Jagdish bhagwati in defense of globalization summary

We rate each piece of content on a scale of 1—10 with regard to these two core criteria. Our rating helps you sort the titles on your reading list from solid 5 to brilliant Here's what the ratings mean: 10 — Brilliant. Often an instant classic and must-read for everyone. Bhagwati slams through fact after fact, statistic after statistic, demolishing those who claim the poor are worse off because of globalization.

He warns that many problems of poor countries are self-inflicted, such as trade barriers against one another. If Mr. Bhagwhati doesn't get a much deserved Nobel Prize for economics, he should get one for literature. His writing sparkles with anecdotes and delightful verbal pictures. Does it erode democracy? Hurt the cause of women? Trash the environment?

Bhagwati supports the free movement of goods, but not of capital-believing that short-term capital flows can destabilize emerging economies. But here he makes the mistake of confusing cause and effect. Short-term capital typically flees emerging economies because of a loss of confidence in the stability of domestic markets. Capital controls can hold those investments captive for a while, but they cannot substitute for real reforms.

These quirks are easily forgiven in a book brimming with engaging arguments and good sense. In Defense of Globalization will encourage the faithful who believe in economic freedom as a value worth pursuing in and of itself, but also those more pragmatic souls who see it as a necessary if less-than-lovable means to achieve poverty reduction and other worthy social goals.

About the Author. Typical is a passage such as: However, I would argue that seizures of people and property are not the way to organize the protests, but that the methods of non-violent resistance advanced by Mahatma Gandhi and practiced so well by Martin Luther King Jr. While certainly a supportable position, Bhagwati offers no further explanation of why he believes this is the better way.

Yet when he states his position he doesn't say: "I think" or "I believe", he says: "I would argue" -- and then doesn't. He does not seem to have any understanding of what it means to argue a point: this is certainly not how to do it. That the position favoured here is not entirely clear-cut should be obvious from the unfortunate fact that the two men he holds up as non-violent exemplars both got themselves killed: at least a bit of justification is necessary when people are told to follow role models whose roles led to their murder; those are footsteps one should surely be wary of treading in, regardless of how noble the cause.

Bhagwati understands that globalization comes with some costs, and he strongly believes in policy solutions to make the transition to free-trade regimes less burdensome on those hit hardest by it. He doesn't call for the immediate abolition of all trade restrictions, trying, for the most part, to keep real-world consequences in mind and not focussing entirely on airy theory which can sound sensible but, put into practise, can have devastating local effects.

Significantly, he is very much pro-free trade, but much more chary about free capital flows especially of short-term capital. Bhagwati shows a lot of interest in the role of Non-Governmental Organisations NGOsand his repeated reminders about the differing interests, goals, and abilities of NGOs from developed countries versus those from developing nations is particularly valuable, as it introduces issues Western European and North American readers may not be jagdish bhagwati in defense of globalization summary with.

In chapter after chapter Bhagwati discusses the main areas where globalization is sometimes thought to have negative consequences, including poverty, child labour, the environment, women's rights, the transition to democracy, culture, and wage and labour standards. The analyses do cover most of the concerns, and suggest that, overall, the benefits of globalization clearly outweigh the costs.

Nevertheless, too often Bhagwati insists the problem is not globalization but the policies which are or rather: which aren't implemented in conjunction with it that are at fault when and if things go bad: "that domestic policies, which the poor countries could change, are the source of the problem". Common sense might dictate other, better policies, and popular and NGO pressure can force governments to institute necessary safeguards to prevent the effects of freeing up trade from impacting the economy and individuals too harshly; unfortunately, not all governments are as vulnerable or open to common sense or outside pressure though, as to the latter, one of the nice things about globalization is that it does make them more so -- and proper policies and safeguards are not always obvious, nor do even academics and professionals agree on them.

Soviet and Indian five-year plans used to have many supporters even among Western economistsand powerful special interests make even incredibly costly in all senses of the word subsidies in the foremost capitalist countries sacred cows that are near-impossible to get rid of. Some of the issues are very complex, the influence of globalization on the environment perhaps most of all.

Jagdish bhagwati in defense of globalization summary

Bhagwati barely hints at the fundamental problem environmentalists presumably have with free trade: its very success. Increases in economic activity the production and consumption of more goods almost inevitably have negative effects on the environment: more factories, more cars, more waste products, more greenhouse gases, more chemicals used in more agricultural production though, as he points out, farming is one area where the effect can actually be positive, as agricultural production moves to areas which don't rely as heavily on fertilizers, etc.

Because free trade is so successful -- i. It's not a great argument, but probably deserving of some attention. Bhagwati does correctly point out that a protectionist or self-sufficient regime -- as practised for some time in in the Soviet Union or India, among other places -- is no guarantee the environment won't come to great harm -- though, again, harm almost only comes with increased economic activity.