The End of "Second Globalization" and Implications for the Korean Economy

Duyong Kang ()
Additional contact information
Duyong Kang: Korea Institute for Industrial Economics and Trade, Postal: Sejong National Research Complex, Korea Institute for Industrial Economics and Trade, 370 Sicheong Dae-ro C-dong 8-12F 30147, Republic of Korea, http://www.kiet.re.kr

No 23/13, Research Papers from Korea Institute for Industrial Economics and Trade

Abstract: Insofar as we define globalization as the consistent growth in the volume of global trade relative to world GDP, we reasonably conclude that the second phase of globalization, which lasted for five decades since the signing of the General Agreement on Trade and Tariffs (GATT) in 1947, effectively ended with the global financial crisis of 2007-2008. Anti-globalization sentiment has taken root in many advanced countries since the global financial crisis and has conspired with an intensifying US-China rivalry to stem the erstwhile growth in trade relative to world GDP. The United States, the onetime champion of postwar globalization, has recently embraced a New Washington Consensus that represents a sharp departure from the original of the 1990s, effectively putting an end to globalization. The end of globalization means an end to a chapter in the history of global trade. It remains to be seen how the post-globalization trade environment will evolve, but the fact that no single country can claim unchallenged hegemony over the global economy also leaves room for concerted actions from smaller countries. The end of globalization is particularly significant to Korea, which has achieved a remarkable economic transformation thanks to the success of an export-led growth strategy. But real export growth in Korea has consistently fallen below its economic growth rates over the last decade, and we can conclude that export-led growth is no longer viable for Korea. As a chief beneficiary of free trade and the world’s eighth-largest trading country, Korea has practical interests, a moral obligation, and the potential to help ameliorate worsening global trade conditions. By making it known that the fragmentation of the global economy is not in its interest, Korea ought to partner with countries that share the same perspective and mobilize international support toward maintaining an open, non-discriminatory, and free trade order against protectionist and fragmenting forces. Expressing and maintaining a commitment to free trade can also help Korea minimize the impact to its economy of the eventual US-China decoupling. Thank you for reading this abstract of a report from the Korea Institute for Industrial Economics and Trade! Visit us on YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q36v30l5CV0 Visit us on Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/worldkiet/ Visit our website: http://www.kiet.re.kr/en

Keywords: free trade; globalization; anti-globalization; protectionism; economic nationalism; economic security; exports; US-China conflict; Korea (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: F01 F02 F10 F13 F15 F52 O20 O21 O24 O25 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Pages: 16 pages
Date: 2023-05-31
New Economics Papers: this item is included in nep-inv
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=4612154 Full text (application/pdf)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:ris:kietrp:2023_013

Access Statistics for this paper

More papers in Research Papers from Korea Institute for Industrial Economics and Trade Sejong National Research Complex, Korea Institute for Industrial Economics and Trade, 370 Sicheong Dae-ro C-dong 8-12F 30147, Republic of Korea. Contact information at EDIRC.
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Aaron Crossen ().