Dani Rodrik's paper, "Populism and the Economics of Globalization," explores the rise of populism in advanced stages of economic globalization. The author argues that while the political backlash to globalization was predictable, the specific forms it took—left-wing and right-wing variants—were less so. Left-wing populism, prevalent in Latin America, emphasizes societal cleavages, while right-wing populism, more common in Europe, focuses on economic issues. The paper examines the economic roots of populism, including the role of trade liberalization and financial globalization, and discusses the distributive consequences of these policies. It highlights the importance of compensation and safety nets in mitigating the negative impacts of globalization, but notes the challenges in implementing effective measures. The paper also delves into the fairness concerns that underpin populist movements, particularly when international competition involves practices that violate domestic norms or social understandings. Finally, it critiques the ambiguous stance of economists on financial globalization, suggesting that it can accentuate the weaknesses of domestic institutions and lead to adverse effects.Dani Rodrik's paper, "Populism and the Economics of Globalization," explores the rise of populism in advanced stages of economic globalization. The author argues that while the political backlash to globalization was predictable, the specific forms it took—left-wing and right-wing variants—were less so. Left-wing populism, prevalent in Latin America, emphasizes societal cleavages, while right-wing populism, more common in Europe, focuses on economic issues. The paper examines the economic roots of populism, including the role of trade liberalization and financial globalization, and discusses the distributive consequences of these policies. It highlights the importance of compensation and safety nets in mitigating the negative impacts of globalization, but notes the challenges in implementing effective measures. The paper also delves into the fairness concerns that underpin populist movements, particularly when international competition involves practices that violate domestic norms or social understandings. Finally, it critiques the ambiguous stance of economists on financial globalization, suggesting that it can accentuate the weaknesses of domestic institutions and lead to adverse effects.