Search for publications, researchers, or questions or Discover by subject area Recruit researchers Join for free Login

Advertisement

How to choose and use protein tags Download PDF

An easy reference guide from purification to detection

Home Molecular Biology COVID-19

Advertisement

Article PDF Available

Navigating Globalization in the Aftermath of

COVID-19 Download full-text PDF

January 2021 · SSRN Electronic Journal

Read full-text
DOI:10.2139/ssrn.3769833

Authors:

Struggling to amplify functional TCR/BCR cells?

Ronald U. Mendoza
Ateneo de Manila University Now you can get RNA expression profile data and immune repertoire
profiles from the same samples

Arsenio M. Balisacan Learn more

Philippine Competition Commission, Phili…

Sheena Valenzuela Clarissa C. David

Syn and Strat Consulting

Show all 5 authors

Download citation Copy link

Citations (2) References (37) Figures (2)

Abstract and Figures

Discover the world's

The COVID-19 pandemic has affected over 200 countries and territories, leading to
well over 40 million confirmed cases and over 1.1 million deaths worldwide
research
(covid19.who.int/). While many are hopeful, an effective vaccine is not yet assured,
25+ million members
and the world still struggles with the so-called “new normal” during the pandemic.
Meanwhile, even prior to the pandemic, deep structural “mega-trends” have been 160+ million publication pages
sweeping across the world, notably the emergence of a new era of “digital
globalization”. These changes promise to re-shape international economic linkages
2.3+ billion citations
just like the previous waves of globalization relating to trade, finance, and people. In
important ways, this new globalization is linked to the 4th industrial revolution, Join for free
which sees automation, artificial intelligence, the internet of things (IoT) and other
technological trends reshaping not just the world economy, but also creating
disruptions and spurring innovations in social and political spheres. Using a
Philippine perspective, it is critical to understand the implications of these waves of
change, which are sweeping across the world. Intended as an evidence-based
foresight analysis. this paper maps the main features of globalization in the
aftermath of COVID-19; and it outlines some initial policy directions with a
particular focus on science and technology. Its main recommendation is to focus
the Philippines’ effort to build-back-better from the health pandemic on areas that
would improve on inclusive recovery from the pandemic, and inclusive development
during the post-pandemic period.

Cross-border Digital
Bandwidth… Platforms…

Figures - uploaded by Sheena Valenzuela Author content

Content may be subject to copyright.

Advertisement

Novogene
Discover more
Novogene 10x Single Cell Services eBook
Familiarize you with scRNA-seq to dissect cellular heterogeneity

Sponsored videos
Public Full-text 1

Content uploaded by Sheena Valenzuela Author content

Content may be subject to copyright.

WORKING PAPER

Navigating Globalization in the Aftermath of COVID-19

Ronald U. Mendoza, PhD

Ateneo School of Government

Arsenio M. Balisacan, PhD

Philippine Competition Commission

Sheena A. Valenzuela
Ateneo School of Government

Clarissa C. David, PhD

Ateneo School of Government

Geoffrey M. Ducanes, PhD

Ateneo de Manila University

ASOG WORKING PAPER 21-004

This preprint research paper has not been peer reviewed. Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3769833

ATENEO SCHOOL OF GOVERNMENT WORKING PAPER SERIES

Navigating Globalization in the Aftermath of COVID-19

Ronald U. Mendoza, PhD

Ateneo School of Government

Arsenio M. Balisacan, PhD

Philippine Competition Commission

Sheena A. Valenzuela
Ateneo School of Government
 Clarissa C. David, PhD
Ateneo School of Government

Geoffrey M. Ducanes, PhD

Ateneo de Manila University

January 2021

This working paper is a draft in progress that is posted online to stimulate discussion and critical comment.
The purpose is to mine reader’s additional ideas and contributions for completion of a final document.

The views expressed herein are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of Ateneo de
Manila University.

Corresponding authors:

Ronald U. Mendoza, PhD, Ateneo School of Government

rumendoza@ateneo.edu

Abstract

The COVID-19 pandemic has affected over 200 countries and territories, leading to well
over 40 million confirmed cases and over 1.1 million deaths worldwide (covid19.who.int/).
While many are hopeful, an effective vaccine is not yet assured, and the world still struggles
with the so-called “new normal” during the pandemic. Meanwhile, even prior to the
pandemic, deep structural “mega-trends” have been sweeping across the world, notably
the emergence of a new era of “digital globalization”. These changes promise to re-shape
international economic linkages just like the pr evious waves of globalization relating to
trade, finance, and people. In important ways, this new globalization is linked to the 4th
industrial revolution, which sees automation, artificial intelligence, the internet of things
(IoT) and other technological trends reshaping not just the world economy, but also
creating disruptions and spurring innovations in social and political spheres.

Using a Philippine perspective, it is critical to understand the implications of these waves

of change, which are sweeping across the world. Intended as an evidence-based foresight
analysis. this paper maps the main features of globalization in the aftermath of COVID-
19; and it outlines some initial policy directions with a particular focus on science and
technology. Its main recommendation is to focus the Philippines’ effort to build-back-better
from the health pandemic on areas that would improve on inclusive recovery from the
pandemic, and inclusive development during the post-pandemic period.

Key words: COVID-19, globalization, 4th industrial revolution

ASOG WORKING PAPER 21-004 3

This preprint research paper has not been peer reviewed. Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3769833

I. Globalization and Four Industrial Revolutions

Globalization marks the interlinkages of various societies throughout vast areas. These
interlinkages are technological, economic, institutional, cultural, and geopolitical in nature
and include the interplay of societies through migration, trade, finance, culture, and wars
(Sachs 2020). The world’s history shows that globalization has been a double-edged
sword: it provided opportunities for innovation, economic development, and
transformation of political communities, but it also caused suffering to the world through
diseases, conflicts, and financial crises (Sachs 2020). The initial phases of globalization
were characterized by movements of people, goods, finance and now it is shifting to the
 soaring flows of data worldwide, a phenomenon called digital globalization (McKinsey
Global Institute 2016). After almost 4 decades of steady increase in global trade as percent
of GDP, the 2008 Financial Crisis triggered a slowdown. In 2019, global trade is at 60.4%
of GDP, close to the 60.8% share before the 2008 crisis (See Figure 1).

Figure 1: Flows of Goods, Services, and Finance as % of GDP

Source: Adapted from Investment and Industrial Policy:

A Perspective on the Future by McKinsey & Company (2018: p. 3). Data from the World
Bank.

The different eras of the industrial revolution s howed how technological

advancements can completely change the way of life of societies. The first industrial

revolution (1IR) from around 1760 to 1840 was propelled by the invention of the steam
engine, in turn leading to the emergence of mechanization of production processes. It
improved transportation, banking, and communications; and it increased manufactured
commodities (Allen 2009). Mechanization replaced agriculture with industry as the main
driver of economic activities, and it also paved the way for the second industrial revolution
(2IR), which took place around 1870 to 1914. The 2IR utilized fossil fuels to produce
electricity that led to the birth of mass production and electric communications such as
telegraphs and telephones (Mokyr 1999). The third industrial revolution (3IR) signified the
start of the information age that occurred during the 1950s up to the 1970s. The automation
of manufacturing was made possible using digital electronics (e.g. computers, mobile
phones) and information technology (e.g. internet) (Greenwood 1997).
Building on the digital revolution, the Fourth Industrial Revolution (FIRe) fuses the
physical, digital, and biological domains through technology, embedding it not only within
societies but also in the human body (Schwab 2016). The FIRe is characterized by
breakthroughs in various spheres such as artificial intelligence, nanotechnology,
biotechnology, 3D printing, and the internet of things (IoT) (Schwab 2016). Cross border
data flows further fuel trade and investments across countries, creating new areas for
productivity enhancement and wealth creation. McKinsey Global Institute (2016:40) notes:
“The amount of cross-border bandwidth that is used has grown 45 times larger since 2005.
It is projected to increase by an additional nine times over the next five years as flows of
information, internet searches, online communications, video, online transactions, and
intracompany internet traffic continue to surge. In addition to transmitting valuable streams
of information and ideas in their own right, data flows help to facilitate the movement of
goods, services, finance, and people (see Figures 2 and 3).
Virtually every type of crossborder transaction now has a “digital component.” Yet
these too raise new challenges, as the benefits of digital trade are premised on trust, which
raises issues of regulation to protect privacy, consumer welfare, and secure data
management (Casalini and Lopez Gonzalez 2019). Across countries, there is wide variance
in institutional readiness to underpin this trust; and within countries, across firms, there is
also wide variance in access online networks (particularly among small and medium scale
enterprises or SMEs).

ASOG WORKING PAPER 21-004 5

This preprint research paper has not been peer reviewed. Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3769833

In 2016, McKinsey noted how the influence of e-commerce had become much more
significant even as over-all goods trade appeared to taper off. Back then:

“16 percent of B2C e-commerce transactions are cross-border, and that share is
projected to reach almost 30 percent by 2020, when international sales could hit $1
trillion […]. Cross-border B2B e-commerce is even bigger. In 2014, it w as an
 estimated $1.8 trillion to $2 trillion market. Together, the roughly $2.2 trillion of
cross- border e-commerce in 2015 is equal to approximately 12 percent of global
goods trade. […] Platforms make it possible for users to research products, services,
prices, and alternative choices. This removes some information asymmetries so that
markets function more efficiently, although it may disrupt traditional intermediaries
in the process” (p.34).

In the post-COVID-19 world, it is more likely that this part of international trade
will increase further and faster, fueled in large measure by online connectivity that has
become more important under lockdown conditions. Analysts predict that consumer
behavior may have begun to permanently change under the “new normal” with e-
commerce within and across borders playing a much larger economic role.

Figure 2. Cross-border Bandwidth Growth

Data Source: McKinsey Global Institute (2016:31).

Figure 3. Digital Platforms Interconnecting People and Firms Across Borders

3500
Active Users as of July 2020 (in

3000
2603
2500
2000 2000
2000
Millions)

1500 1203 10 82
1000 800 694
55 0
500 397 326

0
p

k
k

QQ
t

bo

er
at
ha
ub

Ap

to
oo

ra

ch

itt
ei
eC

k
ag
eb

uT

ts

Tw
Ti

ap
W
ha
Yo
c

st

na

Sn
Fa

In
W

Si

Data Source: Statista (2020).

ASOG WORKING PAPER 21-004 7

This preprint research paper has not been peer reviewed. Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3769833

Furthermore, although all these transitions could bring considerable benefits to

society, these could also displace a substantial number of workers and businesses,
especially the ones with routine functions. As the world swiftly moves to another phase of
globalization and a new form of industrial revolution, it is crucial to consider the
implications to policy, vulnerable populations, and environmental sustainability. In
addition, it is important to address the challenges that could hinder the Philippines from
more fully benefiting from all these advancements.

II. Unequalizing trends: From “flat world” to “regional trade, tourism, and
investment bubbles”?
Globalization has been interrupted by the COVID-19 pandemic, and it may have erected
additional economic, political and health challenges for many countries, increasing the
possibility that there will be varied progress in establishing the conducive institutional
frameworks for fully engaging in the 4th industrial revolution. Rather than multilateralism,
increased regionalism may become even s tronger in the post COVID-19 world, akin to the
tourism and trade bubbles now being promoted as part of coping strategies for countries
that band together in terms of their relative success in dealing with the pandemic (Locker
2020). Such trends may exacerbate inequality in several ways, particularly in the Philippine
context.

Poverty and hunger during the “great lockdown recession”

The social inequality among Filipinos became more visible as the coronavirus pandemic
in the Philippines quickly shifted from a health crisis to an economic recess ion. As the
country was put into lockdown, thousands of businesses were forced to temporarily stop
operations and consequentially, lay off millions of workers who had to rely on the
government’s meager financial support through the Social A melioration Program (SAP)
for their survival. In July 2020, adult unemployment in the Philippines rose to 45.5% from
17.1% in December 2019, which is equivalent to 27.3 million unemployed Filipinos (Social
Weather Stations 2020). While skilled workers were able to continue their employment
through a work-from-home setup, less-skilled workers, especially those that perform
manual labor, are the mos t exposed to the infection risk. In July 2020, for example, over

300 workers in a construction site in Taguig City tested positive for coronavirus (CNN
Philippines, 2020). D uring this time, most blue-collar and informal workers in the
Philippines only have two options: s tay at home but get hungry, or continue to work but
increase the risk of virus infection.

The Matthew effect in education

As part of the measures to contain the virus, face-to-face interactions were prohibited,
which prompted schools to move their classes online, but not without encountering
challenges on the supply side (training of teachers, teaching equipment/materials), and the
demand side (computers/mobile phones and internet connection for s tudents to access
online classes). According to the National ICT Household Survey (NICTHS) 2019, only
17.7% of households nationwide have their own internet access at home and 24% have
communal cellphones but only two out of ten have communal computers (Department of
Information and Communications Technology, 2020). While private schools were able to
fully transition into online teaching with the opening of classes in A ugust 2020, the
Department of Education had to delay the opening of classes of public schools to October
2020 due to technical issues and limitations mentioned above (Department of Education
2020). Nevertheless, the necessity to push online learning is likely to spur innovations in
online education which may introduce cost-effective models that could last beyond the
COVID-19 crisis. However, experts fear the crisis is likely to exacerbate the “Matthew
effect”—a deepening inequality in access to education and quality of learning across the
digital divide (Burgess and Sievertsen 2020; UN ESCO International Bureau of Education
2020)
In addition, there is growing recognition of the necessary investments for more
effective hybrid online education options, which go well beyond immediate (and often
haphazard) efforts to deliver “emergency remote teaching” as a result of the lockdowns
(Hodges, et al. 2020). Hence, there is an opportunity to dramatically enhance online
learning capabilities, and in ways that may effectively complement traditional teaching.
This will require a re-tooling of the education system so that countries go well beyond mere
“emergency remote teaching”, with key investments in both hardware (classroom
connectivity) and software (notably proper teaching skills build up). Such an education
system can also be better prepared for any future pandemic, providing more options in
education with potentially less disruptions in learning and education outcomes. To build a
more resilient and cohes ive society, such a s ystem could also be underpinned by more
inclusive access to key technologies, notably internet connectivity and the appropriate
education and training for children and young people against disinformation, which has
become a bane during the pandemic. In a joint statement by the key UN agencies they
referred to the “infodemic” as:
“…an overabundance of information, both online and offline. It includes deliberate
attempts to disseminate wrong information to undermine the public health respons e
and advance alternative agendas of groups or individuals. Mis - and disinformation
can be harmful to people’s phys ical and mental health; increase stigmatization;
threaten precious health gains; and lead to poor observance of public health
measures, thus reducing their effectiveness and endangering countries’ ability to
stop the pandemic (WHO et. al 2020).”

Automation and jobs

Even prior to the COVID-19 pandemic, a growing number of analysts and policymakers
began to recognize the emergence of the 4th industrial revolution (FIRe), comprised of
trends in the adoption of new technologies fueling automation, harnessing massive
amounts of data for analysis, and interlinking vast numbers of people, economies and
systems underpinning an “internet of things” (IO T). A disease outbreak may end up
accelerating many aspects of FIRe through several channels. First, robots do not catch a
cold, and in an era of global pandemics, there is a distinct advantage behind manufacturing,
transport, and other systems that are less impacted by disease outbreaks and the means
through which they are contained (e.g. human social distancing, mobility restrictions, etc).
Automation is likely to have received a dramatic boost from COVID-19 (Morgan 2020).
Social distancing, quarantine, travel restrictions and lockdowns will create massive
inefficiencies in the economy (e.g. a sub-optimal number of passengers in airlines,
shoppers in malls, riders of mass transport, and even less workers (working in shifts) in
manufacturing. All of this will likely intensify the need to invest in increased efficiency-
enhancing tools and technologies, such as through big data and the IOT. Finally, some of

ASOG WORKING PAPER 21-004 10

the responses to fight COVID-19 are also drawn from the FIRe, offering a demonstration
effect on how useful these new technologies are (and could be used to underpin stronger
health systems from now on): tele-medicine, contact tracing applications, AI-powered and
big-data enabled epidemiological s imulations, and automation in retail, hos pitals, and
various other sectors (Khagram 2020).
All these trends underscore how vast numbers of workers may face employment
challenges even as the “lockdown recession” already deeply impacted the labor market. As
noted earlier, there are over 27 million unemployed Filipinos, and recently, the D epartment
of Labor and Employment (DOLE) forecasted that up to 10 million Filipinos could lose
their jobs due to the COVID-19 lockdown (Yumol 2020). Even prior to COVID-19,
analysts were already predicting that over 18 million jobs in the Philippines could be
automated, raising the challenges of strengthening education (to better thrive in the new
technology environment), re-skilling for better jobs matching, boosting innovation and
ample social protection and training mechanisms during the adjustment period (see among
others, Albert et al 2018, Dadios et al 2018, and Moraje 2017). Meanwhile, analysts
forecast millions of new high-quality jobs created as part of the 4th industrial revolution,
and the Philippines is well placed to move up the quality ladder from BPOs to corner many
of these jobs.

The debt burden

As the COVID-19 pandemic wreaked havoc on the Philippine economy, Filipinos will have
to bear the burden of the increasing debt for the government’s COVID-19 response.
According to the Department of Finance (DOF), the agency has already secured a total of
USD 9.914 billion as of September 28, 2020, equivalent to about PhP 480 billion in
borrowings to finance the administration’s COVID -19 response (D epartment of Finance,
2020). Moreover, Finance Secretary Carlos G. Dominguez III said gross borrowings will
reach over PhP 3 trillion in 2020, PhP 3.03 trillion in 2021, and PhP 2.32 trillion in 2022,
and these borrowings will increase the country’s outs tanding debt to PhP 11.98 trillion in
2021 (De Vera 2020). Although the loans can help fund the government’s efforts to respond
 reality is that future generations will have to shoulder this liability and economic growth
must continue to outpace debt growth in order for the latter to be sustainable. M oreover,
governance will be key so that the investments and spending do not suffer from
considerable leakages; and it is crucial that these investments translate to strong economic
returns for the country.

Poor governance and weak institutions

The global pandemic has disrupted many economies, yet emerging evidence suggests that
the severity of its impact can be mitigated by the relative quality of the governance
environment. A novel study by Chien and Lin (2020) empirically examines the links across
governance (proxied by the World Bank’s Governance Indicators) and relative
effectiveness in containing COVID-19 spread (proxied by daily cumulative confirmed
cases) and they found evidence that: “countries with better governance had a more rapid
increase but a shorter outbreak period than countries with fair or worse governance by 19.6–22.3
days. Most countries with better governance (84.0%) revealed a declining trend in COVID-19
incidence, while such a trend was less than half of fair and worse governance countries (38.5%–
41.7%)” (Chien and Lin 2020). Countries like New Zealand, South Korea, Taiwan and
Vietnam are now seen to have implemented relatively effective responses to the pandemic,
underpinned by strong systems and institutions, and effective leadership (Dayrit and
Mendoza 2020).
In addition, the urgency required by the pandemic may have encouraged many
countries to dramatically expedite procurement and other elements of crisis response,
which in turn opens the door for abuse and corruption. Already, Bolivia, Brazil, and
Colombia are among a growing number of countries racked with governance issues in their
pandemic response, as the corrupt may have taken advantage of the situation. Even
industrialized countries like Italy and the United States face issues with politically
connected firms that may have benefited from the situation (Jarvis 2020). Similar
corruption allegations hound the Philippines’ response to COVID-19, particularly related
to the country’s health insurance corporation, PhilHealth (Robles 2020).
Different governance and institutional environments could also produce an
unequalizing effect on crisis response and recovery. Countries (and within them, regions

ASOG WORKING PAPER 21-004 12

This preprint research paper has not been peer reviewed. Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3769833

and jurisdictions) with better governance may be better prepared and may mount relatively
more effective responses compared to those with weaker governance and institutions.
Given the importance of trust in government and social cohesion in more effective
pandemic responses (e.g. behavioral changes such as complying with mobility restrictions,
mask wearing, hand-washing, health-seeking in case of suspected infections, etc), one
might also these factors to be stronger in better governance environments, where there is a
longer history of good governance, and robust systems embedded in more inclusive health
and social protection systems. While we only have prima facie evidence at this early stage,
we hypothesize here that economic actors may start differentiating across governance and
institutional environments, producing “bubbles” of trade, investment and tourism ties
among countries (and w ithin them jurisdictions) w ith similarly strong s ystems, excluding
those without. (In particular, for those flows for which health security matters, there could
be a self-selection into countries and jurisdictions with better sys tems.) This s uggests a
slightly more difficult recovery for those countries and jurisdictions with already weak
governance and institutional environments, further perpetuating non-inclusive recovery.

III: Science and technology for inclusion: Main ingredients for policy foresight
From a mapping of the policy context, there are additional factors to consider in crafting a
foresight strategy on technology and development. First, globalization has been
interrupted, and it is crticial to understand whether this will be a brief interruption or a short
blip. Due to the factors related to CO VID-19 and perhaps also the political environment
(e.g. populism), it is possible that this is likely going to be a more protracted adjustment
period for broader globalization trends (Neuman 2020). Second, in the immediate future,
Asia and key large countries like China, India and Indonesia will be critically important,
not just because of their size (and the size of their emerging middle class), but because of
 the important role they now play in the global economy (ADB 2020). Nevertheless, geo-
political risks and challenges also suggest that there could be some challenges ahead for

Philippines as it balances continued high and inclusive growth and development with
sustainability objectives (Habito 2020; World Resources Institute 2020; World Economic
Forum 2020). And while there is still considerable uncertainty due to COVID -19 at the
time of writing this article, this should not deter reformists from exercising bold foresight
in building the necessary elements for successful recovery from COVID-19 and the
lockdown recession, while also thriving under the mega-trends characterizing the 4th
industrial revolution. There are at least four areas for policy foresight and action.

Investing in STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics)

The FIRe presents both the challenges of displacement of workers from jobs with routinary
functions and the producing highly skilled workers for the new jobs that the technological
revolution created. Experts projected that by 2022, about 10 million jobs w ill be generated
in data science and Big Data analytics in the country, making the Philippines a big player
in the field, considering the increasing use of internet and social media (Dadios et al.
2018).This would entail a shift from being a busines s process outsourcing (BPO) hub to a
Big Data processing hub. To equip young people with the necessary skills and
competencies for this shift, an investment in STEM education is imperative not only to
boost productive inputs, but also as a means to temper the inequality pressures brought by
the FIRe. This may necessitate the transformation of the role of the government from
providing ‘remedial’ compensatory policies to a proactive strategy of social investment in
the human capital (including of disadvantaged groups ), ultimately resulting in a form of
pre-distribution since education could be the key investment for inequality reduction
(Diamond 2014).

Universal healthcare and building back better from COVID-19

“Build back better” will be crucial for a health-anchored inclusive recovery. There now
appears to be grow ing recognition that countries cannot simply go “back to normal”
because what had become “normal” was part of w hat exacerbated the crisis in the first
place (Pantuliano 2020). Issues here include insufficient and non-inclusive healthcare and
social protection, combined with a growing level of inequality that, in part, reflected itself
in densely populated urban slums vulnerable to contagion, as well as easily impacted

ASOG WORKING PAPER 21-004 14

This preprint research paper has not been peer reviewed. Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3769833

heavily by quarantines and lockdowns. The case of the Philippines highlighted how the
deep divides between the healthcare-haves and have-nots, and the technology-haves and
have-nots (for online education and work-from-home vs “no work no pay” daily wage
earning) made the crisis trade-offs noted earlier even more acute. Moving forward, among
the key areas for policy focus under the “new normal”, strengthening and building a more
crisis-resilient and inclusive healthcare system is probably the most critical investment
from both medium-term and long-term perspectives.

Internet access as a public good

Due to its social and economic characteristics and its worldwide reach, the Internet is a
global public good (GPG) that demands the intervention of the government to develop
efficiently and uniformly, and the Internet infrastructure is a human-made global common
(Kaul, Mendoza, Conceição, & Le Goulven 2003). In 2015, UNESCO espoused the
concept of Internet Universality that highlights four key tenets promoting the growth and
development of the internet with the acronym ROAM : a cyberspace based on human rights
(R), open (O) and accessible (A) to all, and nurtured by multi-stakeholder participation (M)
(UNESCO 2015). Considering the potential GPG nature of the internet, government
intervention on all levels of its provision is crucial, especially on the implementation of
policies favorable to an optimal supply of the internet through legislation, taxation, and
trade and industrial policies (Canazza 2016). Along with this decision by many countries
to make the internet accessible as a public good, there are many ancillary investments
necessary to ensure that this “global common” also acts as a force for better information
 rather than disinformation. Countries like Argentina and Malaysia have invested in trying
to protect their populations from the easy spread of disinformation, and the Philippines
may consider these types of investments as well (Law Library of Congress 2019).

Technological transfer for rapid catch-up

While COVID 19 sped up the adoption and use of digital technology digitalization in the

opportunity costs of non-users but also amplifies income inequality within and across
countries (Canazza 2016). In terms of technology transfer, there are barriers such as high
trade costs that limit firm innovation, which might have caused the low levels of technology
adoption --- only 9 percent of firms in the country have internationally recognized quality
certifications and only 11 percent of firms use technology licensed from foreign companies
(World Bank 2018). As Diop et al. (2020) observed, there is a “tendency to frame
technology transfer in terms facilitating transfer from own public research organizations
(PROs) and not necessarily from cheaper and more efficient technology in the market” (p.
110). Furthermore, a more open economic environment will be crucial to help facilitate
investments that carry with them the potential for new technology.

Conclusion
As explained in this article, the FIRe provides opportunities as well as challenges. While
technological revolutions help s pur globalization, they also have a tendency to outrun the
capability of governments in managing their implications. The consequences include the
exacerbation of inequality due to the loss of jobs for the less skilled workers and the
widening great digital divide between populations with access to computers and the
internet and the underprivileged members of society without access, which are already
highlighted due to the COVID -19 pandemic. To ens ure that the Philippines can reap the
benefits of the FIRe, the government needs to protect investments in human capital by
building a more crisis-resilient and inclusive healthcare system and equipping the
vulnerable population with STEM education as well as specialized education to combat
disinformation. Lastly, barriers in technology adoption among businesses and populations
need to be addressed through flexible and adaptable government policies. Taken together,
all these investments emphasize how science and technology can be a force for inclusion,
and lowering inequality. This policy orientation will be critically important in the decades
to come, particularly as many mega-trends reshape economies and societies, on top of the
adjustments that COVID-19 already demands.

ASOG WORKING PAPER 21-004 16

This preprint research paper has not been peer reviewed. Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3769833

References
Allen, R. C. (2009). The British industrial revolution in global perspective. Cambridge ;
New York: Cambridge University Press.
Asian Development Bank (ADB) (2020). Asia’s Journey to Prosperity. Manila; ADB.
Bisley, N. (2020, April 8). Asia after the pandemic. Lowly Institute.
https://www.lowyinstitute.org/the-interpreter/asia-after-pandemic
Burgess, Simon, and Hans Henrik Sievertsen. (2020). Schools, Skills, and Learning: The
Impact of COVID-19 on Education. VOX CEPR Policy Portal.
https://voxeu.org/article/impact-covid-19-education.
Canazza, M. R. (2016). The Internet as a Global Public Good and the Role of
Governments and Multilateral Organizations in Internet Governance (Columbia
University). Columbia University, New York. Retrieved from DOI:
10.20889/M47e19007
Casalini, F. and J. López González (2019-01-23), “Trade and Cross-Border Data
Flows”, OECD Trade Policy Papers, No. 220, OECD Publishing, Paris.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/b2023a47-en
Chien, L.-C. and Lin, R.-T., 2020. COVID-19 Outbreak, Mitigation, and Governance in
High Prevalent Countries. Annals of Global Health, 86(1), p.119. DOI:
http://doi.org/10.5334/aogh.3011
CNN Philippines. (2020, July 10). Over 300 workers in BGC construction site test
positive for COVID-19. CNN Philippines. Retrieved from
https://cnnphilippines.com/news/2020/7/10/Over-300-workers-in-BGC-
construction-site-test-positive-for-COVID-19
Dadios, E., Culaba, A., Albert, J. A., Paqueo, V., Orbeta, A. Jr., Serafica, R., … Bairan,
J. C. A. (2018). Preparing the Philippines for the Fourth Industrial Revolution: A
Scoping Study (Discussion Paper No. 2018–11). Philippine Institute for
Development Studies. Retrieved from Philippine Institute for Development
 Studies website:
https://pidswebs.pids.gov.ph/CDN/PUBLICATIONS/pidsdps1811.pdf
Dayrit, Manuel and Mendoza, Ronald U., Social Cohesion vs COVID-19 (2020).
Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3555152 or
http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3555152;
De Vera, B. (2020, September 4). COVID-19 impact: PH debt to hit P13.7T in Duterte’s
last year in office. September 30, 2020. Retrieved from
https://business.inquirer.net/306588/covid-19-impact-ph-debt-to-hit-p13-7t-in-
dutertes-last-year-in-office
Department of Education. (2020). Official Statement on the Opening of Classes.
Retrieved from https://www.deped.gov.ph/2020/08/14/official-statement-on-the-
opening-of-classes/
Department of Finance. (2020). Financing Secured for COVID-19 Response (As of
September 28, 2020). Retrieved from https://www.dof.gov.ph/data/fin-
agreements/

Diamond, P. (2014). Education, Pre-distribution and Social Justice (pp. 15–19). Policy
Network. Retrieved from Policy Network website: https://policynetwork.org/wp-
content/uploads/2017/09/Education-predistribution-and-social-justice.pdf
Diop, N., Warwick, M. K., Hassan, Z., Fock, A., Niang, C. T., Coulibaly, S., & Hansl,
B. (2020). Philippines Digital Economy Report 2020 : A Better Normal Under
COVID-19 - Digitalizing the Philippine Economy Now (No. 153490). Philippines:
World Bank. Retrieved from World Bank website:
https://documents.worldbank.org/en/publication/documents-
reports/documentdetail/796871601650398190/philippines-digital-economy-
report-2020-a-better-normal-under-covid-19-digitalizing-the-philippine-economy-
now
Goto, S. (2020, April 21). Asia’s New Economic Order in a Post-Pandemic World,
Wilson Center, https://www.wilsoncenter.org/blog-post/asias-new-economic-
order-post-pandemic-world.
Greenwood, J. (1997). The third industrial revolution: technology, productivity, and
income inequality. Washington, D.C: AEI Press.
Habito, C. (2020, July 17). COVID-19 and our ‘Blue Economy’, Inquirer.net.
https://opinion.inquirer.net/131839/covid-19-and-our-blue-economy
Hodges, Charles, Stephanie Moore, Barb Lockee, and Aaron Bond. 2020. The
Difference Between Emergency Remote Teaching and Online Learning. Educause
Review. https://er.educause.edu/articles/2020/3/the-difference-between-
emergency-remote-teaching-and-online-learning.
Jarvis, M. (2020, June 23). Why Governance Matters in the Time of COVID-19. Council
on Foreign Relations. https://www.cfr.org/blog/why-governance-matters-time-
covid-19
Kaul, I., Mendoza, R. U., Conceição, P., & Le Goulven, K. (Eds.). (2003). Providing
global public goods: managing globalization. New York, NY: Oxford Univ.
Press.
Khagram, Sanjeev. 2020. Why Coronavirus Will Accelerate the Fourth Industrial
Revolution. The Economist. https://eiuperspectives.economist.com/financial-
services/why-coronavirus-will-accelerate-fourth-industrial-revolution.
Law Library of Congress (2019). Initiatives to Counter Fake News in Selected Countries.
The Law Library of Congress, Global Legal Research Directorate.
https://www.loc.gov/law/help/fake-news/counter-fake-news.pdf
Locker, M. (2020, May 28). Five Things to Know About Travel Bubbles. Smithsonian
Magazine. https://www.smithsonianmag.com/travel/five-things-know-about-
travel-bubbles-180974983/
McKinsey & Company. (2018). Investment and Industrial Policy:A Perspective on the
Future, UNCTAD Trade And Development Board, Sixty-Fifth Session Panel
Discussion,
https://unctad.org/meetings/en/Presentation/tdb65pt2_item5_presentation_LKrstic
_en.pdf
McKinsey Global Institute (MGI). McKinsey & Company. (2016). “Digital
Globalization: The New Era of Global Flows.”
https://www.mckinsey.com/~/media/McKinsey/Business%20Functions/McKinse

ASOG WORKING PAPER 21-004 18

This preprint research paper has not been peer reviewed. Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3769833

y%20Digital/Our%20Insights/Digital%20globalization%20The%20new%20era%
20of%20global%20flows/MGI-Digital-globalization-Full-report.pdf
Moraje, S. (2017, February 2017). Seizing the automation opportunity in the Philippines.
McKinsey & Company. https://www.mckinsey.com/featured-insights/asia-
pacific/seizing-the-automation-opportunity-in-the-philippines.
Morgan, Blake. 2020. “10 Examples Of Robots Helping To Fight COVID.” Forbes. htt
ps://www.forbes.com/sites/blakemorgan/2020/04/22/10-examples-of-robots-helping-to-
fight-covid/#6d42c4c8f4bf.
Mokyr, J. (1999). The Second Industrial Revolution, 1870-1914. Retrieved from
https://en-
econ.tau.ac.il/sites/economy_en.tau.ac.il/files/media_server/Economics/PDF/Mini
%20courses/castronovo.pdf
Neuman, G. (2020, June 30). Human Rights in a Time of Populism and COVID-19.
Harvard Law Today. https://today.law.harvard.edu/human-rights-in-a-time-of-
populism-and-covid-19/
Our World in Data (2020). Daily new confirmed COVID-19 cases per million people, Oct
20, 2020, https://ourworldindata.org/coronavirus-data-explorer
Oxford Economics. (2020, April). The Economic Impact Of Covid-19 on Asia-Pacific.
Oxford Economics. https://www.oxfordeconomics.com/recent-releases/The-
Economic-Impact-of-COVID-19-on-Asia-Pacific
Pantuliano, S. 2020. “COVID-19: we won’t get back to normal because ‘normal’ was the
problem.” Overseas Development Institute. https://www.odi.org/blogs/16815-
covid-19-we-won-t-get-back-normal-because-normal-was-problem (Accessed
 May 10, 2020)
Robles, R. (2020, August 19). In Philippines, coronavirus crisis led to massive
PhilHealth corruption, whistle-blowers claim. South China Morning Post.
https://www.scmp.com/week-asia/economics/article/3097861/philippines-
coronavirus-crisis-led-massive-philhealth
Sachs, J. (2020). The ages of globalization: geography, technology, and institutions. New
York: Columbia University Press.
Schwab, K. (2016). The Fourth Industrial Revolution: what it means, how to respond.
World Economic Forum. Retrieved from World Economic Forum website:
https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2016/01/the-fourth-industrial-revolution-what-
it-means-and-how-to-respond/
Social Weather Stations. (2020). SWS July 3-6, 2020 National Mobile Phone Survey –
Report No. 16: Adult joblessness rises to record-high 45.5%. Quezon City.
Retrieved from
https://www.sws.org.ph/swsmain/artcldisppage/?artcsyscode=ART-
20200816184051
Statista. (2020). Most popular social networks worldwide as of July 2020, ranked by
number of active users. Retreived from
https://www.statista.com/statistics/272014/global-social-networks-ranked-by-
number-of-users/
UNCTAD (2020 October 08) COVID-19 has changed online shopping forever survey

Retrieved from https://unctad.org/news/covid-19-has-changed-online-shopping-

forever-survey-shows.
UNESCO International Bureau of Education. 2020. Some Implications of COVID‐19 for
Remote Learning and the Future of Schooling.
https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000373229 (May 28, 2020).
UNESCO. (2015, August 10). Outcome Document of the “Connecting The Dots: Options
For Future Action” Conference. 38 C/53. Paris: United Nations Educational,
Scientifioc, and Cultural Organization. Retrieved from http://wayback.archive-
it.org/10611/20170329043157/http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0023/002340/23
4090e.pdf
World Bank. (2020). Trade (% of GDP). Retrieved from
https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NE.TRD.GNFS.ZS
World Bank. (2018). Growth And Productivity In The Philippines: Winning The Future.
Washington, D.C: World Bank. Retrieved from World Bank website:
http://hdl.handle.net/10986/30450
World Bank. (2020). Worldwide Governance Indicators.
https://databank.worldbank.org/source/worldwide-governance-indicators#
World Economic Forum. (2020, May 15). How the great COVID-19 reset can help firms
build a sustainable future. World Economic Forum.
https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2020/05/the-covid-19-reset-sustainability
World Health Organization, UN, UNICEF, UNDP, UNESCO, UNAIDS, ITU, UN
Global Pulse, and IFRC (2020). Managing the COVID-19 infodemic: Promoting
healthy behaviours and mitigating the harm from misinformation and
disinformation. (2020, September 20). World Health Organization.
https://www.who.int/news/item/23-09-2020-managing-the-covid-19-infodemic-
promoting-healthy-behaviours-and-mitigating-the-harm-from-misinformation-
and-disinformation
World Resources Institute. (2020, May 20). 8 Ways to Rebuild a Stronger Ocean
Economy After COVID-19. World Resources Institute Blog.
https://www.wri.org/blog/2020/05/coronavirus-resilient-ocean-economy
Yumol, D. T. (2020, May 21). DOLE estimates 10 million workers will lose jobs this year
due to COVID-19 pandemic. CNN Philippines.
https://www.cnn.ph/news/2020/5/21/dole-estimates-ten-million-workers-will-
lose-jobs-covid-pandemic.html
+AMDG

ASOG WORKING PAPER 21-004 20

This preprint research paper has not been peer reviewed. Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3769833
Citations (2) References (37)

The World Trade Organization and the Digital Economy Partnership Agreement: Analog Trade Rules in a Digital
Era

Chapter Jan 2022

Li Sheng

View Show abstract

The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on digital globalization

Article Full-text available Jan 2021

Maria Loredana Popescu · Svetlana Platagea Gombos · Sorin Burlacu · Amza Mair

View Show abstract

 Recommended publications Discover more about: COVID-19

Article Full-text available Article Full-text available

COVID-19 Pandemic and Its Impact on Indian and SARS-CoV-2: A virus that is shaking the world
Global Economies September 2020 · Journal of KIST Medical College
September 2020
P Ravi Shankar
Sundaram Ravichandran
The coronavirus disease-19 and the causative virus, SARS-CoV-2 has
had a profound impact globally during the year 2020. The virus has
View full-text
spread to over 213 countries and has created a climate of fear and
uncertainty. In this article the author reflects on the pandemic, its
effects and also the impact of measures to contain the virus.

View full-text

Article Article Full-text available

Covid-19 Economic Turbulence and Governments
Stimulus Package: A Quest for Survival as Global
Recess...
April 2020 · The International Journal of Business & Management
Abubakar Umar · Anene Nduka · Abba Mustapha
Mohammad · [...] · Mubarak Umar
This paper demonstrates the essential role various governments are
playing to stimulate their economy within the framework of COVID-19
in the 1st Quarter of 2020 with more than a million people in over 205
countries and 2 international conveyance infected as at April 2020.
The paper centers around governments’ expenditure to drive
containment and encourage employee retention as economies head
... [Show full abstract]
Während, nach und wegen der COVID-19 Krise: Die
Welt neu denken
December 2020
Werner Wintersteiner
Dieser Text plädiert, auch als Konsequenz der Corona-Krise, für eine
große gesellschaftliche Transformation, für die ein begleitender
Bewusstseinswandel Voraussetzung ist. Dieser lässt sich mit den drei
Leitbegriffen Global Citizenship, globale Gerechtigkeit und planetare
Schicksalsgemeinschaft umschreiben. Welche Lernchancen und
welche Lernhindernisse gibt es für eine derartige planetare ... [Show
full abstract]
View full-text

Read more

Company Support Business solutions

About us Help Center Advertising

News Recruiting

Careers

© 2008-2023 ResearchGate GmbH. All rights reserved. Terms · Privacy · Copyright · Imprint