To date, the Internet economy -- with its emphasis on knowledge and innovation -- has widened the global income gap. Rich nations must help level the playing field in areas from trade to banking to intellectual-property laws. Poor nations, meanwhile, must help themselves by taking steps to promote foreign investment, tackle corruption, and improve education.
Avinash Persaud is Managing Director of Global Markets Analysis and Research at State Street Bank.
A PENNY FOR YOUR THOUGHTS?
For a long time, economists saw capital, labor, and natural resources as the essential ingredients of economic enterprise. In recent years, they have also come to recognize the role of technology, as well as information, innovation, and creativity, in expanding economic potential. Now the Internet has increased the scope of innovation by lowering information and distribution costs. As a result, what is emerging today is a combination of innovation with "equitization," wherein individuals and companies sell equity stakes in good ideas and use the capital they raise -- rather than the help of existing profit -- to realize these ideas. In the first six months of 2000, for example, biotechnology companies raised $20 billion in the stock markets to finance gene research, even though related revenues are not expected for many decades to come. Despite their lack of profits and recent downgrading, many "new economy" companies with untraditional business models are nevertheless valued in billions of dollars. Established rules on the role of capital in investment and economic growth and development need to be rewritten. The implications are significant -- but run contrary to the current consensus.
In a globalizing and liberalizing world, unlimited capital can be tapped across traditional boundaries. According to State Street Bank, cross-border private equity flows have already leapt from $268 billion in 1995 to an estimated $1.1 trillion in 2000. For the first time, such flows now rival those in government bonds. With past profits and current capital no longer a major constraint, a country's future economic prospects will depend predominantly on knowledge. Yet examining the relative knowledge base of different countries today does not lead to optimism about reducing the income gap. It is doubtful that the knowledge revolution will let developing countries leapfrog to higher levels of development, as many technologists and Internet evangelists assert. In fact, the knowledge gap will likely widen the disparities between rich and poor, imprisoning many developing countries in relative poverty.
This is a premium article
You must be a Foreign Affairs subscriber to continue reading. If you are already a print subscriber, click here to activate your online access.
Log In
Buy PDF
Buy a premium PDF reprint of this article.Related
The Asian financial crisis had a side benefit: prodding the Japanese government to fix its economy. But as the sense of urgency eased, so too did the momentum for change. The Liberal Democratic Party, never a true champion of reform, now blocks deregulation from every angle. Wasteful public spending has created little but debt. And the public's trust in its government is all but gone. Recovery would require Japan's politicians to give up the many benefits of the status quo, which they will not do without a fight. So Japan's reforms are stalled permanently. Its economy is, too.
Over the past decade, China's leaders have pursued rapid economic reform while stifling political change. The result today is a rigid state that is unable to cope with an increasingly organized, complex, and robust society. China's next generation of leaders, set to take office in 2002-3, will likely respond to this dilemma by accelerating political reform -- unless a new cold war with the United States intervenes.
Two simultaneous revolutions in the developing countries-in education and in communications-can be expected separately and through their interaction to have an impact which is as yet only vaguely foreseen. They promise changes not merely in degree but in kind. As education pushes toward universality, and as the communications network makes more and more sweeping use of printing, broadcasting, film-making and other new methods, the effects will be not only on the economy but perhaps on the basic civic structure of the societies concerned. Whether the long-run political results will be beneficial is another and quite different question. And whether the side effects will strengthen the social fabric is likewise in doubt. But, whether for good or ill, overwhelming changes are going to occur. We should think about them if we are concerned with the welfare of Asia and Africa and Latin America, or with the relations of their societies with the rest of the world.
