Globalisation and Free World Trade - Is it Justified?

Many countries around the world are supporting thecountries are the ones that impose environmental
notion of free trade and globalisation, which is easyand labour standards without any action from poor
access to goods and services determined by marketcountries (Hill, 2004). Moreover, imposing import
forces on a global platform with minimal governmentrestrictions on developing countries will be
intervention (Hill, C., 2004). Some benefits of freeself-defeating, as free trade can help to improve
trade would include higher consumption of goods andtheir standards of living, which will subsequently lead
services; better utilization of resources; greaterto proper environmental and labour laws being
economic growth and higher creation of wealth (Hill,enacted in those countries (Hill, 2004).
2004).At the same time, jobs are not 'stolen' but rather
However, there exists strong opposition tothere are greater unskilled workers in the market (Hill,
globalisation and to the organizations promoting a2004). Hence one solution should be an investment in
freer world trade. Such opposition can come in theeducation by the respective governments in order to
form of certain government intervention. There arereduce the supply of unskilled workers (Hill, 2004).
several reasons for such opposition. First, certain jobsAdvocates of free trade also maintain that free
and industries need to be protected from foreigntrade through comparative advantage brings about
competition (Hill, 2004). United States gave protectionwealth creation and economic growth, hence allowing
to important industries such as automobile, machineeven poorer countries to cope with problems of
tools and steel in the form of Voluntary Exportpollution and population growth (Hill, 2004).
Restraints (VER) in the 1980s, which protected jobsWith regards to the two points mentioned above,
as well (Hill, 2004). However, such a move is notsuch opposition to WTO's style of management may
justified as the prices of these products turned outbe justified, as the organization needs to be better
to be higher than the world prices by reducingequipped in politics and technical skills to deal with
foreign imports, hence diminishing its globalproblems facing world trade. However, WTO's stance
competitiveness (Hill, 2004). Another relatedon freer trade is still justifiable, as this will lead to
argument for opposition is the need to protect infantlower prices to consumers with greater efficiency in
industries with appropriate tariffs, import quotas andresource allocation on a global basis (Hill, 2004).
subsidies until they have developed sufficiently toThird, the WTO has to be more discreet in their
compete on the global stage (Hill, 2004). However,decisions with regards to free trade in agricultural
such protectionism usually does not make theproducts. Environmentalists have been concerned
industry more efficient, with the adverse effect ofwith how the lowering of tariffs on imports of lumber
making them more complacent. The Brazilian autofrom developing countries will lead to more logs of
industry was still highly inefficient after 30 years oftrees being cut from places like Indonesia and
protection from the government (Journal ofMyanmar (Hill, 2004). This will lead to greater global
Commerce, 1991). Krugman (2001) also mentions thatdeforestation (Hill, 2004). At the same time, WTO
interventionist policies to promote particular sectorsalso has to deal with high protectionism in agricultural
of the industry must draw resources away fromproducts. This is reflected by high tariff rates in
other sectors, hence rendering such policiescountries such as U.S. (4.7%) and Japan (4%),
inefficient. In fact, advocates of free trade havecoupled with high subsidies, in year 2000 (Hill, 2004).
called for an end to all subsidies that promote theSuch high tariffs and subsidies are implemented by
wasteful use of natural resources and to introducedeveloped countries, which want to protect their
pollution taxes, so that current prices can reflect theindustries from competition by low-cost developing
risk of global warming (Economist, 2001). Suchnations (Hill, 2004). Such actions are not encouraged
arguments for free trade are thus justifiable in thisby developing countries and the WTO, who feel that
instance.such tariffs and subsidies will only lower trade,
National security is another reason for opposition toincrease prices to consumers and lead to inefficient
globalisation. Industries related to production ofuse of resources (Hill, 2004). In this instance,
defense products, such as aerospace andprotectionism in agriculture is not justified.
semi-conductors, are considered too important andGlobalisation should not ignore the need for
dangerous to rely upon from foreign sources (Hill,protection of intellectual property. Without proper
2004). The U.S. government previously funded andprotections for intellectual property, there will be
protected Sematech, which is a consortium infewer incentives for greater innovation. The Trade
production of semi-conductors, in the mid 1980sRelated Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights
(World Investment Report, 2002). However, such anagreement (TRIPS agreement) has given varying
argument proves to be self-defeating, asgrace periods to WTO members on compliance with
semi-conductors are subsequently used for personalpatent and copyright regulations (Hill, 2004). WTO will
computers and microprocessor chips, and ultimatelyhave to take extra care with certain countries such
resulting in more efficient private funding during 1996as China and India, whereby piracy of softwares is
(World Investment Report, 2002).rampant (Hill, 2004). The decrease of piracy will help
Protecting consumers is another strong call forboast economic and social welfare (Hill, 2004). Such
opposition to globalisation. At times, governmentaction on the part of WTO is considered justifiable
intervention is required, with regulations in place, inand should not be opposed by any special interests
order to protect consumers from products deemedgroups.
to be unsafe (Hill, 2004). U.S. had banned the importsWTO also came under criticisms for the way they
of several arms and weapons in 1998 following theallow countries to impose anti-dumping policies on
rampant killings by individuals using such weaponsforeign imports if they can prove they are "victims"
(World Investment Report, 2002). Such an oppositionto excess capacity and cheap prices by low-cost
is justified in this instance.countries (Hill, 2004). Some 2,160 anti-dumping policies
Protecting human rights have always been a popularhave been implemented since 2002, with India having
call for opposition to globalisation. Countries like Chinathe largest number of anti-dumping policies (331
and India have bad human rights records, with thecases) (Hill, 2004). However, some of the
usage of child labour and poor working conditions inanti-dumping actions brought up by the respective
rural areas (Hill, 2004). U.S. has wanted to grant thegovernments may constitute political rather than
Most Favored Nation (MFN) status to China, witheconomic well-being, as government officials may be
many critics opposing such a move. They claimedpressurized the need for more votes for future
that MFN status should only be awarded when Chinaelections by huge manufacturers to provide
has shown marked signs of improvement in theirprotection from foreign imports (Hill, 2004). Such
human rights record (Hill, 2004). However, othersirresponsible actions should be abolished by WTO and
have argued that the best way to improve thethe organization should keep regulations for
human rights stance of a country is probably toanti-dumping actions in check (Hill, 2004). Meanwhile,
engage them through international trade (Hill, 2004).Bhagwati (2002) also argued that multinational
With China's entry to World Trade Organisationcorporations must also be socially responsible with
(WTO) in 2001, it remains to be seen if China canregards to their policies and the environment in
show vast improvement in their human rights andgeneral. The governments must also take active
working conditions situation.steps to enhance the openness and accountability of
There are several criticisms of WTO in promotingtheir own actions and policy making (McLaren, 2001).
freer world trade. First, the WTO is not consideredAn example would be the implementation of the spirit
politically powerful (Rugman, 2001). All of its previousof the Arhus Convention in terms of rights to access
rounds of tariff cuts have to be screened andof information, participation and access to justice
implemented by the respective sovereign(McLaren, 2001). Hence in this case, globalisation
governments, such as U.S. and Britain. Hence theinstead of protectionism is more justified.
WTO has no power on its own to be activelyIn summary, there are mixed reviews to the
involved in politics (Rugman, 2001).opposition for globalisation. In the end, the need for
Second, WTO lacks technical skills in dealing withgreater liberalization will hugely depends on how the
non-trade and labour issues such as environmentaladvocates for free trade are able to convince the
regulations, labour standards and human rightsanti-globalists that globalisation is often the best way
(Rugman, 2001). This may lead to adverse effects onin providing better labour standards, providing more
some of the WTO's rulings on environmental andjobs in the market and protecting the environment
human rights policies. One example is how WTO hasas a whole (Hill, 2004).
blocked a U.S. ruling whereby fishing nets are requiredReference List
to be fitted with a device that allows endangeredBangkok Post. (1998) 'WTO Ruling in Turtle
sea turtles to escape (Bangkok Post, 1998). This hasProtection Dispute'. March 18, 1998.
caused uproar among environmentalists as theyBhagwati, J. (2002) 'Coping with Gobalisation: A
found this ruling necessary to protect theseTrilogy of Discontents'. Foreign Affairs. Vol. 81.
endangered species (Bangkok Post, 1998).February 2002.
People who oppose to WTO feel that theEconomist. (2001) 'A Different Manifesto'. Vol. 360.
organization is not doing enough to prevent importsIssue 8241. September 29, 2001.
from countries whereby child labour is being abusedEconomist. (2003) 'Liberty's Great Advance'. Vol. 367.
together with poor working conditions (Hill, 2004).Issue 8330. June 28, 2003.
Globalisation also causes greater pollution to theHill, C. (2004) International Business. 5th Ed. McGraw
environment (Hill, 2004). Opposition also states thatHill International.
such imports from these countries are 'stealing' jobsJournal of Commerce. (1991) 'Brazil's Auto Industry
from developed countries as well, as suchStruggles to Boast Global Competitiveness'. October
manufacturers from rich countries will shift their10, 1991.
working bases to poorer countries (Hill, 2004). For allKrugman, P.R. (2001) 'Is Free Trade Passe?'. Economic
of the anti-globalists' critics, developing countries havePerspectives. Vol 1.
been crying for more liberalization, with ChinaMcLaren, D. (2001) 'From Seattle to Johannesburg:
providing the major spur at the moment (Economist,Anti-globalisation or Inter-localism?'. Local Environment.
2003). Hence the rich countries are the worried ones,Vol. 6. No. 4.
as the developing countries' growth are said to 'steal'Rugman, A. (2001) 'The End of Globalisation: Why
their markets (Economist, 2003). However advocatesGlobal Strategy Is A Myth and How to Profit From
of free trade and WTO feel that developedthe Realities of Regional Markets'. Amazon.