Without developing the point at length here, the short answer is that there are numerous opportunities for selective involvement at the regional level. Providing investment guarantees and infrastructure-building projects for such regions would be especially desirable. The main rule of thumb should be that officially sanctioned investment projects are conducted by, and at the behest of, local actors in the regions themselves. Despite the tenor of the preceding comments, it is important not to treat globalization in a glib and Panglossian manner. Neoliberalism contains contradictions that often require difficult value tradeoffs, and globalization carries a variety of potentially detrimental effects.
Capital flows can be hugely disruptive and socially punitive.
Other dangers include the loss of traditional sources of social cohesion and meaning, the loss of cultural diversity, and the emergence of reactionary social and political backlashes. While grappling with its problems, it is equally important not to demonize globalization. There are innumerable local responses to and interpretations of globalization, which in many respects ease the numbing sameness of its social and cultural outcomes. Thus while homogeneity does tend to arise, it is often interwoven with a subtle fabric of innovation in traditions, norms, and institutions. The threat to cultural diversity is real, but should not be overstated.