According to Miliband, “global hazards are crashing into the boardrooms and executive suites of every corporation worldwide.” You have a nationalization of resilience but a globalization of risk. You have an unstable geopolitical order as well as a globalization order. Petraeus succinctly described how this change has affected things: “What we’ve got to do is identify those [risks], mitigate them, and ensure that these can still be successful in this extremely altered world.” The amount of trade that is conducted globally will increase, albeit at a far slower rate. Instead of the rather significant growth that we were witnessing during that period of beneficial globalization, we’re talking 1% a year now. Geopolitics and the associated dangers have evolved into the independent variable dictating economic outcomes in this new era of great power conflicts. The disappearance of the three main forces that have fueled the seamless or “benevolent” globalization we have experienced for the past forty years—cheap capital, labor, and energy—has made resilience much more difficult.
Our current state of the international economy can be attributed to globalization. Globalization still has advantages and disadvantages and is far from perfect. These issues are related to free or inexpensive labor and free trade agreements.
It enables them to operate more cheaply. Due to international trade agreements and associated economic policies, governments everywhere adopt free-market economic systems. Global consumers are now more aware of various financial opportunities, economic trends, and new products thanks to globalization.