IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/worlde/v26y2003i5p639-658.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

What Might Globalisation's Critics Believe?

Author

Listed:
  • Alan V. Deardorff

Abstract

Critics of globalisation object to many things, some of which can be easily understood within standard economic models, but others of which seem to reflect a view of the world that economists generally do not share. This paper attempts to identify several alternative frameworks for analysis within which some of their criticisms may be understood, with the ultimate aim of extracting testable implications that differ from standard models. Three such alternative models are suggested, all of which focus mainly on the behaviour of owners and managers of corporate capital: an anti‐labour model, in which capitalists are willing to sacrifice some of their own profits for the chance to make labour worse off; a labour‐monopsony model in which capitalists co‐operate globally to increase profits by depressing wages; and an international political economy model in which capitalists use their resources to influence the political process for more than just obtaining import protection. This third framework, which is not spelled out in any detail here, has capitalists seeking policies such as export subsidies and other means of promoting market access, and it also has them influencing the international negotiations that set the rules of international agreements and organisations, such as the NAFTA and WTO. Examples of the latter sort of influence are discussed.

Suggested Citation

  • Alan V. Deardorff, 2003. "What Might Globalisation's Critics Believe?," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 26(5), pages 639-658, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:worlde:v:26:y:2003:i:5:p:639-658
    DOI: 10.1111/1467-9701.00540
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9701.00540
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/1467-9701.00540?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Robert W. Staiger & Kyle Bagwell, 1999. "An Economic Theory of GATT," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 89(1), pages 215-248, March.
    2. Deardorff, A.V, 1990. "Should Patent Protection Be Extended To All Countries?," Working Papers 259, Research Seminar in International Economics, University of Michigan.
    3. Alan V. Deardorff, 1990. "Should Patent Protection Be Extended to All Developing Countries?," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 13(4), pages 497-508, December.
    4. Dani Rodrik, 1998. "Has Globalization Gone Too Far?," Challenge, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 41(2), pages 81-94, March.
    5. repec:fth:michin:259 is not listed on IDEAS
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. John Whalley, 2008. "Globalisation and Values," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 31(11), pages 1503-1524, November.
    2. Holger Görg & David Greenaway, 2016. "Much Ado about Nothing? Do Domestic Firms Really Benefit from Foreign Direct Investment?," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: MULTINATIONAL ENTERPRISES AND HOST COUNTRY DEVELOPMENT Volume 53: World Scientific Studies in International Economics, chapter 9, pages 163-189, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    3. Arvind Panagariya, 2004. "Miracles and Debacles: In Defence of Trade Openness," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 27(8), pages 1149-1171, August.
    4. Khaled Elmawazini & Gamal Atallah & Sonny Nwankwo & Yazid Dissou, 2013. "US Foreign Affiliates, Technology Diffusion and Host Country Human Development: Human Development Index versus Human Capital," Industry and Innovation, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 20(1), pages 69-91, January.
    5. Richard B. Freeman, 2004. "Trade Wars: The Exaggerated Impact of Trade in Economic Debate," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 27(1), pages 1-23, January.
    6. Michael G. Plummer, 2014. "The emerging “post-Doha” agenda and the new regionalism," Chapters, in: Masahiro Kawai & Peter J. Morgan & Pradumna B. Rana (ed.), New Global Economic Architecture, chapter 8, pages 172-196, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    7. Alan V. Deardorff, 2004. "Who Makes the Rules of Globalization," Working Papers 517, Research Seminar in International Economics, University of Michigan.
    8. Ms. Anastasia Guscina, 2006. "Effects of Globalization on Labor’s Share in National Income," IMF Working Papers 2006/294, International Monetary Fund.
    9. Wolf-Heimo GRIEBEN, 2004. "Globalization, Labor Market Rigidities and Multiple Equilibria," DEGIT Conference Papers c009_020, DEGIT, Dynamics, Economic Growth, and International Trade.
    10. Schmidt, Oliver, 2005. "Understanding the case of international labour standards – methodological insights into an ongoing debate," MPRA Paper 5558, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised Jun 2006.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Alan V. Deardorff, 2007. "Trade Policy Options for Korea Trade Policy Options for Korea Outside the Doha Round Outside the Doha Round," Working Papers 568, Research Seminar in International Economics, University of Michigan.
    2. Holmes, Peter & Lopez-Gonzalez, Javier & MILE 02, Anirudh Shingal, 2011. "TRIPS and Special & Differential Treatment – Revisiting the Case for Derogations in Applying Patent Protection for Pharmaceuticals in Developing Count," Papers 238, World Trade Institute.
    3. Alan V. Deardorff & Robert M. Stern, 2003. "Enhancing the Benefits for Developing Countries in the Doha Development Agenda Negotiations," Working Papers 498, Research Seminar in International Economics, University of Michigan.
    4. Drusilla K. Brown & Alan V. Deardorff & Robert M. Stern, 2009. "Pros and Cons of Linking Trade and Labor Standards," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Globalization And International Trade Policies, chapter 16, pages 599-621, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    5. Frisvold, George B. & Condon, Peter T., 1998. "The convention on biological diversity and agriculture: Implications and unresolved debates1," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 26(4), pages 551-570, April.
    6. Alan V. Deardorff, 2004. "Who Makes the Rules of Globalization?," CESifo Working Paper Series 1301, CESifo.
    7. Paolo Epifani & Gino Gancia, 2005. "On Globalization and the Growth of Governments," Working Papers 267, Barcelona School of Economics.
    8. Paolo Epifani & Gino Gancia, 2009. "Openness, Government Size and the Terms of Trade," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 76(2), pages 629-668.
    9. GianCarlo Moschini, 2004. "Intellectual Property Rights and the World Trade Organization: Retrospect and Prospects," Chapters, in: Giovanni Anania & Mary E.. Bohman & Colin A. Carter & Alex F. McCalla (ed.), Agricultural Policy Reform and the WTO, chapter 19, pages 474-511, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    10. Syed Hasanat SHAH & Hafsa HASNAT* & Sarath DELPACHITRA***, 2019. "Did the WTO Promote Growth, Trade and Foreign Direct Investment in South Asia?," Pakistan Journal of Applied Economics, Applied Economics Research Centre, vol. 29(2), pages 165-179.
    11. Kosack, Stephen & Tobin, Jennifer L., 2015. "Which Countries’ Citizens Are Better Off With Trade?," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 76(C), pages 95-113.
    12. Alan V. Deardorff & Robert M. Stern, 2004. "Enhancing the Benefits for India and Other Developing Countries in the Doha Development Agenda Negotiations," Working Papers 512, Research Seminar in International Economics, University of Michigan.
    13. Caswell, Margriet F. & Fuglie, Keith O. & Klotz, Cassandra A., 1994. "Agricultural Biotechnology: An Economic Perspective," Agricultural Economic Reports 262025, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.
    14. Funke, Norbert, 1994. "The world trading system: Recent trends," Kiel Working Papers 646, Kiel Institute for the World Economy (IfW Kiel).
    15. Patrick Conway, 2004. "The Economics of the World Trading System By Kyle Bagwell and Robert Staiger. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2003. Pp. xiii, 224. $29.95," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 70(3), pages 705-708, January.
    16. D. Greenaway, 1991. "The Uruguay Round Of Multilateral Trade Negotiations: Last Chance For Gatt?," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 42(3), pages 365-379, September.
    17. F. M. Scherer, 2004. "A Note on Global Welfare in Pharmaceutical Patenting," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 27(7), pages 1127-1142, July.
    18. George B. Frisvold & Peter Condon, 1994. "Biodiversity Conservation And Biotechnology Development Agreements," Contemporary Economic Policy, Western Economic Association International, vol. 12(3), pages 1-9, July.
    19. Zhongyuan Geng & Xuan Liu, 2019. "Optimal input trade policy under economic uncertainties in a small open economy," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 51(20), pages 2155-2171, April.
    20. Lu, Louis Y.Y. & Liu, John S., 2016. "A novel approach to identify the major research themes and development trajectory: The case of patenting research," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 103(C), pages 71-82.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • F1 - International Economics - - Trade
    • F13 - International Economics - - Trade - - - Trade Policy; International Trade Organizations

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:worlde:v:26:y:2003:i:5:p:639-658. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/journal.asp?ref=0378-5920 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.