As the discussion stresses globalisation provides a wide-ranging and an all-embracing set of opportunities for worldwide development but evidently, is not progressing uniformly. A few countries have assimilated into the global economy swiftly more than others. Countries that have been able to assimilate are experiencing faster growth and reduced poverty. Likewise, outward-oriented strategies resulted into added economic vitality and wealth to much of East Asia, converting the region from one of the most pitiable territories of the world forty years ago. Together with the ascent of living standards, it became possible to make progress on democracy and economic matters such as work standards and the environment.
According to the research findings poverty incidence escalated and high inflation became the norm. In several circumstances, especially Africa, hostile and unfavourable developments made the problems worse. However, as these territories changed their economic policies, their incomes began to rise and vital transformations were on track. They found out that promoting this trend and fostering such economic scenario and not quashing it is the best course for propping up growth, development and poverty reduction. As globalisation made its way into every fiber of human life and human activity, it can be safely deduced that it has both increased and reduced poverty. ...
So, how can the developing countries, especially the poorest, be assisted to pull alongside its more affluent neighbors Does globalisation aggravate inequality or can it help reduce poverty What about those countries that assimilate into the global economy, are they inexorably vulnerable to instability These are some of the imperative questions that need to be answered.
As globalisation made its way into every fiber of human life and human activity, it can be safely deduced that it has both increased and reduced poverty. A process involving the intricate sequence of events - symbolized by the surge of privatisation in public utilities and state-controlled industries, changes in domestic financial markets, taxation systems and liberalised labour markets -- resulted into an unmatched swiftness of international trade and FDI flows (United Nations, 1999; Sala-i-Martin 2002a and 2002b).
When social outcomes of globalisation have been closely investigated and deeply scrutinised, academics and logicians have recognised the direction, significance and repercussions of this correlation. And as its effects have been evaluated and analysed, reference was made to two diverse components in the literature - one that connects growth to poverty and inequality and the other pertains to the association of trade to growth. Academic analysis and pragmatic evidence result from the blend of contentions utilised in each sphere of study, one is if 1) growth is distribution neutral as asserted and 2) trade enhances growth, so much so that it can be claimed that 3) trade is helpful in order to alleviate poverty.
The notion that growth