Revision summary
NIEO 1974 demanded fairer trade, finance, and technology for the South. Globalisation produced growth for some and locked unequal rules for many. WTO S&DT, IMF quotas, and climate finance are the living agenda. BRICS and new banks are institutional substitutes for a UN-commanded order. China’s dual role and market facts make a pure 1974 replay impossible.
Model answer
Introduction
The New International Economic Order was demanded by the G77 in UN General Assembly resolutions of 1974. It asked for fairer trade, technology, and finance for the South. Globalisation did not cancel that demand. It changed the instruments.
Body
What NIEO asked
- Sovereign control over resources, better commodity terms, more aid, technology transfer, and a larger voice in the IMF and World Bank.
- UNCTAD and the Prebisch lineage supplied the diagnosis of unequal exchange.
- Wallerstein’s world-system reading is harsher: the core will not gift a new order; conflict over surplus is normal.
What globalisation did
- Some East Asian and Indian growth showed that insertion into trade can raise incomes. That is the liberal reply.
- TRIPS, financial crises, tax havens, and farm subsidies in rich States showed that rules still tilt. That is why Stiglitz and UNCTAD still sound like 1974 on different files.
- The WTO replaced much of the old NIEO bargaining table. Special and differential treatment fights, including fisheries, are NIEO in committee language.
Present relevance
- Voice: BRICS, the New Development Bank, Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank, and IMF quota debates are institutional NIEO by other means.
- Justice: climate finance, loss and damage, and vaccine equity replay technology and resource claims.
- Food and energy shocks after 2022 revived commodity politics that 1974 knew well.
- Digital public goods, data localisation, and platform taxes are new NIEO chapters that the 1974 text did not name.
What is obsolete
- A UNGA resolution cannot command markets. Cartel power like 1970s oil is rare for most commodities.
- South–South gaps: China is both a developing-member claimant and a core manufacturer. The old G77 unity is thinner.
Balanced claim
- The spirit of NIEO—policy space, fairer rules, and Southern voice—is live. The letter of 1974 state-managed prices is not the working programme.
Flow diagram
flowchart TD N[NIEO 1974 G77] --> V[Voice and policy space] G[Globalisation WTO] --> R[Rules still tilted] V --> T[BRICS climate digital] R --> T
Conclusion
- NIEO remains relevant as a justice claim inside globalisation: rules, finance, technology, and climate. It is less relevant as a single UN command economy. Today’s means are WTO bargaining, BRICS finance, and climate funds, not a replay of 1974 resolutions alone.
Quick related
Students also ask
-
Critically examine the major factors responsible for a turnaround in the trajectory of India's foreign policy in the post-cold war period
Next question in the 2022 paper (Q6). View answer →
-
Did globalisation kill NIEO?
It killed the hope of a UN price-and-quota world. It did not kill the demand for fairer rules and voice.
-
Is India still an NIEO voice?
Yes, on WTO agriculture, fisheries S&DT, and climate finance, while also seeking Northern markets and technology.
PYQ trend
When UPSC asked this
Related PYQs from other years, newest first. Open a question to read it.
More from this paper
Q1(a) · UPSC Mains 2022 · PSIR GS 2 · 10 marks
Discuss the main limitations of the comparative method to the study of Political Science.
Comparative Politics
Comparison substitutes for experiment, as Lijphart argued. Mill’s designs fail when variables outnumber cases. Galton’s problem and conceptual stretching are standing limits. Official data and Eurocentric concepts add political distortion. The method is disciplined inference, not a controlled trial.
Q1(b) · UPSC Mains 2022 · PSIR GS 2 · 10 marks
What are the main challenges faced by the developing countries in the era of globalisation?
Globalisation
Globalisation opens markets and tightens external rules. Wallerstein’s hierarchy and Prebisch’s trade concern still describe many late developers. Capital flight, TRIPS, and farm subsidies in the North cut policy space. Inequality, informality, and climate costs are domestic faces of the same pressure. Regional and South–South bargains are the usual reply, not autarky.
Q1(c) · UPSC Mains 2022 · PSIR GS 2 · 10 marks
Discuss the commonalities between the Marxist and Realist approach to the study of International Politics.
Approaches to the Study of International Relations
Both approaches deny that trade and law automatically pacify world politics. Carr’s critique of utopia feeds realist and Marxist readings. Morgenthau and Waltz stress State power; Lenin and Wallerstein stress capital and hierarchy. Institutions are treated as masks or tools, not as a world government in waiting. The commonality is conflictual materialism; the split is State versus class.
Toppers' copies
Toppers' copies for this question will be uploaded soon.