3.2 - Governments, institutions and globalisation
Learn how international institutions and national governments shape trade and investment, why regional agreements and economic liberalisation accelerate connections, and how China's opening illustrates the interaction of policy and place.
International institutions and investment
International institutions influence globalisation by changing the rules, risks and infrastructure through which firms operate.
Foreign direct investment
Investment by an organisation in another country's business or productive assets that establishes a lasting interest and significant influence or control, such as building or acquiring a factory.
FDI differs from buying goods abroad and from a small holding of shares made solely as a financial investment. It can bring capital, technology, managerial knowledge and market access to the host place. Profits may flow overseas, and local benefits depend on wages, supplier links, taxation and environmental standards. An institution can encourage FDI without directly owning or building the factory.
The World Trade Organization (WTO) provides a framework for agreements negotiated by member governments. Lower tariffs and clearer trading rules reduce the cost and uncertainty of buying and selling across borders. A tariff is a tax on an imported good; reducing it can make an overseas supplier more competitive. Binding a tariff ceiling helps firms plan because future market access becomes more predictable. The WTO's account of its trading principles explicitly links predictability to investment. Firms may therefore be more willing to invest in export production. This is a multilateral rule-making role, not a power to remove every national regulation or lend money to a business.
The International Monetary Fund (IMF) monitors economies, provides policy advice and lends to members facing financial difficulties. Its official description distinguishes these functions from its capacity-development work. Financing can help a country meet external payment needs during a crisis; policy conditions and reforms may seek to restore stability. More stable finances can lower investor risk and sustain trade payments. Some past programmes supported liberalisation, but the IMF is neither a trade bloc nor a universal instruction to privatise everything. The content and distributional effects of programmes vary, and austerity or reform costs may produce opposition.
The World Bank finances and advises on development, including transport, power, skills and institutions. Reliable electricity and access roads lower production and delivery costs, making locations more attractive to investors. The wider World Bank Group also supports private investment through bodies such as IFC and MIGA; MIGA guarantees can reduce specified investment risks. These bodies should not be confused with the IMF's crisis-lending role. Infrastructure and financial stability make connections possible; actual trade and investment also depend on firms' decisions and national policy.
National economic liberalisation
National governments make choices that can open an economy to competition and foreign firms, or restrict their participation.
Free-market liberalisation reduces selected state restrictions on economic activity. Removing an import quota, allowing foreign ownership in a sector or making it easier to exchange currencies can allow firms to trade or invest across borders. Deregulating entry can increase competition and expand production networks. Liberalisation does not mean abolishing all rules: governments still make choices about safety, employment, environmental protection and competition.
Privatisation transfers ownership of a state-owned business or asset into private hands. If an overseas company buys the asset, this can create FDI and link the business to a wider production or service network. Private finance and management may improve capacity, but an ownership change alone does not guarantee more efficient or fair service. A poorly regulated monopoly may raise prices; profits can leave the country rather than be reinvested locally. Privatisation is an ownership decision, whereas liberalisation concerns restrictions and competition. A government can liberalise a market while retaining a state-owned firm.
Encouraging business start-ups can widen participation. Simplifying registration, providing training or improving access to credit lowers barriers to forming a business. A new local firm might sell through an online platform or become a supplier to an international company. However, foreign market access still requires suitable quality, finance, logistics and skills. Grants for local firms are therefore complementary to infrastructure and education rather than automatic causes of global success.
Policy affects different players differently. Export producers may favour lower trade barriers, while an established firm exposed to cheaper imports may lobby for protection. Workers may gain new employment but face insecure conditions if competition is pursued through weak safeguards. Governments weigh growth and tax revenue against social and environmental costs. Political decisions explain why identical transport technology can lead to different degrees of integration in different states.
Liberalisation changes market access, privatisation changes ownership, and start-up support changes entry opportunities. Explain the mechanism each creates instead of treating the three as synonyms.
Continue this lesson.
You’re previewing NovaLearn without an account. Create a free account to read the rest.
Create free account