This sceptical mood is also, of course, reflected in many conclusions of the Trade and Development Board and innumerable other international assemblies both within and outside the United Nations system. As the full implications of a globalised economy become more apparent, it becomes ever more evident that many of the functions of government, in particular the supply of public goods and the pursuit of social objectives, will somehow have to be undertaken at the global level. Yet there is nothing remotely resembling a global government . Nor is there one visible on any reasonable time horizon. So, probably, will international sector codes and standards, introduced on a voluntary basis, and, in some instances, hybrid private public arrangements to achieve the same ends.
Market forces are powerful, and can be so for good.
Markets may be important and market incentives can indeed be powerful, but they are neither all-pervasive, nor do they solve all problems. In their proper context, with appropriate safeguards and institutions, markets and their incentives can do much good. It is also, of course, well-known that great harm can be done when governments try to replace or outdo markets in circumstances where they do not have the capacity effectively to do so. The trick for society, both at the national and at the global level, is to harness the power of markets in the social interest. That, and not the defence, or attempts at the perfection , of markets, through thick and thin, has been the traditional role of the economist.