In a world of fear and panic, compounded by a global rulebook that is increasingly being suspended, firms are struggling. Companies do not manage increasing risks and growing uncertainty very well. The natural inclination is to suspend all decisions—to not hire any additional staff, to retrench, to cut costs, and to limit future investments. Contraction by firms only exacerbates the challenges. Companies that are in shutdown mode are not buying goods or services. Suppliers are caught, unable to manage their own costs. Many of these challenges are going to be hard to manage, no matter what responses governments provide. Companies and citizens will make their own decisions about employee and personal health risks. Individuals that end up with radically altered lifestyles as a result of prolonged periods at home or out of work may permanently change their buying patterns. Unlike companies or households, government cannot simply shut down. It has to do two things that are hard: manage the immediate situation and plan ahead to limit future damage. Understandably, the former task occupies most of the time and attention for officials. But the latter also needs focus or countries will come out of this current crisis unprepared for accelerating growth and supporting future development.
Guest Post: Unraveling the Complexities of Modern Trade
More recently still, trade has branched out into non-core areas such as sustainability. The evolution of trade deals is attempting to future-proof FTAs to better accommodate the complexities of digital transformation, the ever-increasing importance of services trade, and handle similar modern-day developments. There is also the need to agree on specific features such as rules of origin, and the streamlining and/or standardisation of non-tariff measures (as well as removal of non-tariff barriers). All of which are imperative to maintain, nourish and grow supply chains. But with such ambition comes complexity, and with complexity comes delay and disagreement. The current trade policy mix is a challenging one: essentially a struggle between protectionism and free trade, and a battle between nation state and the multilateral trade environment, but also a chance to use FTAs as mechanisms to structure sustainable targets and agree broader policy direction between partners. How these trade-offs untangle and become conducive to an ever flatter, more connected world is uncertain. There is also uncertainty regarding what a new or revised set of multilateral and regional agreements and bodies may look like, and how quickly these can be agreed upon.
Revisit: Trade in the First Hour of My Day
All the ways that trade affects the first hour of my day demonstrates one contributing factor to globalisation. But these benefits to me from trade—my ability to use an iPhone alarm, to shower and shave, and to drink good coffee—are trade most simply, not globalisation itself. A decision like Brexit, a desire to decouple from trade or to “build a wall” will not eliminate trade or the ability to enjoy these products; it will merely make them more expensive. It would not eliminate foreign ideas and cultures from permeating society, for those have little to do with trade itself. At its most simple level—taking just the first hour of one’s day—trade is, in short, the ability to enjoy life as we know it. It is the ability to wake up to an alarm while lying on cotton sheets, to walk on tiles and to shower and to catch the bus to work. We misunderstand and underestimate trade at great costs to ourselves and to society.
Trade and Globalisation: Experience From the First Hour of My Day
Trade does not just benefit the “1%.” It is not just for people who own stocks. Trade does not affect just the people who work in places that directly export to foreign countries. International trade matters to everyone, probably every single hour of every day. Take just the first hour of my day, for instance.