Vous êtes sur la page 1sur 13

c c 

Over the past two decades, world output has been expanding and many countries are
benefiting from increased cross-border trade and investments. Many others suffer because
economic regimes are inefficiently managed, and this weakness reduces their capacity to
successfully compete globally (Schneider and Enste, 2002). International mobility of capital,
resulting from advances in communications technology and liberalization of financial
markets has intensified as the world economy witnesses the unleashing of market forces.
Deregulation of domestic markets, their opening to competition, privatization and the retreat
of the state from economic management are also features of the current global order.
However, this same process encourages rising inequality among nations. The liberalization of
the world economy, for instance, has proceeded in such a way that the growth prospects of
developing countries are being undermined. Thus, while restrictions have been lifted on the
freedom of capital and skilled labour to move to areas of high returns, the restrictions on the
mobility of unskilled labour remain. Moreover, as developing countries have increased their
capacity to produce and export manufactures, the developed countries have become active in
promoting tariff peaks and escalations (UNCTAD, 2001a). Such measures can neither solve
the South¶s development problems nor allow for a narrowing of the North± South divide.

The word µglobalization¶ was first employed in 1930, according to the Oxford English
Dictionary, to denote a holistic view of human experience in education. An early description
of globalization was authored by the American entrepreneur-turned-minister Charles Taze
Russell who coined the term µcorporate giants¶ in 1897. This term, however, was not widely
used by economists and social scientists until the 1960s. Since its inception, the concept of
globalization has inspired numerous competing definitions and interpretations, with
antecedent dating back to the great movements of trade and empire across Asia and the
Indian Ocean from the 15th century onwards.
Globalization (or globalisation), in Wikipedia, describes a process by which regional
economies, societies, and cultures have become integrated through a global network of
communication, transportation, and trade. The term is sometimes used to refer specifically to
economic globalization, that is, the integration of national economies into the international
economy through trade, foreign direct investment, capital flows, migration, and the spread of
technology. However, globalization is usually recognized as being driven by a combination
of economic, technological, socio-cultural, political, and biological factors.
Globalization is the term used to describe the growing worldwide integration of the people
and countries. According to Paulo (1998) the process of increasing global integration has
accelerated dramatically in the technology. Peter (2002) views globalization as a process of
integrating economic decision-making such as consumption, investment and saving all across
the world. This means that globalization is a process of creating global market place in which
increasingly, all nations are forced to participate. Among the features that characterize
globalization include interconnection of sovereign countries through trade and capital flow;
harmonization of the economic rules that govern the interaction or relationship between these
sovereign nations; creating structures to support and facilitate dependence and inter
connection; and creation of a global market place (David 1997).
The process of globalization is not restricted to the economic sphere only. The advancement
in information technology has resulted in the opening and exposure of the people of the world
to more than ever before, different and alternative views and as a consequence influences
almost all aspects of human life. This may influence the stand of Salimono (1999) when he
maintains that globalization is a process of harmonization of different culture and beliefs of
the world in to one. In the like manner, Garry (1998) views globalization as the
harmonization of political system and enthronement of the culture of west. It is observed that
decisions taken by countries operating under separate, sovereign and autonomous
environment has bearing on others. The emergence of global market is increasingly
weakening these autonomous units. Globalization is a multi-dimensional concept with
political, socio-economic transnational and business undertones. It is simply the integration
of national economics leading to near free movement of goods, services, capital, skill among
companies which regards everywhere as their ³home´ market and serving customer with
³globalized´ tastes and preferences, using the same or slightly different projects and
strategies (Orunmoluyi, 2000). In other words, globalization is a process of increased
integration of national economy with the rest of the world to create a more coherent global
economy. This can be achieved through the creation of a global market place in which free
markets; investment flows, trade and information are integrated.
According to Awake (2002) globalization will heighten the level of interconnectedness
between and among nations through a systematic integration of autonomous economies into a
global system of production and distribution. It should be noted that globalization seek to
eliminate trade barriers through unfitted integration and interaction of global capital and
labour thereby leading to an unhindered exchange of goods and service across border.
Globalization is a process that affects firms, industries, economies and nations. (Bayo, 2000).
But the mere fact that a firm operates in a global world does not quality it a global company.
In order to measure the globaliness of a company, it should have the following attributes as
posited by Francis (2000):
1. Possessing a standard product that is marketed uniformly across the world;
2. Sourcing out all assets (not just product) on an optional basis, i.e, from wherever and
whoever provided it is competitive;
3. Achieving market access in line with break-even volume of needed infrastructure;
4. The ability to contest the asset as much as products when circumstance requires, i.e.
neutralizing the assets and competencies of global competitors; and
5. Providing all functions (or competencies) with global orientation even when they are
primarily local in scope.
The key elements of globalization involve the inter connection of sovereign nations through
trade and capital flows; harmonization of economic rules governing relationship between
these nation; creating structures to support and facilities dependence and interconnection;
global configuration and co-ordination of business activities with local responsiveness; and
creating a global market place (Salimono, 1999).

Development means different thing to different people. This may be the reason for Idode
(1989) to describe development a problematic concept. According to him, development has
been used in many different ways including political, economic and social. In other words,
development is a construct of many applications
In a view expressed by Okobiah (1984), development involves a process of economic,
political and social change in a progress direction towards a better social well being for the
member of the society. According to Nwana (1998) development involves harnessing of the
resources for the realization of their major objectives, solving their major problems. This
means that, development from the foregoing consists of activities required in improving the
attitudes and potentials of people. Probably, this justifies the view of Boateng (1990), which
describes development as the process aimed at improving the living conditions and
circumstances of human beings both directly and indirectly. Considering the various views,
national development encompasses social, economic, cultural and political development. In
other words, the components of national development include social development, economic
development, political development and cultural development.
Social development refers to positive social change. According to Adeniyi (1995) social
change is the process through which the patterned network rules and institutions are modified
in the course of time. In other words it refers to the process of transformation of the ways of
life and structures of society over-time. The transformation or modification should lead to
new behaviour which reflects improvement on the old attitude. The term economic
development refers to the improvement in the general standard of living of the people of the
society. Falodun, et al (1997) observed that economic development is the attainment of ideals
of modernization such as the rise in productivity, social and economic equity, improved
institution and values. This means that economic development is concerned with the
improvement in the quality of life of the people.
Political development refers to the process of evolving an acceptable political behaviour that
would facilitate the achievement of the national objective such as a free and democratic
society. It is also the attainment of a just and egalitarian society. In other words, there is the
development of civilized and refined political culture that corresponds with the objective of
the country. Culture refers to the total way of life of the people. Cultural development
involves a process of improving the culture of the society. Since culture is dynamic, it is
expected that the culture of the society should reflect the socioeconomic requirement of the
people from time to time. Adeniyi (1995) noted that improvement in culture of the people
involves making the culture relevant and in line with the present and future interests, values,
aspiration, and needs of the society.

cc   c    cc 

The world is fast becoming a global village, a metaphor that is often invoked to depict global
interdependence and the increasing interaction among and the integration of economic
activities of human societies around the world (Ajayi, 2001). In concrete terms, globalization
is the intensification of cross-border trade and increased financial and foreign direct
investment flows among nations, promoted by rapid advances in and liberalization of
communication and information technology (Islam, 1999 and Aninat, 2002). Thus,
globalization conjures the picture of a borderless world with greater economic integration that
enhances the living standards of people across the globe.

Even then, globalization is not a novelty in the development process. On the contrary, the late
19th century was a period of dramatic integration of the world economy as evidenced by the
rapid expansion in world trade, the founding of the Latin Monetary Union in 1865 and the
emergence of the gold standard in 1878 (Onwuka, 1998 and O¶Rourke and Williamson,
1999). Although the retreat into managed trade by the major trading countries between the
first and second world wars dampened the outlook of global economic intercourse, the post±
1945 multilateralism has virtually permeated all corners of the globe.
Since 1990, increased economic cooperation has lifted the ratio of the growth of world export
volume to the growth of gross world product to a range of 2.5-3 from an average of below 2
in the 1970s and 1980s (United Nations, 2001). Other benefits of globalization, which include
exposure to new ideas and products, greater specialization and expanded opportunities for
mergers and acquisitions, leading to growth in size and power of corporations, their increased
competitiveness and efficiency in the utilization of productive resources and major
improvements in social development and human welfare are well documented in the literature
(see, for example, Ayorinde, et. al. 1998; Rodrik, 1999; Sachs, 2000; Crafts, 2000; Masson,
2001; IMF, 2002 and Ocampo, 2003). The transnational corporations (TNC) with their
intensive integration of production, distribution and services globally provide the impetus for
this process. Between 1990 and 2001, for instance, their stock of outward foreign direct
investments (FDI) increased from 1.7 trillion dollars to 6.6 trillion dollars and in 2001 alone
their sales of 19 trillion dollars were more than twice as high as world exports that year
(UNCTAD, 2002a). No doubt, increased trade and investment flows help countries to
develop more quickly as trade generates income and the flows enable them to increase their
stock of productive capital without compromising their level of consumption. And when such
flows are in the form of FDI, they often improve access to international best practices in
terms of managerial, marketing and technical know-how, skill acquisition and institutional
deepening. Moreover, the intangible assets of TNC such as knowledge, technology,
management know±how and access to market serve not only as essential link between
national and enterprise competitiveness but as well as complements to domestic development
resources in recipient countries (UNCTAD, 2001b). Technology, policy and competition are
the forces driving globalization. This is attested to, for example, by advances in computing
technology, which enable traders to meet demand for financial instruments such as swaps and
futures with relative ease, thus allowing them to better manage their risks. In addition,
improved transportation such as the advent of containerization in land±and sea±based
shipping has reduced both the handling requirements and transit time by more than two
thirds. The second force is policy liberalization. With this, most governments have removed
barriers to trade and controls on the movement of capital and services, thereby allowing
market forces to play themselves out. The third force, which is heightened competition,
compels firms to explore new ways of increasing their efficiency, including shifting some of
their activities abroad to reduce costs (UNCTAD, 2002a). However, not every nation is a full
member of the global village. The developed countries use their competitive advantage to
boost their share of world trade and finance, and so largely benefit from globalization (Khor,
2001 and UNCTAD, 2003a). On the other hand, developing countries are losing out as they
experience a worsening of existing imbalances and distortions in the global economy (Collier
and Dollar, 2001). This view is shared by Zuma (2003) who argues that the unequal
distribution of political, economic and military power has meant that whilst globalization
created immense opportunities of wealth for some, it has produced two contrasting global
villages: one which is indeed prosperous, rich and democratic for a few who live in it, and the
other, in which the majority are poor, alienated and marginalized with hardly any voice to
determine their own destiny. The data on tables 1 and 2 clearly show that there are actually
two villages in the global economy. Table 1 reveals that developing countries are mainly
primary commodity producers and exporters. In 1985, they accounted for 61.2 per cent of
primary products traded globally. Although this dropped to 56 per cent in 2000, this drop
cannot compensate for the 68.2 per cent of manufactures based on natural resources or 66.8
per cent of manufacturers not based on natural resources that developed countries exported
that year. The shares of developing countries in these categories of manufactures that same
year were 26.6 per cent and 30.8 per cent respectively. In the case of FDI inflows (Table 2),
developed nations increased their share from 64.4 per cent during 1990-1995 to 68.4 per cent
in 2001, whereas the share of developing countries fell from 33 per cent to 27.9 per cent
during the same period. Moreover, industrial countries protect their markets, particularly in
sectors in which developing countries have a recognized comparative advantage like textiles,
clothing and footwear. Agriculture is also heavily protected usually in the form of subsidies,
driving world prices down and hurting farmers in developing countries the more. The
estimate of economic losses from agricultural protection in developed countries is around 150
billion dollars yearly, about 50 billion dollars of it in lost exports for developing countries
(for details, see McGuirk, 2002 and Lankas, 2002).While responsibility for global economic
reform is ceded to the International Monetary Fund and the International Bank for
Reconstruction and Development (IMF/World Bank), the policies of these agents of
globalization, controlled by the highly industrialized countries, have failed to narrow the gap
between the richest 20 per cent of humanity and the poorest 20 per cent, which doubled
between 1950 and 2000 (O¶ Rourke, 2002). Free trade and market forces, canvassed by
globalization, are not closing this gap. Instead, they have contributed to widening it because
after the Tokyo and Uruguay Rounds of trade liberalization in the 1980s and 1990s, the
developing countries have ended up with 3 per cent more trade deficits and 2 per cent less
economic growth in 2000 in comparison with the 1970s (Erb-Leoncarallo, 2000). The
economic internationalization process while not removing national sovereignty subordinates
domestic economies to global market conditions (Kwanashie, 1998). The transmission of
shocks this entails can alter the prospects of growth particularly in uncompetitive economies.
In this respect, the economic fortunes of developing countries are hostage to the forces of
globalization. The East Asian financial crisis of 1997/1998 testifies to this assertion as the
contagion, which followed affected the growthof many of them (UNCTAD, 1999; Bresciani
et al.,2002). As we acknowledge the peculiar economic circumstances of developing
countries, we also share the view canvassed by Onimode (2003) that the desirable policies for
them even in the context of globalization are those that promote selfreliance. This becomes
imperative after the fact that globalization increases their dependence on foreign capital and
the attendant exploitation impedes their growth, aggravates their poverty and intensifies their
marginalization in the global economy. The message from these concerns is that globalization
is more than the free interplay of market forces since economic questions cannot be divorced
from social issues. That being the case, the foundation of globalization has to be strengthened
with broadly shared values and practices that would also reflect the needs of developing
regions, so that all countries could benefit from the globalization process.

   cc      c     

c c  c  
Bayo (2000) and Salimono (1999) observed that globalization offers developing countries
like Nigeria the opportunities to create wealth through the export-led growth, to expand
international trade in goods and services and to gain access to new ideas, technologies and
institutional designs. This means that globalization affects all aspects of Nigeria development
including her economy. In essence, globalization offers many opportunities to Nigeria and
other developing countries as well as other actors in the global economy.
Salimono (1999), opined that globalization has reduced barrier existing in international trade.
The reduction in those barriers has opened the door for export led growth. For instance,
Phillips (1991) noted that Nigerian economy has been mono-cultural since independence and
has so much depended on the western countries for its survival. Bayo (2000) and
Evbuomwan (1996) observed that in the 1960s, Nigeria depended on agriculture for her
revenue, which in turn, was used to provide life sustaining goods for the citizen. Then,
Nigeria and other less developed economies exported raw-materials in form of cash crop such
as Cocoa, Coffee, palm-produce Groundnut etc. The discovery of petroleum by Nigeria
marked the turning point for the country and by the turn of 1970, agriculture has been pushed
to a distant background.
Onwioduokit and Ashinze (1996) observed that it was in the 1970s when Nigeria witnessed
oil boom that brought about major shift from agriculture to petroleum. The bulk of the
revenue of Nigeria now comes from petroleum. Since then, Nigeria has depended heavily on
crude oil and this has cause instability in the economy due to fluctuations in the price of
crude oil in the world market. Oputa (1996) and Salimono (1999) stated that since
globalization entails trade liberalization, it is therefore imperative that there is free and
unrestricted movement of trade, finance and investment across the international border. The
advantage here is that globalization allows Nigeria to export and import goods, capital and
investment without restriction. It is probably because of this advantage that Salimono (1999)
asserted that for small and medium-size economy with limited internal market, the
possibilities of economic growth lie, to a large extent, in production oriented towards
international market. To buttress his point, he stated that the experience of the last four
decades shows that countries like China, Chile, Ivory coast, Botswana that have managed to
grow at very rapid rate of 7%, 8% or more per year, have relied on strong export growth, with
export expanding at a faster rate than Gross Domestic Product (GDP). Nigeria can and should
borrow a leave from these countries experience. Globalization promotes the rapid output
growth that will increase national income and as a consequence enhance higher standard of
living of developing countries including Nigeria. Globalization, according to Awake (2002)
has enriched the world economically, scientifically and culturally. This is due to the fact that
globalization opens the economies to a wide variety of consumption of goods, new
technology and knowledge. Salimono (1999) opined that globalization offers economies with
potentials of eradicating poverty. The reason for this belief may not be unconnected with the
dramatic increase in prosperity that globalization has brought in its wake especially in South
Korea, India and South Africa. To buttress this reason, Awake (2002) noted that family¶s
income has increased three times more than it did 50years ago .However, the situation is
different in Nigeria where real income is decreasing.
Through the Internet, globalization allows the access to ideas on new things and best
practices in all areas of human endeavour. For instance, new design, production technology,
new managerial practice etc are made available to people, thereby enabling them to change
their old practices. These may lead to acquisition or imitation of foreign products,
technologies and cultural practices, which would have been made impossible without
globalization. This means that Nigeria now has access to opportunities to acquire new things,
ideas and technologies.
Globalization is a process of intensified and broadened interdependence among nations.
According to Peter (2002), globalization creates global market place, which, with the
development in communication technology, can be accessed by virtually any one from any
location. Thus, it opens up a world of opportunities for business and also link them to market,
which was hitherto unknown to them. In this process, there is decrease the possibility of wars
among nations. Awake (2002) noted that interaction among people has the potential for
improving global solidarity. It maintained that some human right organizations have been
able to tap the resources of the people to promote their effectiveness. For instance, in 1997
international treaty banning land mines was achieved through mobilization of the people of
the world through Internet. Despite these positive effects many people are still of the opinion
that globalization poses tension and dilemma to countries integrated to the economy. The
greatest concern about globalization expressed by Awake (2002) is the ever-increasing gap
between the haves and the have-nots. It is observed that while the global wealth has
increased, it has become concentrated in the hands of the few privileged individuals and few
It was also noted in Awake that the net worth of the 200 richest people on earth exceeded the
combined income of 40% of the people who live on the planet. It continued further that while
wages continued to rise in wealthy countries, 80 impoverished countries have actually seen a
decline in average income over the past ten years. Nigeria was among these eighty countries.
The distribution of global wealth has never been fair. But economic globalization as widened
the gap between the rich and poor nations. However, some developing counties, as observed
by Salimono (1999), have benefited from integration into the global economy. For example,
India and Asia as a whole have seen improvement. He also noted that, only 15% of the East
Asian population lived on US$1 a day compared with 27% ten years earlier.
In an interdependent world economy, any adverse global shock affects other countries. For
example, the oil glut of 1982 and 1998 according to Salimono (1999) was more rapidly
propagated. The propagation mechanism at work could be a decline in the import volume and
change in the real price of commodities (oil). Nigeria depends heavily on crude oil as the
main source of income or foreign exchange earnings such that the country¶s revenue is
always hit hard by these shocks (Doguwa and Englana, 2002).
Furthermore, highly integrated financial market tends to transmit global, regional, national or
local shock much more rapidly than in past decades when financial markets were less
integrated. It has been observed by CBN (2002) that portfolio shift affect the exchange and
interest rates including other economic activities. As a consequence, the volumes of financial
intermediation and currency transactions are enormous nowadays. The shocks are greatly
amplified in more or less synchronized fashion with destabilizing effects on Nigeria
economy. This financial volatility was largely unknown in the 1950s, 1960s early 1970s
when multilateral lending aids and foreign direct investment dominated global capital
investment (CBN, 2000).
The effect of globalization is the fear of uncertainty and volatility on capital formation and
productivity growth with its negative consequence on economic growth. CBN (2000) viewed
the instability on the economy as tax on growth and prosperity. It should be noted that this
problem of uncertainty is not from within but external generated. Nigeria as a developing
country has not evolved a mechanism that can absorb the shocks generated by the effects of
globalization. The types of domestic policy response put in place by the government have
increased the negative impact of these shocks in Nigeria and the people are worse off. The
income of the people of Nigeria is low and they are living below poverty line.
The social effect of globalization is another fear entertained by Dani (1997), when he states
that since globalization is associated with instability of output and employment, the effects
among other things job security. Majority of the people in Nigeria derived their income from
labour. In Nigeria anything that affects their job is socially disrupted and thus bring tension to
the fabric of the society. This may create industrial conflicts. Furthermore, it is observed that
the unskilled and the uneducated workers as well as the marginalised agrarian population
benefit less than the people with sophisticated skills and high level of education. As noted by
David (1997), the highly educated people and people with sophisticated skills are better and
more equipped to meet challenges of the competitive world.
One other area of globalization is that it tends to transmit the cultural pattern of developed
countries to the rest of the world. For instance, Nigeria Youth have been culturally colonized.
This is because they now imitate the European¶s consumption patterns, modes of transport,
method of communication including their music, without regard for the local culture.
Though, it is noticed that this problem does not affect Nigerians only. It is a worldwide
phenomenon. This trend would, eventually, lead to homogenization of economic values,
thereby eliminating or reducing Nigerian economy to nothing.

The merit of globalization for a developing economy like Nigeria lies in the capacity for
wealthcreation through export-led growth and the benefit of expanded international tradeof
goods, services, and access to new products and designed in the globalmarkets.
However, it has been observed that globalization, despite the opportunities provided, is
associated with serious problem that has to be managed in appropriate ways using appropriate
fiscal policies.
Globalization gives rise to macro-economy instability that had characterized Nigeria
government. This problem shows that Nigerian economic development may remain only a
dream and difficult to actualise. A highly globalise and integrated financial market spread
rapidly across counties financial shocks and loss of confidence that affect exchange rate,
interest rate, assets prices with the resultant effect on output and employment and ultimately
adverse social effects.
It is therefore, suggested by Annan (2000), that if globalization is to succeed, it must improve
the life of every inhabitant of global neighbourhood without excluding Nigerians.
Furthermore, for globalization to succeed it must also deliver right no less than riches and
provides social justice and equity no less than economic prosperity and enhanced
communication. This is why Yakubu (1999) observes that much as we are enthused about
then technological and economic wonder of globalization, we must not as Nigerians, forget
that vast areas of our continent still remain excluded and invisible. In spite of globalization
for example, Africa is the only continent, according to Yakubu (1999), in which poverty has
increased since the 1970s, and in which government use up 70% of their GNP to service
Economic globalization should not be driven by desire to make money. This is because profit
motive rarely takes into account the poor and the disadvantage or the long term need of the
planet. The global economy should be regulated and should not be dominated by corporations
that recognize money as their only value.
It should be noted that unregulated global economy is inherently unstable. Also an
unregulated economy dominated by corporation having the desire to make profit will only
increase poverty. Finally, collective action is needed to safeguard global ethic that will
regulate globalization. Nigerian government should see globalization as a challenge and
should find means to counter the deleterious effects of globalization.

Ajayi, S.I. 2001. ³What Africa Needs to Do to Benefit From Globalization.´ Finance and
Development, 38 (4): 6 - 8.
Aninat, E. 2002. ³Surmounting the Challenges of Globalization.´ Finance and Development,
39 (1): 4-7.
Ayorinde, F.O., O. Adenikinju and A. Adenikinju. 1998. ³The Impact of Trade Liberalization
on Technological Acquisition in Nigerian Manufacturing Sector.´ Journal of Economic
Management, 5 (2): 89-122.
Collier, P. and D. Dollar. 2001. Globalization, Growth and Poverty: Building an Inclusive
World Economy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Crafts, N. 2000. ³Globalization and Growth in the Twentieth Century.´ IMF Working Paper
No. 44, Washington: International Monetary Fund.
Debt Management Office 2001. Annual Report and Statement of Accounts for the year Ended
2001. Abuja: Debt Management Office.
Erb-Leoncarallo, A.M. 2000. ³The Road From Seattle,´ in United Nations Chronicle Vol.
XXXVII, No. 1, New York: Department of Public Information, United Nations.
IMF 2002. Globalization: Threat or Opportunity? Issues Briefs. Washington: International
Monetary Fund.
Islam, A. 1999. ³Globalization and Development Revisited in the Light of Asian
Experience.´ Asia - Pacific Development Journal, 6(2): 1 - 21.
Khor, M. 2001. Globalization and the South: Some Critical Issues. Ibadan: Spectrum Books.
Kwanashie, M. 1998. ³The Concept and Process of Globalization.´ Central Bank of Nigeria
Economic and Financial Review, 36(4): 340 - 351.
Lankas, H.P. 2002. ³Market Access for Developing Countries.´ Finance and Development,
39(3): 8-13.
Masson, P. 2001. ³Globalisation: Facts and Figures.´ IMF Policy Discussion Paper No. 4,
Washington: International Monetary Fund.
McGuirk, A. 2002. ³The Doha Development Agenda.´ Finance and Development, 39(3): 4 7.
Obadan, M. I. 1998. ³Managing the Nigerian Economy into the Next Millennium: Strategies
and Policies.´ Journal of Economic Management, 5(1): 1 - 38.
Obadan, M. I. 2001. ³Africa and the Challenge of Globalization: How Should the Continent
Respond?´ Nigerian Journal of Economic and Financial Review, 6(2): 35-42.
Ocampo, J. O. 2003. Globalization and Development, Washington: The World Bank.
Onimode, B. 2003. ³Unequal Exchange, External Debt and Capacity for Development±
Oriented Policies in African Countries´, (pp. 39-56) in A. Garba (ed.), Development Thought,
Policy Advice and Economic Development in Africa in the 20th Century: Lessons for the 21st
Century: Ibadan: Ibadan University Press.
Onwuka, E.C. 1998. Contemporary International Economic Relations, Benin: Razjel Interbiz
O¶Rourke, K. H. 2002. ³Globalization and Inequality: Historical Trends´, (pp. 39-67) in B.
Pleskovic and N. Stern. (ed.), Annual World Bank Conference on Development Economics
2002: Washington: The World Bank.
Rodrik, D. 1999. ³The New Global Economy and Developing Countries: Making Openness
Work.´ Policy Essay No. 24, Washington: Overseas Development Council.
Sachs, J. 2000. ³A New Global Consensus of Helping the Poorest of the Poor´, (pp. 39-47) in
B. Pleskovic and N. Stern, (eds.), Annual World Bank Conference on Development
Economics 2000: Washington: The World Bank.
Stiglitz, J.E. 2000. ³Development Thinking at the Millennium´, (pp. 13-38) in B. Pleskovic
and N. Stern (eds.), Annual World Bank Conference on Development Economics 2000:
Washington: The World Bank.
UNCTAD. 1999. ³International Monetary and Financial Issues for the 1990s.´ Research
Papers for the Group of Twenty-Four, Vol. XI, Geneva: United Nations.
UNCTAD. 2001a. Post±Uruguay Round Market Access Barriers for Industrial Products,
Policy Issues in International Trade and Commodities Study Series No. 12. Geneva: United
UNCTAD. 2001b. World Investment Report 2001: Promoting Linkages. Geneva: United
UNCTAD. 2002a. World Investment Report 2002: Transnational Corporations and Export
Competitiveness. Geneva: United Nations.
UNCTAD. 2002b. UNCTAD Handbook of Statistics 2002. Geneva: United Nations.
UNCTAD. 2003a. Trade and Development Report 2003: Capital Accumulation, Growth and
Structural Change. Geneva: United Nations.
UNCTAD. 2003b. World Investment Report 2003: FDI Policies for Development - National
and International Perspectives. Geneva: United Nations.
United Nations. 2001. World Economic and Social Survey 2001: Trends and Policies in the
World Economy. New York: Department of Economic and Social Affairs, United Nations.
World Bank 2002. World Development Indicators 2002. Washington: The World Bank.