A. Introduction

Globalisation is defined as a set of social processes that embodies a transformation in the spatial organization of social relations and transactions – assessed in terms of their extensity, intensity, velocity and impact – generating transcontinental or interregional flows and networks of activity, and the exercise of power . When Stiglitz made reference to the enormous benefits that globalisation is supposed to bring, the starting point surely is the new international economic order assembled in Bretton Woods in 1947. There, the United States and Great Britain, the major economic powers of the global North, made a firm commitment to expand international trade and to establish binding rules on international economic activities. …show more content…
We now explore the claims Stiglitz made. Essentially, there are two: First, globalisation’s potential to bring enormous benefits to both the developing and developed world has not been fully exploited; Secondly, the rules and functioning of the globalized world are skewed in favour of the advanced industrial countries, particularly special interests in those countries. The two claims are not independent of each other. The potential of globalisation, however quantitatively or qualitatively defined, is measurable insofar as globalisation as a process is carried out in a proper way, not lacking in any humanly conceivable way. Necessarily, should the second claim hold true, in that the rules and functioning of the globalized world are skewed in favour of one party over another, then the first claim will necessarily be true as well, that globalisation’s potential has not been adequately exploited.

The thrust of this paper will be to explore the rules and functioning of the globalized world, and to determine whether they indeed are skewed in favour of the advanced industrial countries and other elite interests within those countries. In Part B, we explore the problems of today’s globalisation, and see how it is largely unsatisfactory. In Part C, we consider possible ways forward for globalisation. For a focused …show more content…
They remain unaccountable in international law to those who are affected by their acts of omission and commission. This is particularly so when we see how third world states are coerced into adopting certain treaties without allowing them equal participation in the process of treaty formation, or even issues arising out of the treaty. Moreover, outside of the treaty and at the level of the international financial institutions, the decision-making processes within the IMF and World Bank are flawed where Northern states have weighted votes and hence dominate the decision-making process.
A concrete example of the lack of concern for third world states can be found in the fact that such international institutions have little physical presence in the third world states, and so those who are affected are literally unable to make their voices heard to the relevant institutions. They are unable to do so through their government, because many third world states do not have mature democratic institutions, and correspondingly have little say and influence in these international institutions. These institutions at times are far more democratic than many national governments in third world