For some time now, some world renowned institutions have speculated that low global economic growth marked the end of globalisation as we have come to know it. In recent weeks, the rapid global spread of COVID-19 has re-ignited those views. See below, excerpts of these views. Do you think you think recent global events will reverse globalisation as we know it?
Thank you for the question Prof. Kheepe Lawrence Moremi
My guess is that if some countries are implicated & found guilty of the global spread of SARS-CoV-20---being these countries, part of the global trade community---they could be punished & as a consecuence "globalization as we know it, could be reversed" as you stated.
Thank you for the question Prof. Kheepe Moremi
It is quite possible that there will be changes in the views related to global processes in different aspects - society, economy, influence on nature. A broad consensus is likely to be reached that, under the new conditions, the role of public expenditure must be expanded. Survival and development based solely on the "invisible hand" of the market mechanism will hardly be possible.
Thank you for your time, participation and contribution Prof. Pedro L. Contreras E.
To ensure I am on the same wavelength, you force a potential fall out of some sort that may fracture or lead to some global re-alignment of some sort. Is this what you are referring to?
Thank you for your time, participation and contribution Bistra Nikolova . If I understand you correctly, you foresee more state intervention on economic matters to correct "market failures?" Is this where you are going from?
If yes, which market failures do you think, on average, states will prioritise?
Yes, that's what I think.The health system should be a priority in this regard.
Every country, whether battling the Covid-19 Outbreak or not, is on the brink of recesssion. As predicted, they will run deficit fiscal policy. It is quite natural that everybody will turn to the World Bank, IMF, ADB or other champions of the current world order for financial assistance. These institutions will make sure these countries' give their commitment toward free trade as a condition for the assistance. Accordingly, these countries will continue their support for the globalization.
However, China and Russia take advantage of the weakening US, to provide alternative assistance. For once, countries are able to make a choice. It is indeed very interesting to see how this competition for influence will end.
Yes, it might be. The health system must be a priority in the future
That is a very interesting perspective Yudhi Dharma Nauly
In a way, the interplay between the "Washington Consensus" and "Beijing Consensus " will have a big say on the shape and form of globalisation post COVID-19?
Thank you for your contribution Silvius Stanciu
Heath care systems and models all over the world look like they require urgent attention.
Exactly Dear Prof. Kheepe Lawrence Moremi
you state it very clear: "I force a potential fall out of some sort that may fracture or lead to some global re-alignment of some sort" or "some countries will argue & stop being friendly"---I guess same as during the start of cold war.
Thank you for your detailed and thoughtful response Prof. Pedro L. Contreras E.
In a way, "history may repeat itself?"
You are welcome Dear Prof. Kheepe Lawrence Moremi
Yes, "history may repeat itself" For instance, some countries are making frightening nuclear experiments again, please check:
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/08/12/world/europe/russia-nuclear-accident-putin.html
The NYT writes that "the missile can reach any corner of the earth because it is partially powered by a small nuclear reactor, eliminating the usual distance limitations of conventionally fueled missiles"
So, it looks like the power unit is also a nuclear bomb as the explosion showed!
Today, it is apparent that Beijing Consensus is far more appealing to emerging countries than the Washington Consensus . Not only because China's amazing economic growth has impressed these countries, but also because China doesn't demand difficult commitment from them. For instance, countries,burdened with human rights issues, shift to Beijing after they're turned down by Washington. In addition, China has the experience in successfully defeating Covid-19. Thus, China's assistance in battling the outbreak would be welcome.
The Covid-19 outbreak is currently in full swing in the US. Washington is quite powerless in seeing the aggressiveness of Beijing. Yet, Washington response will be more aggressive once the pandemic is curbed. Yes, observing the interplay between the Beijing Consensus and the Washington Consensus will be fascinating.
Thank you for the insightful response Yudhi Dharma Nauly
This a space that is worth watching.
Niyungeko Antoine your perspective will be appreciated on this.
The European Union will also play a role in shaping the Global Scenario after the pandemic, where the damage caused by the virus is also significant, as well the Russian interests.
Thank you for the perspective Bistra Nikolova . EU and Russia are important players. What impact do you think COVID-19 will have on the EU. Will the unity hold or weaken? From a distance, it does not seem as though their response to COVID-19 is collective.
Dear Kheepe, the period the world is living now is a difficult moment in all aspects. Is shows the limitations of the existing knowledge. As far as globalization is concerned, I think the Covid'19 has nothing to do with the globalization. In contrast, covid'19 will enhance globalization , because now the world is becoming aware of the unicity of the human race. Covid'19 is now opening our yes, the world has the same war now, has the same enemy. It is better to find unique solution for the whole world. As consequence, the links between countries will be reinforced as countries are working together in the fight of Covid'19.
Dear Kheepe, the period the world is living now is a difficult moment in all aspects. Is shows the limitations of the existing knowledge. As far as globalization is concerned, I think the Covid'19 has nothing to do with the globalization. In contrast, covid'19 will enhance globalization , because now the world is becoming aware of the unicity of the human race. Covid'19 is now opening our yes, the world has the same war now, has the same enemy. It is better to find unique solution for the whole world. As consequence, the links between countries will be reinforced as countries are working together in the fight of Covid'19.
Thank you for your insight Niyungeko Antoine . You think COVID-19 will enhance globalisation?
World Economic Forum's version of the "history of globalisation."
https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2019/01/how-globalization-4-0-fits-into-the-history-of-globalization/
Dear Prof. Kheepe Moremi, it seems that the world has not been prepared for an adequate response to a pandemic. In such a context, the EU should rethink its effectiveness. It is very possible that after the pandemic, cooperation and integration will be expanded and strengthened, not only in the Union but also globally. More and more synergies will be required.
Kheepe Lawrence Moremi, I propose yes as anticipation, besides, I also foreshadow the emergence of new world powers along with a 're-arrangement' of the current ones.
Globalization as we know it (since 1989/1990) is over.
Social systems entropy can be reduced globally by investments into human health:
https://healthmanagement.org/c/healthmanagement/issuearticle/health-the-economic-growth-engine-of-the-21st-century
Yes I think so. I suppose it will be many restrictions in traveling and transport of goods. The main consequence of global corona virus or precisely covid-19 strain outbreak is fear of future possible similar incidents. However, the borders will not be open as they used to be before covid-19 pandemic.
I do agree with Dr.Bistra,really there is a need to rethink and re-arrange the global effectiveness and cooperation as well.
Dear Kheepe Moremi,
As you know, in mathematics, any search for a solution begins with the formulation of a mathematical model. If this model is not reliable, then the search for a solution is doomed to fail. If we receive inaccurate source data, we accordingly draw the wrong conclusions. So, it all depends on the reliability of the source data. What is this data? To be completely trueable, I would really like to receive reliable information on the statistics of coronavirus deaths. We only know the total number of deaths, but we don’t know anything about any details, for example:
a) What is the age of the deceased?
b) What diseases did this deceased have before the coronavirus?
I heard somewhere from the Internet, possibly from
1. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K10dDbfvvpM Italy. Operation Coronavirus. Opinion of the Italian virologist.
2. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QnEcCGgRhGo Italy. Operation Corona virus. The difference in situation between the EU and the United States. Will there be a sacred sacrifice?)
3. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8kAsiQvXqYM Italy. Operation Corona virus. Administration of different regions of Italy. About the media.
a phrase: "It’s very profitable for the authorities to blame everything on the coronavirus, because good death insurance will have to be paid for deaths from heart attack, stroke, cancer and other diseases". Here is the phrase "if a coronavirus was found in a patient and then a car ran over it, then in China they write" death from a car ", and in Italy -" death from a coronavirus". Everything is simple. Here is one phrase from this video:
"... A doctor from Spain says: Neighbors are calling, in our neighboring house an old man lives there, we don't see his a very long time, he's lonely. They called the police, opened door and unfortunately they saw that this man was dead, and at least two months have passed from that day, but the most interesting was an autopsy, forensic examinations, there was a conclusion, they wrote to him that the reason for him death is coronavirus ... "
Therefore, in order to adequately respond to events, we must correctly understand these events. Let's wait another three months and compare the figure for six months from January 1, 2020 to June 30, 2020 with the period from January 1, 2020 to June 30, 2019, 2018, 2017 in different countries. If the difference increased sharply, then the coronavirus had a big impact, if the difference was insignificant or equal to zero, then all deaths for this period in 2020 were attributed to coronavirus. Everything is simple. It only means - we were cruelly deceived. We must not trust blindly. In my opinion - this is reasonable.
Thank you for your insightful perspectives Gennady Fedulov Eman Riyadh Adeeb Amer B. Dheyab
Stephen I. Ternyik Siniša SrečecStephen I. Ternyik you believe it over, especially from a health perspective, Eman Riyadh Adeeb , re-arrangement or restructuring or multilateral agents - regional or global, Siniša Srečec , from a trade, travel and supply chain point of view; Amer B. Dheyab
, from a multilateral agency point of view.Gennady Fedulov than for your perspective, but our focus on this thread is GLOBALIZATION.
Thank you for your time and contribution Yousif Yaqoob Shahtha
Dear Prof. Yudhi Dharma Nauly
It also will be interesting if those countries that choose China & Russia to provide alternative assistance, previously review the venezuelan case. It is a good example to watch & follow. Regards.
Thank you for contributions Arben J Salihu
Pedro L. Contreras E. . Your perspectives and insights are highly valued.
“If you can't live longer, live deeper.” — Italian proverb. None of us can predict how long we will live, which is why it is so important to live each day with intention and purpose.
Corona can't stop life on the earth. Be positive.
My opinion is that globalization was overrated in general. It existed primarily in a few industries - finances/ banking, travel, tourism, transport, production of goods/ more limitted in services.
The rest of the world economy has always been based on bilateral, state-to-state relations.
How a viral infection can change the dynamics in the globalized industries?
Travel, tourism, transport, I expect, will change very little.
More economically advanced countries (USA, Australia, Canada, Japan, some EU member-states) would most probably detach a portion of their production from China and would transfer it home or to neighbouring countries (e.g. Vietnam).
It is in their domestic interest also, because of rising uneployment and increasing internal debt related to social security programs, investments in infrastructure, loss of competitive edge in new technology.
Countries in which China has invested heavily throughout the years (esp. in Latin America, the African continent, parts of Europe), has good trade relations with (e.g. Russia) or draws energy/ food resources from (e.g. oil- or grain-exporters) will continue to do business with China, pretty much as they used to before.
Discourses aside, lower prices (as long as China maintains them) targetted at a larger number of people in the lower and middle economics-based classes in this second group of countries is linked to internal stability.
The great unknown is how will the financing/ banking sector chose to change to lower international mid- and long-term risk exposure.
Regardless of how much in gold reserves a state can hold, it would never be enough to cover potential, wide-spread damage.
As some of the scientists above have already stated, there is a need to invest in human resources (i.e. human health and education based on state/ industry needs), as upon their shoulders rests the long-term economic prosperity of any state.
:)
Thank you very much Pedro L. Contreras E. for bringing up the Venezuelan case. It is inevitable for countries which receive assistance from either side to become battle ground for global influence. Proxy war will be definitely unavoidable there. The government will take side with the donor country while the opposition clearly join the rival country. I agree with you that every recipient country need to understand that receiving assistance means taking side. And taking side may bring undesired consequences.
Thank you for a detailed and considered follow on response Valeria Tananska . It does indeed look like there will be a re-alignment of some sort. Nation states and regions will re-assess their priorities as suggested by Bistra Nikolova . In addition, there may be some "bilateral re-alignment.'
In addition to the above, the sectors that are global in nature as per your suggestion (travel, trade and tourism) will continue as normal. In this area, I also foresee, a certain level of import substitution.
Thank you Yudhi Dharma Nauly and Pedro L. Contreras E. for your contribution and perspectives. In the past, there used to be something called the Non Aligned Movement, countries that would trade and accept assistance from anywhere, but not take sides. Is this still possible, in light of your question Pedro L. Contreras E. ?
Thank you so much for your answer Prof. Yudhi Dharma Nauly
Yes 2 countries arrived here: Cuba (1 flight) and China (3 flights). I may guess that the quarantine chavistas are implementing here is similar to Wuhan quarantine.
Yes Prof. Kheepe Lawrence Moremi . Non Aligned Movement still exist. There was a meeting here in Ccs a few months ago.
Indeed, I guess from where the president of the WHO comes from. Please check the following link:
https://www.nationalreview.com/2020/04/coronavirus-china-world-health-organization-chinese-communist-party/
Thank you for the insight Pedro L. Contreras E.
My interest is more forward looking.
I do not think so. Globalisation is here to stay as long humanity continues to exist. We have had world economic recessions, world wars and other epidemics even before the concept of globalization became a reality. For example, many developing countries and even the developed countries can not wait for the pandemic to stop such that the world can resume international trade and the exchange of ideas in different fields. International travel, tourism, connection of China to Europe by road or railway will not stop. Technology which is a lead factor in globalization will not even slow down a second and many other areas that are a concern of globalization. What we may experience once the pandemic is no more are accusations and counter accusations of who started it or whether it was manufactured or as result of climatic change and so on. But even then, the countries that will be involved in such a proxy war of words will not stop working together. One living example is the economic war between China and USA which has not stopped the two world powers from conducting business together in various fields.
Agree with previous comment. Globalization is not going to end because of the Pandemic. It will be forgotten like the Spanish flu or the Plague once an effective vaccine and treatment is developed. You can not take back the freedoms of the people unless there is a global dictator... It will continue. The vested interests of the big businesses will also not let this happen. They will be hit for a brief period of time but they are resilient.
Notice the difference between "the end of globalisation as we know it" Madhu Deshpande versus the "end of globalisation."
The former is a relative statement whilst the latter is an absolute statement. You are asked to comment on the relative statement.
Today is World Health Day!
Thanks for the care and responsibility during the pandemic! Health and success for all medics!
https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/2020-03-16/will-coronavirus-end-globalization-we-know-it
Thank you for your contribution Peshawa O. Hama . That is a great piece from Foreign Affairs that you shared. It does look like this is topic issue at the moment and I am sure nation states, regions and multilateral agencies are already thinking about the post COVID-19 world and what it would like.
Thank you Prof. Bistra Nikolova
You are right, we should honour the men and women who are at the cold face of the fight against Corona Virus and those who put their lives on the line in the fight against Ebola in Sierra Leone, Liberia etc.,
The process and growth of globalisation as we know it will ebb in a post- COVID-19 world. The dynamics of globalisation such as migration, trade, finance, knowledge/ technological exchange and transfer, will be grossly reduced within short -term and medium-term periods. Nations will be more careful in their relationships, thereby diminishing the flow of globalisation. Sense of nationalism will be heightened among nations with more pronounced protective policies on national interests, particularly if it became obvious that the pandemic was linked to global power game.
Thank you for your considered view Alphonsus Nwoye . The last part of your response, in my view, is the most significant. When nations get into distress of one form or another, they tend to look more inward. I suspect we will be hearing more about "self sufficiency" and import substitution drives from different countries. My suspicion is that the drama around "supply and demand" of ventilators, masks and gloves will surely linger in policy makers' minds for some time to come.
COVID-19 SOCIAL & ECONOMIC CHANGES (speculative):
Given that this virus is going to be around for a while (6 months minimum with at least 12 months for any socio-economic recovery, assuming of course that this does not precipitate a world-wide depression) I speculate on the following:
1. Increased use of the internet/social media to maintain distanced contacts. [This is already apparent.]
2. Increased use of internet-based purchasing, including home deliveries of food etc. [also apparent]
3. Conversely, increased use of local businesses such as food stores etc. [This one is not happening yet – needs some government support to get it going.]
4. Along with this there could be closer, local neighbourhood social connections. [Already some evidence of this happening.]
5. Increasing efforts by people to grow their own vegetables to become independent [already happening].
6. Massive decrease in international tourism (already happening) – the only answer to this is to generate internal tourism. Worse than that – all international tourists could be regarded with suspicion (I have seen some very anti-tourist postings on fb).
7. Increased support for right-wing politicians for taking control – mind you, the reverse could happen, it depends whom the general public blame and the fallout from all of this.
8. The downfall of Trump! (the world, except Putin, hopes for this)
9. Increased trust in science! Conversely, millennium movements will try to generate irrational, superstitious beliefs – a good example of this is attempts by some to say Covid-19 is the earth responding to environmental destruction.
10. Breakdown of some barriers between people of different cultures etc.
11. Despite what some millennium movements think, such as Deep Green Resistance, capitalism is not on its deathbed but will actually flourish, with a few strategic changes – such as, greater local production of some strategic goods so as to reduce reliance on imports. I notice also that the Marxists are crawling out of the swamp – they too are doomed to return to the dustbin of history.
Thank you for a considered and detailed response Geoff Holloway
Localisation is indeed a "phenomenon" worth watching. This includes the "potential return" of the "grocery store around the corer" or the "mom and pop store."
Nothing changes. Business as usual. Social midia showed a huge gap between the chosen people and their struggle to have cute videos without the entire crew. The market has one model only,
Degrowth is not contemplated as a possibilty. some people will grow vegetables for some time, some reduced shopping. Many are afraid, unemployed and hurt, but all will be forgotte soon.
Bankers were the first save and that tells a lot about who runs the game.
Perhaps small investors that were lured into the game will refrain. But marketing will bring things back and push consumption. As always.
Saying that it is the "end of globalization" it is not right. My analysis is that it is globalization pause to secure globalization in future.
Thank you for your time and contribution Jawad Shafique Kiani . The issue at hand is the end of "globalisation as we know it" and the end of "globalisation." The former is a relative statement - globalisation as you/we know it, whilst the latter is an absolute statement.
In addition, globalisation is a composite term with lots of different parts. It could be globalisation of; 1) travels and tourism; 2) trade; 3) money; 3) arts and sports; 4) science etc.,
Reading the responses to this question has been both fascinating and fantastic with great opinions from an extremely diverse array of perspectives. As a read, and re-read, I felt that there was an over-arching theme that tied all of these perspectives about the future of globalization together. And that one thing is the need to develop global citizenship competency in order to more efficiently and effectively address these types of issues.
First, to give a direct answer to the question of whether or not this pandemic "marks the end of globalization as we know it"...No, I don't think so. I agree with some previous comments that it will ebb in the short (and possibly) medium term (the 1- 4 years max), but after a minor adjustment it will revert back to it pre-pandemic form. Actually, it will probably be in turbo-charge because of pent-up energy. But the globalization that has evolved into what we know will still be in full force. It takes A LOT to make people, societies, nations, etc. go backwards, and as its been said, pandemics are not new. Neither are concepts of global citizenship. The EU is built on this idea of the common good being the responsibility of the many. But it focused on the economic common good. Their response has been underwhelming because the Union developed the economic side (globalization) without the competence (global citizenship) to deal with issues that come along with global connectedness. The U.S. response has been just as bad because we still think that oceans and borders protect us. Again, the competence to understand issues of global scope, and the foresight and planning that it takes to prevent and/or deal with them is lacking. The U.S. is doubly cursed because we don't even see how our own internal response, or lack there of, to this pandemic can negatively effect our own communities (see college students at Spring Break and partying on campus before they closed).
Will there be adjustments? Yes, of course. The adjustment that needs to be made is that global citizenship education and competence will need to catch-up to the economics side of the equation. Nationalism, and the looking inwards of countries would be the worst thing that could happen as it would cause issues like this to continue to slip through the cracks as the turn inwards decreases collaborations and an increase in unilateralism or partnerships that are limited in scope. Instead, we need to embrace the reality that all of our economies, our societies, and all that they are built on are connected, and interdependent. Theresa May said global citizens are citizens of nowhere, but looking back it was that mentality that led us to where we are now.
The true answer to the question is that the development of global citizenship competence is the future of globalization post-Covid19. It is the need for the rise and development of global citizenship education that ties the Washington and Beijing Consensus; the current world order and the organizations that it is built on; the economies that we depend on; and the society that we live in. It is the side of globalization that constantly gets over looked, but it is the future of globalization moving forward, and the future of the global good.
On another note, I would love to collaborate and work with anyone on some research on this topic.
Yes, I like your initial analysis Eric, but in the context of the EU clearly there are multiple challenges, not just Covid-19, that may even threaten its future existence as a unified entity (the retirement of Angela Merkel is a major problem here). With respect to the USA, arguably it is fast losing its status as a world power (totally due to Trump) and the vacuum appears to be being filled by Russia and China - USA is no longer a global citizen ('Make America great again!').
Thank you for immersion and engagement with the topic and discussion Eric Simeon . If I understand your point of view, you are saying that "in the short term, there will be some level of "disruption to globalisation," but in the medium to long term, there will be some "correction?"
I value your input and perspective. If I may ask, what do you base your viewpoint on?
At current state i will not be end of globalization but if it prolongs for more than a year with any cure then it can be the end for the ruling elites and city dwellers out of starvation.
Geoff, thank you for your response. I in no way meant to imply that the EU has only 1 issue to contend with. But rather how this pandemic offered a missed opportunity for the EU to ideally demonstrate the collaborative foresight and seamless integration that claims to strive for. As far as the U.S., I would say that we dont do enough to promote global citizenship competence in general. We are moving in the right direction, but still have a long way to go. But we are also a diverse multicultural country that needs to do a better job of promoting cultural competency and diversity within our own communities.
Kheepe, you are welcome. Yes, the answer to your question is that there will be short term disruption in order to make necessary adjustments or corrections.
I base my viewpoints on my own research, which looks at the connected issues of diversity, equity, inclusion, global citizenship, globalization, international affairs/science diplomacy, STEM, and international business.
I have done several presentations at national and international conferences where I have discussed these issues and how a globally engaged citizenship, with a culturally diverse education, that builds a multiculturally/globally competent workforce serves the economic interest of industrialized nations. And with that I have also discussed how the promotion of disciplines (specifically STEM) to deal with issues that are global in scope (i.e. pandemic control), have become necessary in national educational policies.
Thank you Eric Simeon Pema Rinzin Geoff Holloway for the lively engagement and insightful comments.
The human and economic damage that the Corona virus has caused to countries around the world may make some view it as an important turning point for the entire global economy, after causing isolation of countries and economic decline. Corona has already restricted globalization but who knows it might be not not for so long .
Thank you for your participation Preet Lal
If I understand you correctly, you are saying the level interdependence is high and also some countries are more dependent on globalisation?
I am late to join the discussion. However, I believe my published research on Covid and governance shows why the governance strategies (technology based) are slow in western democracies. Full text is available here: Article Smart technologies for fighting Pandemics: The techno and hu...
Better late than never Rama Krishna Reddy Kummitha
Thank you for joining in. I will digest the attachment. Would you mind though to share the essence of the attachment?
Thank you Barbara Sawicka for your time, contribution and insights. I am already seeing a "retreat in a few countries" and a move towards "self sufficiency." It would be interesting to hear from other researchers whether they are picking up anything where they live or work.
I agree with you that a retreat may have draw backs for science and research.
Dear Prof. Moremi,
I think that the world has not been prepared for an adequate response to a COVID-19.
I am sure that recent global events will reverse globalisation in future.
Regards,
Zijad
Thank you for your time, participation and insights Prof. Zijad Džafić
Thank you for a detailed response Avinash Pawar . I like the fact that you have taken a micro perspective on the subject. This helps to build a bottom up view of the topic at hand. Thank you.
I feel that COVID-19 posed a rethink over globalization.
The series of challenges that have been brought about by globalization in terms of supply crisis were a matter of concern. It was not only noted that needed items were scarce but almost empty shelves were showing helplessness in times of need. Countries are thinking of selfsufficiency by bringing in manufacturing units back to the country, However cost of items will escalate as cheap labours are not available in Europe and USA.
The other alternative is in two years time can be major shifts to supply chain. The countries that can most benefit can be Vietnam, India and Mexico. Mexico having close border to America will benefit a lot. Moreover Vietnam with its cheap labour and acumen in manufacturing will reap the benefit out of this crisis the major shift of India will be of technological supplies. Given the fact that don't all the eggs in one basket.
Instead of globalization, regionalization will develop. America will integrate more with Canada and its align borders to broaden its trade. Europe might trade in Eurozone and China will integrate more with Central Asia, Russia, Iran, Africa and Pakistan, Having the blocks developed will make major decisions of currency and order of the new economy.
Thank you for your contribution Munira Tharwani . This is an interesting space to watch. Like with many things in life, many opposing forces will be at play. Forces for national self sufficiency and forces against. At this point, we see moves and actions for national self sufficiency. It will be interesting to see the forms that "forces against" will take and their drivers.
The SARS-CoV-2 coronavirus pandemic that causes Covid-19 disease has accelerated the digitization and internetization processes of many business processes, increasing the scale of e-commerce development, however, mainly on a national scale, less internationally. However, there are many indications that information and IT globalization may increase due to the development of the SARS-CoV-2 Coronavirus epidemic. However, economic globalization can decrease if the scale of interrupted international intermodal logistics chains is large. The importance of developing sub-assemblies, semi-finished products and production factors for the production of specific goods within the national economy may increase, to which they are now imported from geographically distant other economies. Therefore, the importance of shortening logistics chains and replacing international logistics chains with domestic logistics chains is growing in order to reduce the risk of dependence on foreign component suppliers located in geographically distant countries, characterized by other economic, social, political and other environmental conditions related to a different climate zone, i.e. also factors that until recently have not been paying much attention. SARS-CoV-2 Coronavirus pandemic can therefore significantly reduce the scale of economic globalization.
Greetings,
Dariusz Prokopowicz
I think world wide countries may be divided into two groups. Chinese and US supporters.
I think it will be difficult. For a period of time, there will be a kind of "global fear," but the society of the 21st century is built on a basis of cooperation. It is true, it will have to create greater independence from China, and redefine the role of institutions. And also... think... where to place the role of the United States in the new World order? Europe must finally build a common voice, to save its values. And also its economy. For countries like Spain, it will be important to seek strategies to maintain vital sectors for its economy, such as tourism. I believe that after the fear generated by COVID, the world will create strategies to continue communicating in a real way, not just a virtual one.
Thank you for a detailed and considered response Dariusz Prokopowicz . The idea of reduced economic globalisation, reduced dependence of components and an increase in national sub assemblies sounds plausible.
Certainly, globalisation will evolve and be modified Sule Akkoyunlu
Globalisation will evolve to one where f2f will not be as prevalent as now. Less physical travel and more utilisation of robots and mechanisation. Goods can still move around the world. Robots will take over from humans and online discussion and trading will be the way forward. All these are temporary rearrangements until we can find a vaccine.