Educational Leadership - September 2009

The cruelties and obstacles of this swiftly changing planet will

state, I am sympathetic with the intention of these plans. However, in times of global economic crises, such protectionist measures may not solve the problem. Instead, they may lead to deeper recession and result in higher unemployment around the globe, just like what happened in the economic crisis in the 1930s.

Pascal Lamy, director-general of the
World Trade Organization, has pointed
out that the protectionist measures that

country than another. New technologies can completely wipe out previous industries. How many buggy whip manufacturers can you find in the U.S. today?

Even without globalization, what powers a nation’s economy can change and force people to transition to other types of jobs. According to a study by McKinsey (Baily & Lawrence, 2005) that was based on an analysis of detailed trade and industry data,

Such an understanding will not only help all citizens actively participate in and contribute to the global society, but also reduce negative feelings toward other countries and enhance harmony in the global village.

Our children need to understand
that globalization’s negative outcomes
can affect their own lives.

countries took in the 1930s eventually led to the Great Depression (Melik, 2009). The Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act, which raised tariffs on imported goods to protect U.S. workers, sent the global economy into deeper recession. The unemployment rate in the United States jumped from 7. 8 percent in 1929 to 25. 1 percent in 1933.

Although economists around the world are warning political leaders not to repeat this mistake, leaders feel tremendous domestic pressure to consider actions that protect the interests of their constituents in the short term, despite the eventual damages these actions may have in the long term.

One commonly held view, namely that developing countries and foreigners are robbing jobs from the developed nations, is not necessarily accurate. First, industries change and jobs get lost. As Robert Thompson (2006), chair of the International Food and Agricultural Trade Council, explained,

countries’ competitive positions change all the time. No economy stands still. New mineral deposits are found, and others are depleted. Some countries’ populations grow, and others decline. Research may find new technologies that provide a greater advantage to one

trade, particularly rising imports of goods and services, didn’t destroy the vast majority of the jobs lost in the United States since 2000. . . . Only about 314,000 jobs ( 11 percent of the manufacturing jobs lost) were lost as a result of trade. . . . Falling exports, not rising imports, were responsible. Service sector offshoring destroyed even fewer jobs. These figures are tiny relative to the millions of positions lost and created every year in the United States by normal market forces. . . . Manufacturing’s share of total U.S. employment has been falling for at least half a century—a trend that is typical, not only of developed economies, but also of many developing ones.

Understanding Global Problems

Global warming has already caused the Arctic ice sheet to shrink, glaciers to retreat, and sea levels to rise. We have seen changes in the amount and patterns of precipitation, resulting in flooding and drought. Global warming also causes extreme weather conditions, affects agricultural yields, leads to the extinction of species, and increases the spread of life-threatening diseases. One study (CNA Corporation, 2007) noted the sobering political implications as well:

Projected climate change will seriously exacerbate already marginal living standards in many Asian, African, and Middle Eastern nations, causing widespread political instability and the likelihood of failed states. . . . The chaos that results can be an incubator of civil strife, genocide, and the growth of terrorism. (p. 6)

The study suggests that a common perception in the United States—that China and India have caused massive job losses in our manufacturing and service sectors—is just not the case. In fact, one study found that trade and investment with China will likely result in a 0.7 percent increase in U.S. gross domestic product (GDP) and a 0.8 percent decrease in prices by 2010 as well as an increase of 0.7 percent in output per worker across the U.S. economy (Britton & Mark, 2006).

It is crucial for citizens of the global
village to develop a good understanding
of economics from a global perspective.

But climate change is not the only serious problem facing all human beings. Environmental degradation, deforestation, desertification, oil depletion, and destruction of wildlife habitats are all consequences of globalization. The economic growth resulting from globalization has significantly increased consumption of natural resources and caused irreversible damage to our environment.

When China imports timber from Indonesia, it exports deforestation. When Brazilians replace forests in the Amazon region with coffee fields, they affect global temperatures. When the United States sends its manufacturing industries overseas, it sends pollution there, too.