In Latin America, which has led the world in implementing market reforms, many countries that once seemed modelperformers are now facing economic and political uncertainty. Rather, it would materialize in ballot boxes in countries like Poland or Peru. Their dissatisfaction does not portend a looming and inevitable backlash against globalization, but it does suggest that policymakers in these countries should pay attention to the insecurities of the middle class as well as those of the poor.Ī genuine backlash against globalization would not take the form of demonstrations on the streets of D.C. Ironically, while the protesters focus on the plight of the poor, the groups most dissatisfied with globalization in the developing countries themselves tend to be closer to the middle of the income distribution than to the bottom. Yet these same opportunities entail new vulnerabilities and new risks for others.
My recent research with Nancy Birdsall and Stefano Pettinato suggests that globalization has brought substantial benefits and opportunities for upward mobility for many low-income individuals in the emerging economies. A large body of evidence, however, suggests the opposite-though clearly globalization can result in unsettling experiences for many who live in the developing world. The protesters claim that globalization is bad for poor people in poor countries.
The protests raise immediate and pressing logistical questions for local officials, but they also pose a more fundamental question: do the protesters represent wider popular sentiment against globalization and market policies in the world’s developing countries? Are they a sign that globalization is facing a backlash in the developing world? In the past few years, routine meetings on the operations of the international financial institutions or on the future of free trade have filled the streets of usually peaceful cities like Seattle, Prague, and Quebec with riot police, tear gas, and protesters lashing out at globalization.
0 kommentar(er)
