Conclusion and recommendation
From the economic point of view, in most cases the globalization of markets is considered as a positive and beneficial process, since it has a positive impact on average global prosperity. The process was mainly driven by a natural technological progress which enabled economic development. With the pace of globalization more and more countries were involved according to their comparative advantage. This enforced their development by means of a higher factor productivity, trade and dissemination of modern practices & methods adapted to the requirements of modern enterprise management, economic growth and financing. In this way the world is moving to a global market economy, which means competition with all the salient benefits and drawbacks.
Even if considered positive all in all, globalization exerts a multiform influence on the participants of this global process. Strong economies, since they are more competitive according to the free market essence, have better management and financial systems and are thereby equipped with the most modern technologies. As a result these established economies are getting more benefits than the weak ones.
In this sense globalization should be regulated and political participation is eventually needed. Therefore, in both rich and poor countries, globalization requires a range of institutional complements in order to remain sustainable and deliver its benefits in full volume. In the advanced countries of the West the complementary measures relate in large part to improved social safety nets and enhanced adjustment assistance. In the developing countries, a big range of reforms is needed, starting with anti-corruption regulations and finally with labor- and financial market reforms18.
Overall, globalization process and economic policies cannot be limited to legislation. All countries should participate in process of overseeing respect for law and free trade and free market rules violations. In a lot of cases, it would be enough to limit this policy to macroeconomic instruments, which mostly include agricultural, industrial, education and investment policies with the foreign economic policy as the main instrument, and which can be permitted only as an exception. These policies cannot be autonomous under globalization and need to be regulated and supervised by international institutions such as World Bank, IMF and World Trade Organization. We also believe those institutions need to focus more on defense of the interests of weaker states threatened by globalization rather than on market missionaries19. At the same time, further liberalization and abolishment of the borders is needed for the future convergence of underdeveloped and advanced economies.
List of References
Bozyk P., Misala J., Pulawski M. 2002. Międzynarodowe stosunki ekonomiczne. Warsaw, pWe.
Bremmer I., and Roubini N., G-Zaro, A. 2011. World, Foreign Affairs.
Brink L. 2004. Against the Dead Hand: The Uncertain Struggle for Global Capitalism. New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc. :275, n. 1.
Daly, H., E. 1999. Globalization Versus Internationalization: Some Implications. Global Policy Forum.,http://www.globalpolicy.org/globaliz/econ/herman2.htm
Evenett J., S. 2009. Keeping Border Open During the Global Downturn: What are The Options? VOX
Kirton, J. 1999. What Is the G20? November 20. http://www.g20.utoronto.ca/g20whatisit.html
Lindert, Williamson. 2001 Does Globalization Make the Worls Unequal? NBER Working Paper. WP 8228.
Rodrik D. 2007. How to save globalization from its cheerleaders. Harvard University.
Schuman, R. 1950. Schuman Declaration, May 9. http://www.schuman.info/9May1950.htm
Stulz R. 2005. The Limits of Financial Globalization, Speech to the members of American Finance Association in Philadelphia.
Stiglitz J.E. The Financial crisis of 2007/2008 and its macroeconomic consequences.
Stiglitz J.E. 2004. Globalization and its Discontents. Warsaw, Wydawnictwo naukowe pWn
2001. Most Annual Report. United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO). http://www.unesco.org/most/most_ar_part1c.pdf.
2009. Turning their backs on the world. The Marketing Conference, World international, The Dorchester, London.
1 Herman E. Daly, “Globalization Versus Internationalization: Some Implications”, Global Policy Forum, 1999, see http://www.globalpolicy.org/globaliz/econ/herman2.htm
2 Brink Lindsey, Against the Dead Hand: The Uncertain Struggle for Global Capitalism (New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 2002), p. 275, n. 1., as cited in M. Wolf, Why Globalization Works (London: Yale University Press, 2004), p. 14-15
3 United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO), MOST Annual Report 2001, see http://www.unesco.org/most/most_ar_part1c.pdf.
4 Lindert and Williamson. “Does Globalization Make the Worls Unequal?” NBER Working Paper, WP 8228 (April 2001)
5Rodrik D.. How to save globalization from its cheerleaders. Harvard University, 2007
6 http://www.g20.utoronto.ca/g20whatisit.html
7 http://www.schuman.info/9May1950.htm
8 Ian Bremmer and Neuriel Roubini, A G-Zaro World, Foreign Affairs, January 2011
9 The Marketing Conference, “Turning their backs on the world”, World international, The Dorchester, London (March 2009).
10 See ibid
11 Bozyk P., Misala J., Pulawski M., Międzynarodowe stosunki ekonomiczne, 2nd edn (pWe, Warsaw, 2002), p. 395
12 Stulz R.. The Limits of Financial Globalization, Speech to the members of American Finance Association in Philadelphia, January 2005, p. 46
13 J.E. Stiglitz. Globalization and its Discontents, (Wydawnictwo naukowe pWn, Warsaw, 2004), p. 22
14 D. Rodrik. How to save globalization from its cheerleaders. Harvard University, 2007.
15 See ibid
16 J.E. Stiglitz. The Financial crisis of 2007/2008 and its macroeconomic consequences.
17 Evenett J Simon, Keeping Border Open During the Global Downturn: What are The Options?, VOX, (January 2009), p.2
18 Rodrik Dani, How to Save Globalization From its Cheerleaders, Harvard Universety, Septemper 2007, p,10
19 J.E. Stiglitz, Globalization and its Discontents, op.cit., pp. 28