Dani Rodrik: The Globalization Paradox
We are honoured to welcome one of the most prominent voices in the current globalisation debate, Political Economist at Harvard University, Dani Rodrik.
Since the Washington Consensus of 1989 the case for free trade and liberalisation of capital markets has been widely promoted by academics and policymakers. Since the financial crisis hit in 2008, globalisation has not been blamed as a primary delinquent by many prominent economists; only since Donald Trump came to power is the case for free trade loudly being questioned.
Dani Rodrik, International Political Economist at Harvard University, argues in his book ‘The Globalization Paradox’ that a pursuit for more globalisation can be dangerous. He says that countries like China and South-Korea that protected their own industries with trade-barriers have performed much better than other developing countries that signed up for free trade. Countries that liberalised capital markets like Argentina and Ireland have had far greater financial instability than others that did not.
In this interview, we will discuss the myths that lay behind the case for free trade, but also the opportunities for wealth creation that it gives. Should we embark on a path to deeper globalisation, or should we praise national sovereignty like in the Bretton Woods era?