In the economic sphere, the most recent phase of globalization ischaracterized by mass, real-time access to information; the global planning of productionby transnational corporations; the spread of free trade, although still limited by manyforms of protectionism in the industrial world; the contradictory combination of a highdegree of capital mobility with tight restrictions on labour migration; the increasingenvironmental vulnerability and interdependence; and an unprecedented trend towardsinstitutional homogenization.

But globalization it is not driven by economic factors alone. One of itsdimensions, which ECLAC has denominated the 'globalization ofvalues', involves the gradual spread of shared ethical principles, which arereflected most clearly in the principles endorsed at United Nations World Summits. Theseprocesses are the product of a long history of international civil society movementsadvocating human rights, social equity, equality for women, environmental protection and,more recently, the 'globalization of solidarity' and the 'right to bedifferent'.

The greatest paradox in this process is that there has been nocorresponding trend towards political internationalization. The contrast between worldwideproblems and national political processes has resulted in a lack of global governancewhich has heightened the tension between the opportunities and risks generated byglobalization. The only reasonable response is to adopt a proactive agenda, since historyshows that efforts to simply resist processes whose roots run so deep will inevitably failin the end. The aim of such agenda should be to create a better institutional structurethat will ensure that globalization becomes a positive force for all the world'speople.

'...history shows that efforts to simply resist processes whose roots run so deep will inevitably fail in the end.' With that goal in mind, ECLAC underscores in its documentGlobalization and Development, that progress must be madetowards three objectives:

Guaranteeing an adequate supply of public goods or, more precisely, global public services;

Progressively correcting the sharp asymmetries existing in the world economic order; and

Gradually building a rights-based international social agenda.

The achievement of these objectives must be based on a virtuous circle ofcomplementary global, regional and national institution-building - that is, on a networkof institutions rather than a handful of global agencies. This type of arrangement is moreefficient and balanced in terms of power relationships. Institutional schemes must also berespectful of diversity. This is the only principle that is consistent with efforts topromote democracy worldwide. Such efforts are meaningless unless national representativeand participatory processes are allowed to influence the definition of developmentstrategies and to mediate the tensions inherent in the globalization process. Lastly, theinternational order must guarantee the equitable participation of the developing countriesand establish appropriate rules of governance.

Two concepts that have been extensively used in recent internationaldebates as basic criteria for restructuring the institutional global order. The first oneis the 'level playing field', which has guided efforts to shape theinternational economic order. The second is the principle of 'common butdifferentiated responsibilities', as set forth at the Earth Summitin Rio de Janeiro in 1992. In a world so fraught with inequality as ours, the applicationof the first of these concepts may perpetuate or even accentuate the global order'sexisting asymmetries and inequalities. Thus, this second principle stands out as the basicconcept to face the new challenges of globalization.