As 2013 draws to a close, the outlook on globalisation
and sustainability suggests a tentative balance between two alternative
futures: one of intensifying zero-sum competition — a scenario that
would be disastrous for the world’s poor — and one of increasing
co-operation in a revitalised, rules-based order.
Globalisation,
the engine of emerging economies’ growth over the past 15 years,
appears to be entering a period of increased stress. Having previously
outstripped GDP growth for 30 years, trade has expanded more slowly
since 2011. About 1,500 “stealth protectionist measures” have been
introduced by G20 members since 2008, when they promised to eschew such
practices. And amid stagnant wages, high unemployment, and anaemic
growth, support for globalisation is waning in advanced economies.
Meanwhile, the world remains way off track for sustainability. Global
greenhouse gas emissions are now 46 per cent higher than they were in
1990, and the International Energy Agency estimates that existing
policies will result in long-term warming of between 3.6°C (38.5°F) and
5.3°C — well into the zone where catastrophic climate tipping points
could be triggered, potentially wiping out progress made on poverty
reduction over the past 15 years. Yet, the decisive action needed to
halt these trends is being held back by the usual squabbling and
concerns about competitiveness. Efforts to formulate new international
development targets to succeed the millennium development goals (MDGs)
when they expire in 2015 are emerging as a key indicator of what the
future holds. And it’s middle-income countries — a group that includes
not just the emerging economies of Brazil, Russia, India, China and
South Africa, but also players like Indonesia, Turkey, and a range of
highly influential Latin American countries, including Mexico and
Colombia — that could have the casting vote on which of these scenarios
we end up heading into.
Governments agreed at this
year’s U.N. general assembly that the post-2015 goals should be
universal, targeting not only the 1 billion people living in absolute
poverty, but all 7 billion of the world’s inhabitants. The reality,
though, is that the new development agenda will be anything but that
unless middle-income countries engage with it seriously — and at
present, it’s unclear what, if anything, they really want or feel they
stand to gain. After all, middle-income countries are much less reliant
on foreign assistance than they were when the MDGs were agreed.
Of
course, middle-income countries still face massive development
challenges. They house the majority of poor people, often in stubborn
poverty “tails” hallmarked by political or geographical marginalisation.
And
while hundreds of millions of their citizens have escaped poverty since
2000, the members of this “breakout generation” are finding that though
they have new opportunities to improve their lot, they are also
encountering dangerous new risks that could halt their progress — or
push them back into poverty.
If we’re going to
eliminate poverty by 2030 (the probable headline target of the post-2015
goals), limit global warming to 2°C, or move to more sustainable and
inclusive globalisation, we’re going to need a serious new global
partnership — with middle-income countries fully on board. —
© Guardian Newspapers Limited, 2013
Comments
Post a Comment