State Secretary Leiv Lunde

Høynivådialog om globalisering

FN, New York 17 September 1998 (check against delivery)

Mr. President,

Mr. Deputy Secretary General,

Ladies and gentlemen,

Let me first of all underline how much I appreciate to be able to take part in this debate. The question of globalization and development is indeed a topical issue where dialogue between the North and the South is essential for meeting our common challenges.

It is therefore with great interest we have noted the focus on this issue at the recent Summit of the Non-Aligned Movement in Durban. In their final document, the Heads of State and Government of the NAM point to the ambiguity of the processes of globalization and liberalization, noting that while these trends were expected to lead to increased economic opportunities for developing economies, a large number of developing countries continue to be marginalized and thus unable to share the benefits of the global economy.

In my view, it is clear that so far the greatest benefits of globalization have been garnered by a small minority, while many are worse off than before. The gap between those living in affluence and those suffering the hardship of poverty is growing, both within nations and between them. The assumption that globalization is a process that benefits everyone has proven to be utterly untrue.

In the wake of the Asian financial crises we have seen unemployment soaring, living standards plummeting and expectations of a better life shattered - not only in Asia, but all over the world. The Asian crisis clearly illustrates the shift in economic powers away from national governments to stockmarkets and other actors with little or at least unclear responsibility for the common good.

The reduced significance of national boundaries also represents a challenge to national identities, traditions and culture. To many the process of globalization has led to reduced cultural variation and increased economic inequality, instead of increased cultural variation and reduced economic inequality.

Many of the menaces facing us have become truly globalized. Financial crises, environmental degradation, spreading of diseases, violent conflicts and organized crime and terrorism are affecting us all, regardless of where we live on this shrinking planet.

To overcome these threats, some people are prescribing a recipe of protectionism and isolation. But is this really a viable alternative in a world where ideas and financial transactions circumvent the globe in seconds? Where help is only available to those with something to offer in the global marketplace? And where many of the challenges we are faced with are of such a magnitude that no country - not even the most powerful - can tackle them alone?

My government does not believe this to be the case. There is no way back to yesterday’s world - where trade, travel and transactions across borders were much more limited. The processes of economic, cultural and technological globalization cannot be reversed.

But the globalization process can and must be managed. Better management of the forces of globalization - at both the national and the international level - is the only way to proceed if we are to maximise the positive effects of an integrated word, while minimising its negative aspects.

At the national level we must invest in both human resources and physical infrastructure, and promote good governance, democracy and human rights. The prospects for the next century depend above all on our willingness and ability to make the necessary long-term social investments, particularly in health and education. The investment base must be broad. The creative potential of society will only be fully unleashed if we are all stockholders in the development process.

The forces of globalization may reduce the sovereignty of individual states, but they will never make them redundant. Quite the contrary. The market has an important role to play in allocating reources as effectively as possible; thus increasing the volume of funds available for social and environmental concerns. But resources do not by any means flow automatically to meet such common needs, nor to care for the most vulnerable groups in society. Vigorous

governmental policies are therefore called for to ensure that resource allocations meet the demands of the people to whom governments are responsible.

Internationally, there is no alternative to strengthening multilateralism. We must further improve decision-making procedures at the international level. We must create a world order based on law and contract where solidarity and social responsibility are not limited by national boundaries, but stretch across borders and continents.

Mr. President,

With one of the most open economies in the world, Norway has greatly benefited from the development of a global economy. But we have also experienced how external, anonymous forces have contributed to make jobs vanish overnight and ruined dreams and expectations. Against this background there has been considerable political debate in my country about how gobalization can be managed for the common good. My Government will in the next few months be arranging national and international meetings in an effort to increase our common understanding of the various features of globalization. We must ensure that globalization serves our interests and not become our masters.

Mr. President,

One of the most pressing dangers of globalization is the increased marginalization of the least developed countries. Many of the world’s poorest nations are hardly in a position to benefit from the global economy. These receive minimal foreign investments and lack a dynamic private sector as a basis for employment and growth. Furthermore, they are often deprived of the benefits of increased export earnings due to heavy debt burdens and closed markets.

Although the prime responsibility for development lies with the leadership of any country who must ensure political stability and sound macro-economic policies, the international community has an obligation to assist. We cannot, yet again, allow ourselves to stand by and see the weakest among us being left behind.

It is a regrettable fact that the industrialized countries are increasingly distancing themselves from the agreed UN target of 0.7 per cent of GDP for development purposes. Norway is going in the opposite direction, and we have plans for a further increase in our ODA, which is already well above the UN target.

We believe that international debt relief schemes must be improved. And we are doing our part through a newly launched national debt relief plan to better assist heavily indebted poor countries. We are also currently finalizing a strategy for private sector development in developing countries. But above all we are actively seeking to counter the widespread and growing donor fatigue and striving to make the multilateral organizations more sensitive to the needs and aspirations of the developing world.

Mr. President,

At the NAM Summit in Durban, the Heads of State and Government reaffirmed that there is no alternative to a constructive dialogue between developed and developing countries if we are to reap the benefits of globalization while effectively meeting its challenges.

The United Nations is an important forum to address the challenges of globalizatiom. It belongs to us all. It is unique and indispensable. It is our repository of hope for a better future. Let us support it, make it more efficient, and place it at the heart of our efforts to derive the very best from the globalization processes, particularly for those who need it most.