The Global Structural Realignment of Historic Significance

"The traditional split between North and South makes little sense in an increasingly multi-polar world where the largest and most dynamic economies may no longer be the richest, nor the world’s technological leaders”.

The OECD Shifting Wealth 2010 Report raises an interesting point above regarding the traditional north south divide which seems to have outlived its relevance. In fact, the Report finds that OECD non-member economies have markedly increased their share of global output since the 2000s, and  as shown below,  projections predict that this trend will continue. This realignment of the world economy is not a transitory phenomenon, but instead is described as a structural change of historical significance.Other interesting facts...

"In 2007, just before the global financial crisis hit, no fewer than 84 developing countries grew their per capita income at a rate more than twice the OECD average. Among them were more than 20 countries in sub-Saharan Africa. The five-year growth performance of Latin America was its best since the 1960s.

In 2009 China became the leading trade partner of Brazil, India and South Africa. The Indian multinational Tata is now the second most active investor in sub-Saharan Africa. Over 40% of the world’s researchers are now in Asia. As of 2008, developing countries were holding USD 4.2 trillion in foreign currency reserves, more than one and a half times the amount held by rich countries.

This structural realignment in the trade context can be considered in light of the fact that Africa trades predominantly with the rest of the world and Asia is the fastest growing trading partner and major source of imports with the US, EU the largest export destinations.  


On Africa-EU trade, the EPAs are deep policy instruments that open Africa's markets to Europe yet Asia is the largest source of imports. One can wonder if EPAs will accelerate or hinder Africa's integration with other developing countries especially with their restrictive rules of origin.

In the WTO Doha Round, traditionally the focus has been on developed and major developing countries with LDCs, (predominantly in Africa) exempt from multilateral liberalization. Hence Africa's south-south engagement would need to be concluded outside of the WTO for developing countries. 

What does this new economic geography mean for global governance, the G20, BRIC economies and is Africa adequately represented in this new world order?