her will still have to repay the loans with interests despite the great loss
they all suffered as a result of certain catastrophe caused by the same China.
As a matter of fact, many issues
need to be addressed in order that the world might not toe the path of the
pre-second World War in the name of globalization. The salient issues revolve
around five cardinal points: One, the type and mannerism of leadership that is
needed at the global scene; two, the idea of regulation and moderation of
activities; three, the question of inequality and poverty of the third world;
four, the issue of ambition and power tussle which is capable of throwing the
whole world into chaos such as the case of Covid-19 and what to do if such
arises, and lastly, the need to review some major pre-Covid-19 economic
agreements, which if left as they were, could undermine whatever is being aimed
at after working assiduously on the first four issues I highlighted above.
In conclusion, whether the
pandemic remains with us longer than expected or not, many jobs will still be
lost and some people will go on furloughs because many companies are already
affected. Governments will draw up contractionary budgetary arrangements.
Investors, will as a matter of national security or necessity, re-shore and put
larger parts of their money within reach domestically. Individuals will change
some of their consumption patterns. In all, the same global system that brought
about enormous profits, development and pandemic will be indirectly re-shaped;
but it is better such review comes into conceptualization via a global platform
that is devoid of lawlessness and chaos.
Post a Comment