The perpetual myth of deglobalization

Abstract

‘Deglobalization’ has been bandied about now for almost a decade, capped off with the war in Ukraine and its geopolitical and geoeconomic impacts on global trade, investment, and finance. However, there have been and continue to be developments that run counter to the argument that we are living in a period of deglobalization. For example, China’s state firms are major investors in Latin America’s energy, roads, dams and other infrastructure, and space industries. In fact, China has surpassed the United States as South America’s largest trading partner. Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company (TSMC) is investing $40 billion in chip manufacturing in Arizona. And Mexico’s Grupo Bimbo has been actively doing business in China for over five years. Admittedly, the world economy is in a period of contraction. However, this slowdown in growth can be attributed as much to politics, in the form of nationalism and populism, as to economics. Additionally, measures of globalization and trade, in general, focus on manufactured goods, yet services comprise the most robust, fastest growing and dynamic sector of the economy worldwide. Any discussion of globalization and deglobalization must also address non-tariff barriers to international trade, the growth of startups, later-stage companies, and cross-border data flows. In essence, there has been no generalized decline in international economic activity but rather the growth rate has slowed. Globalization is here to stay.

Keywords

• globalization
• deglobalization
• global economy
• nationalism
• populism