This paper revisits the definition of globalization, which has
different levels of meaning, and makes an inquiry into the theory and
practice of globalization. It then delves into the relationship between
trade openness and growth and the performance of "globalizers," with
particular focus on the so-called "globalizers" in Asia. A close look
at the successful countries of Asia show that they have not fully
adhered to the liberalization as prescribed by the Washington Consensus.
International trade—or trade liberalization—is a strong pillar of
globalization. A defining feature of economic globalization is the
intensification of cross-border trade. That trade openness is strongly
associated with globalization is manifested in how the World Bank and
the International Monetary Fund (IMF) have defined the grouping of
"globalizers" as those developing countries that have liberalized trade.
An IMF Staff paper (2001) notes that the share of developing countries
in global trade has increased steadily. Developing countries now
account for a third of international trade. In the early 1970s, the
share of developing counties of international trade was around 25
percent. Furthermore, manufactures now account for 70 percent of the
total exports of developing countries, in contrast to the 20 percent
manufactures in the 1970s (UNCTAD 2000).
Whether greater trade openness is determinant of growth and poverty
reduction is a subject of intense debate. But what is clear is that the
issues on international trade liberalization are inseparable from the
broader debate on globalization.
This discussion paper is divided into five parts. The first section
revisits the definition of globalization, which has different levels of
meaning. The second section, an extension of the first, makes an
inquiry into the theory and practice of globalization. The third part
delves into the relationship between trade openness and growth and the
performance of "globalizers." The fourth part takes a closer look at
the so-called "globalizers" in Asia, showing that they have not fully
adhered to the liberalization prescribed by the Washington Consensus.
The concluding part issues a challenge to change the global rules as
well as for developing countries like the Philippines to chart their
own development path that is responsive first and foremost to their
Read full text (.pdf, 119kbm 7pp.)