(Page 2 of 26) - Economic Inequality, Environmental Quality, and International Development authored by Bryner, Gary.

has been described as the first modern globalization era: “The world was more closely
integrated before 1914 than it is now, in some cases much more so,” wrote Clive Crook in a 1997
Economist article.

Perhaps globalization is the inevitable future, but it may be better understood

as cyclical, peaking in 1914 then unraveling during the two world wars and the cold war, and
only re-emerging in the past two decades.

Critics of globalization argue that the well-being generated by global markets is selective

and asymmetrical: the benefits of globalization have largely been concentrated in the wealthy
countries and it widens the gap between rich and poor, the kind and level of economic activity it
represents is not ecologically sustainable but represents profound risks to the future of the planet,
and that it profoundly disrupts traditional societies and cultures. Contesting the ideology of
globalization does not necessarily suggest that globalizing trends are ripe for reversal. In the
immediate future, globalization may be irresistible, but the precise form it takes and ways in
which it will be shaped by public policy are open questions.

Among all the trends associated with globalization and its classical liberal, free market,

capitalistic ideological underpinnings are three that are particularly important. First, while the
globalization of markets and trade has produced significant benefits, including economic growth,
the spread of new technologies, individual freedom, and the dissemination of information,
globalization is quite selective and asymmetrical, and the benefits have largely been concentrated
in the wealthy countries. In general, regions blessed with an educated workforce, with effective
transportation and communications infrastructure, with high levels of income already established
do much better than other areas. During the 1990s, the number of people earning $1 a day or
less has remained static at 1.2 billion while the number earning less than $2 a day has increased
from 2.55 billion to 2.8 billion people. The gap in incomes between the 20 percent of the richest
and the poorest countries has grown from 30 to 1 in 1960 to 82 to 1 in 1995; the average income
of the wealthiest 20 countries is 37 times that in the poorest 20 countries—twice the ratio in
1970. The middle strata of developing countries, namely those with incomes of between 40 and
80 per cent of the average in the advanced countries, are thinner than in the 1970s.

Economic

conditions worsened considerably in some 25 countries during the 1990s. Again, ideology is
critical here: inequality is, proponents of markets argue, an inevitable outcome of globalization
and a desirable one insofar as it creates competitive pressures that drive costs down.

Second, globalization is intertwined with growing global environmental threats. Some

environmental indicators show dramatic improvement over the past decades. Air and water
pollution in many areas, particularly in the wealthy world, are improving. The wealthier a region
is, the more resources it has to invest in cleaner technologies and improved efficiency.
Conversely, among the most pressing environmental problems are securing clean water and
sanitation for the world’s poorest residents. But other indicators suggest that globalization is not
ecologically sustainable. Growth in greenhouse gas emissions and toxic wastes, the decline of
biodiversity and habitat, the loss of topsoil, and the mining of aquifers are examples of
environmental threats that inexorable expand with global economic growth. Such results are not
unexpected, given globalization’s ideological emphasis on unfettered markets and blindness to
the threats posed by market-based prices that fail to reflect the true costs of production and fail to
provide the kind of signals essential for making efficient decisions about the use of resources.