[wpfilebase tag=”file” id=424]
This bibliography covers very recent articles related to the trade protectionism/globalization controversy triggered by Brexit and the election of Trump. There is obviously a lot of additional literature that is a bit slightly older on the advantages and disadvantages of both trade protectionism and globalization. That evidence is available in our release but I did not reproduced the citations here.
Trump and the Status Quo
Globalization took hits in 2016, will 2017 lead to more? . This article explains that globalization is under threat due to populist pressure that triggered Brexit and Trump’s victory.
The myth of globalization may shatter after hard blows in 2016. This is a similar article that makes the case that globalization is threatened by the events of 2016. It also points out that a reduction in globalization could trigger problematic economic consequences.
The geopolitics of global populism. This article argues that economic inequality and, perhaps even more significantly, the loss of power by the economic shifts toward East Asia resulted in populist pressure that led to Brexit and the election of Trump. It argues these forces still put continued globalization at risk.
Don’t underestimate the Carrier clue This article makes the case that while the Carrier deal is symbolic that it might represent economic nationalist tendencies of the Trump administration, placing globalization at risk.
The big three: automation, nationalism, social expectations This very brief article points out that automation risks unemployment and increased nationalism.,
Globalization is dead for a generation. This article argues that while globalization has reduced poverty on the net, it has resulted in the elimination of a million mid-level jobs in the US, triggering a massive popular backlash against globalization that will at least put it on pause for 10 years.
Why there’s a globalization backlash. This article idcntifies some common reasons for the backlash against globalization — economic inequality, racism, concerns about immigration.
China, Trump, and the deglobalization trade. This article argues that support for globalization is decreasing and discusses some of the specific anti-globalization policies Trump may implement.
Global Connectedness Index 2016. “According to a new report by Pankaj Ghemawat, an economist at the Stern School of Business at New York University, actual trends in globalization are much different than the political rhetoric from the 2016 election would suggest. For one, growth in cross-border trade has slowed dramatically over the past several years. Meanwhile, the U.S. actually ranks pretty far down the list of countries in terms of depth of global trade integration, meaning that much less of the economic growth in America is due to international trade than a typical wealthy country.” [Fortune]
China in the crosshairs of America’s anti-globalization trend. This article argues that China will likely be the target of trade protectionism. Affirmative debaters can argue this is bad because it will destroy relations with China and risk a trade war. Negative debaters can argue it is good to subject China to trade pressure to protect US competitiveness.
Finding the US-China balance. This article argues that a US-China economic clash will damage the global economy and risk war between the US and China.
The long-term jobs killer is not China, it’s automation. This Affirmative article makes the point that jobs will not be lost to China, they will be lost to automation.
Trump, Globalization, and Trade’s uncertain future This article is of limited use, but it identifies ways the Trump administration may want to restrict global trade.
Is China the new global champion of openness. The author contends that protectionism in the US and Europe will boost Chinese global leadership. Negative debaters can argue Chinese economic leadership is good, Affirmative debaters can argue it is bad.
Trump’s trade advisor is a terrible film producer. This article indites the advisor to the new National Trade Council Peter Navarro’s China trade-bashing documentary.
Democracy under pressure. Written by former UN General Secretary Koffi Anan, the article argues that globalization’s inequality threatens democracy but also that globalization is good and that we need to continue to fight for both globalization and democracy.
Global Inequality: A New Approach for the Age of Globalisation. By Branko Milanovic (Book). Branko Milanovic presents a bold account of the dynamics that drive inequality on a global scale. Using vast data sets, he explains the forces that make inequality rise and fall within and among nations over time. He reveals who has been helped by globalization, who has been hurt, and what policies might tilt the balance toward economic justice.
The global 1% and the Asian middle class have gained from globalization . This article, written by Branko Milanovic, argues that incomes gains in the developing world have come at the expense of income in the developed world, at least for the middle class. While the author doesn’t take a position on the value of it, he does argue that it has political effects.
Globalization has slowed middle class income growth. This article basically sums up the debate — globalization has reduced poverty abroad and has improved overall economic growth and lowered the price of goods in the US. At the same time, however, it has displaced, at least temporarily, some middle class workers who have not been able to obtain new jobs.
Understanding Global Inequality. This article examines many of the factors in global economics that impact inequality.
Globalization Good/Protectionism Bad
The end of globalization. The international security implications . This article contends that if the US does not support a globalization agenda that it will substantially reduce its global military force, resulting in a loss of power projection and influence. This is basically a link to, “hegemony good.”
It’s time for a reset Written by Harvard economics professor Larry Summers, the article argues that globalization is responsible for all social progress for the last 70 years and that reversing it will arrest these gains and make it impossible to establish global standards that present a corporate race to the bottom.
Trump says the US is too focused on globalization. Is he right? This article claims Trump is wrong because free trade increases efficiency and fosters innovation, leading the development of new products and improving the quality of life for future generations.
5 ways the US economy could slide into another global depression. This article makes the straightforward claim that US protectionism will trigger a global depression.
Why the protectionist cure would be worse than the globalization disease. This article argues that trade protectionist measures — currency sanctions and tarrifs will fail to protect American workers. It also argues that protectionism will disrupt workers who are dependent on exports, creating massive poverty and failing to reverse harms created by current trade practices.
Making manufacturing again will require a two prong approach. Bringing jobs back from overseas makes for a promising campaign pledge. But filling domestic jobs through skill upgradation and changing the image of manufacturing to make it a more appealing career choice can be a more practical and achievable jobs policy.
Globalization and poverty. This article contends that globalization has resulted in a massive reduction in poverty and has not increased poverty in the US.
Trump’s protectionist trade policies will hurt poor Americans. Higher tariffs, such as those Trump and Navarro want to impose, would substantially raise prices for consumers, which would have the largest impact on the middle class. They would also trigger a trade war, resulting in loss of jobs because of declining exports.
Donald Trump would bring the change you really don’t want . This article argues that a tariff on imports will substantially raises costs to consumers and reduce jobs because a trade war will reduce exports.
Serving the people: China has gained hugely from globalization. This article contends that China has gained a lot from globalization but that it is now losing out to globalization because it is cheaper to produce goods elsewhere. This article isn’t highly useful, except for making the points that globalization will not continue to empower a China rise at the expense of the US in the future.
How to cure the globalization backlash. This article argues that American companies already want to return manufacturing to the US due to the difficulties in managing global supply chains and declining energy costs but that US workers lack appropriate job skills.
Manufacturing job loss driven by technology, not globalization. Similar to some of the articles above — manufacturing job losses triggered by automation, not globalization.
US needs more globalization, not less. This article cites a McKinnsey report that claims that exposure to globalization will result in more innovation and better jobs.
Border cities worry that ending NAFTA could hurt economies This article contends that the NAFTA agreement has been good for US border towns.
Here’s how Trump can fight globalization . Although the article is critical off immigration growth (unrelated to the topic), it does also argue that foreign investment is good for the US economy.
Globalization is the only answer The article contends that increased protectionism will trigger a global economic downturn.
Shocks. These two two articles that reversing trade wth China that will produce economic shocks by disruptions in supply chins. that are worse than the status quo unemployment triggered by current trade. Forbes Investing.com Original research paper.
Globalization is dead, and white supremacy has triumphed. This article contends that racism and mysogeny are primarily responsible for the rise of white nationalism.
What globalization isn’t. This article contends that trade substantially reduces poverty in the developing world and reduces it some in the US. It also makes the case that globalization promotes freedom.
The future of jobs, the future of work. This article argues that automation means trade protectionism will not return and that we need to invest more in education so that workers can learn skills to succeed in a high tech economy and that we can develop new types of jobs that simply can’t be automated.
The magic of global manufacturing. This article gives great examples of how global manufacturing has really reduced costs.
What critics get wrong about global protectionism (Gated) This article argues tariffs fail because we’d have to put tariffs on may countries, triggering a depression.
Globalization Bad/Protectionism Good
It’s the globalization, stupid . The article argues that if we don’t limit globalization a growing backlash will result in popular nationalism that will crush democracy and risk a world war.
The year the old order began to unravel While not necessarily arguing in favor of protectionism, the article claims that economic globalization is generating increasing inequality that triggers economic nationalism and risks world war.
Measuring global inequality. This article argues that global inequality is massively increasing and that the spread of global capital is to blame.
Revenge of the losers of globalization. This article argues that economic inequality, anti-elitism and racism are responsible for the populist backlash to globalization.
Globalization and free market capitalism are tearing our societies apart . This article argues globalization has reduced wages in Europe and has resulted in the exploitation workers in the developing world.
Globalization doesn’t make as much sense as it used to. It’s sort of hard to categorize this article. Most of the article is just a history of globalization from a US perspective, making it not especially relevant for debaters. It does conclude that globalization has been problematic for raising the US trade deficit to $500 billion, but concludes that a non-protectionist response may be in store:
The results of the election seem to indicate that—the views of economists and foreign-policy experts notwithstanding—America is about to change course on trade policy. That doesn’t necessarily mean a return to pre-World War II protectionism. It could instead simply mean a revival of the spirit that inspired the foundations of the postwar economic order. That spirit, articulated by the economist John Maynard Keynes, focused on assuring balanced trade—the avoidance of chronic surpluses on the part of some trading partners and chronic deficits on the part of others. Thus a new order might operate to prevent the misalignment of currency valuations, to abolish or offset the impact of tax subsidies, and to mitigate the implicit subsidization of state-owned enterprises. It has been largely forgotten that one of the key objectives of postwar free-trade policy was to maintain a roughly balanced trade account—a goal that the country is likely about to pursue anew and that will likely affect its policies touching on not just trade, but investments, currency, technology, and labor as well.
Africa missed globalization, and that was a good thing. This article is interesting, but I haven’t figure out how to use it yet. The basic argument is that when the economy is strong developing countries benefit from globalization and when it is weak they are hurt by it.
Scoring the Trump economic plan: Trade, Regulator, and Energy Policy Impacts. This paper, written by two people who will now be serving in the Trump administration, defends Trump’s protectionist agenda. It argues that protectionism, and the threat of protectionism, can be used to reduce currency manipulation and trade cheating that widens the trade deficit.
Brexit and Trump in the Democratic age. Although the article does not call for greater protectionism, it claims that the inequality created by globalization has led to right wing populism in Europe and the US. It calls for social programs to protect against the rise in inequality.
Measuring global inequality. This article argues that globalization has substantially increased in equality world-wide.
The North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA). This non-partisan Congressional Research Service report argues NAFTA hasn’t had a significant positive or negative impact on jobs but that it had benefited overall US economic growth