The Swedish People and Globalisation

Transcription

1 The Swedish People and Globalisation July 2001 Allan Åberg

2 The Swedish People and Globalisation 1. Introduction As in many parts of the world, globalisation is a concept that has become the focus of much political debate in Sweden. The concept does not have a precise definition but serves more as a collective name for the phenomena that coincide with increased international integration as a result of improved communications, greater international trade and an increasing flow of cultural influences across national borders. This trend appears threatening to many people. In recent years we have seen the growth of organisations and networks that are critical of globalisation, or at least towards certain areas of globalisation. It is not unusual for these groups to be depicted as, or to depict themselves as spokespersons for grass roots opinion, the general population or the oppressed. For both nations, individuals and companies, the greater movement for people, goods, services and capital means major opportunities. For the Confederation of Swedish Enterprise it is therefore important to defend and promote this positive view of openness and free trade. We want Sweden and the EU to actively promote liberalisation and the international exchange of goods, services and capital. It is important to determine the level of support for globalisation amongst the general public. The Confederation of Swedish Enterprise therefore commissioned Temo to undertake the most comprehensive opinion poll to date in Sweden on the issues surrounding the globalisation debate. Of particular interest was the response given to questions such as; are the critics of globalisation representative of strong and widespread general feeling? Are Swedes still in favour of free trade? What aspects of the increasing internationalisation are you most positively and most negatively disposed towards respectively? 2. The Swedish People and Globalisation Five in ten Swedes view globalisation as a positive concept. Only one in ten thinks it is negative. Only a handful make negative associations with globalisation spontaneously. Few Swedes, just 15 percent, feel that globalisation threatens welfare in Sweden. In other words, globalisation is generally seen as a positive concept in Sweden. 3. Swedes and free trade Perhaps the most important driving force behind the globalisation process is international trade without free trade there would be no globalisation. Sweden has 2

3 a long record of being favourable to free trade. The advantages of free trade have been taken as read by governments of different hues. This survey shows that the policy being pursued has the strong support of the general public. The Swedish people are genuinely positively disposed towards international trade. Over two thirds of the population think that free trade is a positive concept. Only six percent see it as negative. If we look at the concepts that together make up international trade, importing and exporting, a solid majority of over 80 percent see them as positive. 90 percent of Swedes believe that the international trade of goods is quite or very important. Not quite as many, but still more than three in four, believe that international trade in services is important. Of particular interest is the fact that fully 54 percent of the population can be classed as genuine friends of free trade. That is the majority that believe dismantling import restrictions is a better way to improve the economy and create more jobs in Sweden than protecting domestic companies through import restrictions. Only 25 percent of Swedes believe that import restrictions are the best way to increase welfare. Free trade supporters and protectionists in 23 countries * 11 Taiwan Sverige Sydkorea Hong Kong Tyskland Japan Thailand Spanien Kina Mexico Kanada Frankrike Italien Frihandlare Protektionister Storbritannien 53 Brasilien Indien 55 USA 56 Chile Österrike Filipinerna Ryssland Malaysia Indonesien * The question was worded: Which of the following do you believe is the best way to improve the economy and create more jobs in Sweden: to protect our domestic companies by restricting imports or to remove import restrictions in order to increase our international trade? 1 Insert countries in table:taiwan, Sweden, South Korea, Hong Kong, Germany, Japan, Thailand, Spain, China, Mexico, Canada, France, Italy, Great Britain, Brazil, India, USA, Chile, Austria, The Philippines, Russia, Malaysia, Indonesia. CODE Blue = Free trade supporters Yellow = Protectionists 3

4 This question is worded in exactly the same was as the one The Economist magazine commissioned the Canadian opinion poll company the Austin Reid Group to ask in 22 countries in December ( Liberalism lives, The Economist 2 Jan 1999) In comparison with the results of that survey, it is clear that Swedes are amongst the most free trade friendly people in the world. Alongside the Taiwanese, South Koreans and Hong Kong residents, the Swedes are genuinely the most free trade friendly in the world. In Sweden, supporters of free trade outnumber opponents by over two to one. This can be compared with the situation on Continental Europe, e.g. France, where more people are anti free trade than pro. In the USA there is an even bigger majority against free trade. In principle, public opinion in America is the opposite of Sweden. 56 percent of Americans believe that import restrictions are a better way of increasing welfare than liberalising imports. Just percent of Americans believe it would be better to liberalise imports, according to the poll mentioned above. Against this background it does not seem strange that the movements critical of globalisation have their roots and power bases in France and the USA. Nor is it surprising that these movements and their ideas have had a cool reception amongst Swedes. 4. Swedes and criticism of globalisation The most famous anti-globalisation movement in Sweden is Attac. Only 1 percent of Swedes have an extremely positive opinion of the movement. A further 11 percent of the population is quite positive about the movement. However one in two Swedes has a negative or very negative opinion of the organisation. In other words, the movement that was introduced in Sweden as a grass roots revolt against a market economy, is supported by one in ten Swedes. The groups most positive towards the Attac movement are the upper middle aged, the university educated and households with medium high incomes. The market economy that the opponents of globalisation object to is seen as something positive by over 60 percent of Swedes. A mere 9 percent consider the market economy to be something negative. The open world economy they oppose is viewed as something positive by one in two Swedes and as something negative by just 15 percent. The World Trade Organisation, the WTO, which is the international interstate organisation that deals with multilateral trading issues, is not wholly unexpectedly an organisation that many people do not have an opinion on. But those that do are overwhelmingly positive about the WTO. Despite the fact that the WTO has been the focus of much anti-globalisation protest, only 8 percent see it as something negative. Almost four times as many Swedes have a positive view of the WTO than have a positive opinion of the Attac movement. A well functioning international capital market is of the greatest importance for investments, especially for investments and therefore for growth and development 4

5 in developing countries. However, one of the most frequent demands made by critics of globalisation is that the international flow of capital must be restricted and made more difficult. This is a demand that has gained very limited backing amongst Swedes. Over 60 percent of Swedes are convinced that it is important for capital to be able to be moved freely between countries. For the hardened critics of globalisation in e.g. the French movement Attack one goal is to restrict international trade generally. This demand does not find favour with the Swedish public. Fully 90 percent of Swedes feel that international trade in goods is important. This is a remarkable figure. Not many political or economic concepts have such support. Altogether this gives an image of an anti-globalisation movement that has the sympathy of perhaps one tenth of the population. On the other side we find an absolute majority of the population who in principle think the opposite of the critics of globalisation. 5. Swedes and multinational companies According to the survey there is a concern that multinational companies can have too great an influence in small countries. The image of the effects of international enterprise is multifaceted however. Pleasingly enough fully 61 percent of Swedes believe that the international trading and activities of Swedish companies in other countries contributes to increased growth and welfare in those countries. At the same time, fully 74 percent believe that the international trading and activities of Swedish companies in other countries increases growth and welfare in Sweden. The concept of multinational companies seems to provoke totally different associations than internationally active Swedish companies. That 4,000 of the world s 63,000 multinational companies are Swedish according to the UN body UNCTAD and that Sweden is therefore a worldleader in terms of the number of multinational companies is somewhat ironic in this context. While many Swedes at least partly agree that the international activities of large companies must be regulated, there is a stable majority that feel that foreign companies should have unrestricted rights to establish operations in Sweden and that Swedish companies should be freely able to establish operations in other countries. The freedom to establish operations is fundamental for growth and development. Countries that open their borders to foreign investment clearly enjoy better growth than countries whose borders are closed. Countries that also maintain stable, democratic and transparent regulatory systems for enterprise and investment demonstrate better growth than countries that cannot demonstrate the same quality of regulatory systems. Certainly companies can have too much influence, but never as a function of a well functioning market economy. Monopolies flourish in corrupt environments and conditions marked by a lack of competition. Large and successful international companies are not a problem but rather poor regulatory systems and weak political 5

6 systems that result in monopolies, oligopolies and corruption. Too much power for individual companies is not a product of a market economy, free trade and openness, but the opposite. In the debate on the activities of multinational companies it is important to bear in mind that the multinationals pay significantly higher wages and offer much better working conditions that local companies. All experiences show that foreign investments are absolutely decisive for the rapid increase in welfare in developing nations, too. 6. Swedes and the free movement of capital This survey, like many others (see e.g. The Economist survey mentioned earlier) show that support for the free movement of capital is lower than support for free trade in goods and services. In this respect enterprise and other proponents of globalisation have an educational role to play here. To achieve the same high support for the free movement of capital as for the free movement of goods and services stands out as a priority for the simple reason that the free movement of capital is just as important for welfare and development as free trade. It is important to demonstrate that the financial crises we have seen over the past decade were not a result of too much regulation and liberalisation but rather caused by inadequate economic policies and over regulation. It is however important to remember that nearly two in three Swedes do think the free movement of capital across borders is important or quite important. 7. Swedes and the developing world 50 percent of Swedes agree with the assertion that free world trade is good for the world s poor countries. So far free trade has mainly been practised between the more developed countries. Today there are many examples of relatively large free trade areas in the world, such as the EU internal market for instance. These usually only include developed nations. Against this background it is not surprising that 62 percent of Swedes agree with the assertion that free trade primarily favours the most developing nations. However it is extremely important to emphasise that free trade benefits all countries that practise it, especially less developed countries. No country is poor because of too much free trade, a market economy and liberalisation but many countries are poor as a result of a lack of these elements. Almost 70 percent of the Swedish population are positive to aid. This should be interpreted as meaning that Swedes feel a strong solidarity with people of the developing world. In this context it is important to stress that globalisation is the most effective route out of poverty. For instance, private investments in the past decade have channelled more money from the rich countries to poor countries than 50 years of aid has ever done. 6

7 8. Conclusion Free trade and globalisation are genuinely positive concepts in Sweden. Generally speaking, Swedes are in favour of the development that is usually referred to as globalisation and see it as offering many more opportunities than threats. This is important to bear in mind when focusing on the vociferous critics of globalisation. A positive agenda from the supporters of globalisation would appear to have a good chance of gaining a proper hearing amongst Swedes and so provide further support for the forces that are working for a free and open world economy. 7