ABSTRACT
In advanced economies, globalization and technological change are blamed for rising inequality while in emerging economies globalization and tech change are credited with lifting millions out of poverty. In the US and UK, inequality has grown steeply over past decades while in Nordic European countries inequality has increased only marginally. The same variables, tech change and globalization, yield widely different processes and outcomes of inequality. The disparities reflect different initial conditions and different institutions, so it follows (a) goldilocks globalization has changed place and (b) it’s the institutions, stupid! In China, poverty is accepted (it’s still a developing country) but inequality is not (it undercuts the legitimacy of the party). In India, inequality is accepted but poverty is not (it is a blight on national pride). Instead of a generalizing macro approach that focuses on global trends and global perspectives, we need multicentric perspectives that are attuned to diverse initial conditions, different institutions and cultures of inequality, which means a fundamental shift in the conversation. General trends (such as globalization and tech change) affect different conditions in different ways.
