Imagine a world in which women and girls have their rights respected, climate change receives the attention it so urgently requires and poverty has been eliminated.
Never before have we had the means that we have now to make this vision a reality. In Africa, for example, I am excited to see how off-grid solar energy is expanding rapidly. In Kenya, mobile banking has significantly improved financial inclusion, particularly for poor women.
These and other technologies associated with the Fourth Industrial Revolution (4IR) have the potential to boost productivity, incomes and leisure time for workers, while also decarbonizing our economies and freeing women from the hold of unremunerated care work, but to realize this potential, we will have to adopt an entirely new approach to globalization.
Illustration: Lance Liu
The World Economic Forum’s theme for its annual meeting in Davos, Switzerland, next month is “Globalization 4.0,” which comprises many of the competing narratives shaping our world. In the dominant narrative of the past 40 years, GDP was king and countries pursued deregulation, loosened capital controls, cut corporate taxes and liberalized their labor markets.
The eruption of popular anger that has roiled many countries’ politics is rooted in the failure of that neoliberal model, but there is no economic law requiring globalization to be a race to the bottom. On the contrary, for humanity to have any hope at all, Globalization 4.0 must break with neoliberalism for good.
I fear that business and government elites gathering in Davos do not seem to have grasped this fully. Until they do, globalization will continue to fuel inequality and sow discontent around the world.
Rising inequality threatens much of the progress that we have made over the past half-century. While the world’s richest 1 percent took home 82 percent of all new wealth last year, the World Bank reported that the “decline in poverty rates has slowed, raising concerns about achieving the goal of ending poverty by 2030.”
Even more shocking, extreme poverty in Sub-Saharan Africa is actually increasing, and almost half of all people worldwide are one medical bill or crop failure away from destitution.
These realities will persist as long as billionaires in Silicon Valley, Africa and elsewhere are writing the future narrative of globalization. We need new stories to challenge the “status quo.”
Consider that of Budi, a shrimp-processing worker in Southeast Asia who must peel 950 shrimp per hour to earn a minimum wage. It would take Budi more than 5,000 years to earn what a US supermarket CEO makes in one year.
Or consider the women farmers in my village of Ruti, Uganda, who wonder if economic growth will ever result in free, quality education for their kids.
Rich countries owe much of their prosperity to universal education, but in developing countries around the world, fees charged by for-profit schools are driving families deeper into poverty.
One person whose story must be heard is Berta Caceres, an Aboriginal-rights leader in Honduras who was assassinated in March 2016 for resisting a destructive hydroelectric dam project. Last month, a court ruled that Caceres’ murder was carried out with the knowledge and consent of executives from Desa, the corporation behind the dam.
When globalization has no rules or referees, the bullies will always win. Even research by the IMF shows that financial globalization has led to “significant increases in inequality,” as has increased trade in some developing countries.
Likewise, climate change is symptomatic of a grossly unequal economy in which the rich exploit the environment for private gain.
Globalization 4.0 must offer a new narrative to replace the abusive, extractive and sexist neoliberalism of the past few decades. We will need far more cooperation among governments to rewrite the rules of finance, trade, wages and taxation. Only then can we ensure that the 4IR benefits ordinary people.
To that end, we should welcome pioneering technologies, but we should also ask tough questions about their ownership and the interests they serve, especially as new monopolies emerge. We will need a smart mix of incentives, public ownership and regulation to manage the changes that are upon us.
We will also need a new approach to taxation and public spending. The richest households and corporations have avoided paying their fair share for too long, while also stymieing meaningful reform.
It was particularly disappointing to see business leaders at the last Davos meeting celebrating US President Donald Trump’s trillion-US-dollar tax cuts. If well-meaning elites are serious about ushering in a more inclusive form of globalization, they will need to back their words with deeds.
Multilateralism remains the only way to manage these policy challenges, but the framework for international cooperation must become much more democratic, feminist and people-centered.
When discussing the trajectory of globalization, a woman smallholder farmer in Nakuru, Kenya, should be valued just as much as a corporate executive in Manhattan. We need multilateral institutions that can rein in corporate abuse and steel civil society against rising authoritarianism.
Responsive, bold leadership from national governments will also be needed to manage Globalization 4.0. Rather than simply trying to manipulate citizens’ anger, politicians need to understand and address the root causes of their discontent.
Fortunately, such leaders are not mythical creatures. South Korean President Moon Jae-in is tackling inequality with a combination of taxes on the wealthy and corporations, a higher minimum wage and increased social spending. New Zealand Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern also has an ambitious agenda to reduce inequality and has made citizens’ well-being a central metric of her government’s success. Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau has openly embraced a feminist global-development policy.
These leaders are living proof that globalization can be managed in a way that benefits everyone. They put those beholden to toxic neoliberalism to shame and offer hope that a more human global economy is within reach.
Winnie Byanyima is executive director of Oxfam International.
The EU’s biggest banks have spent years quietly creating a new way to pay that could finally allow customers to ditch their Visa Inc and Mastercard Inc cards — the latest sign that the region is looking to dislodge two of the most valuable financial firms on the planet. Wero, as the project is known, is now rolling out across much of western Europe. Backed by 16 major banks and payment processors including BNP Paribas SA, Deutsche Bank AG and Worldline SA, the platform would eventually allow a German customer to instantly settle up with, say, a hotel in France
On August 6, Ukraine crossed its northeastern border and invaded the Russian region of Kursk. After spending more than two years seeking to oust Russian forces from its own territory, Kiev turned the tables on Moscow. Vladimir Putin seemed thrown off guard. In a televised meeting about the incursion, Putin came across as patently not in control of events. The reasons for the Ukrainian offensive remain unclear. It could be an attempt to wear away at the morale of both Russia’s military and its populace, and to boost morale in Ukraine; to undermine popular and elite confidence in Putin’s rule; to
A traffic accident in Taichung — a city bus on Sept. 22 hit two Tunghai University students on a pedestrian crossing, killing one and injuring the other — has once again brought up the issue of Taiwan being a “living hell for pedestrians” and large vehicle safety to public attention. A deadly traffic accident in Taichung on Dec. 27, 2022, when a city bus hit a foreign national, his Taiwanese wife and their one-year-old son in a stroller on a pedestrian crossing, killing the wife and son, had shocked the public, leading to discussions and traffic law amendments. However, just after the
The international community was shocked when Israel was accused of launching an attack on Lebanon by rigging pagers to explode. Most media reports in Taiwan focused on whether the pagers were produced locally, arousing public concern. However, Taiwanese should also look at the matter from a security and national defense perspective. Lebanon has eschewed technology, partly because of concerns that countries would penetrate its telecommunications networks to steal confidential information or launch cyberattacks. It has largely abandoned smartphones and modern telecommunications systems, replacing them with older and relatively basic communications equipment. However, the incident shows that using older technology alone cannot
RSS