The 26th lecture of the “Adventus Amicorum” salon series was held on May 24, 2024 by Peking University’s Institute of Area Studies (PKUIAS), during which Prof. Jean-Marc Coicaud, distinguished professor of Law and Global Affairs, Rutgers School of Law, New Jersey, and a fellow of Academia Europaea, shared his thoughts on the topic, “Globalization in Question and the Future of its Legitimacy.” The lecture was moderated by Zhang Yongle, deputy director of PKUIAS. Other participants included Prof. Zan Tao, deputy director of PKUIAS; Prof. Wei Nanzhi, director of the Institute of American Studies of the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences; Marc Uzan, executive director and founder of the Reinventing Bretton Woods Committee; Cao Wenjiao, lecturer at the Department of International Law, China Foreign Affairs University; and Lin Zhaoran, postdoctoral fellow, Peking University Institute of Ocean Research.

Before introducing the key themes of his presentation, Prof. Jean-Marc Coicaud made it clear that his presentation would be based on ideas in his forthcoming book, The Law and Politics of International Legitimacy. He emphasized that it is useful to think about the nature and evolution of the international system through the angle of international law, but it is far from enough. It is also necessary to include the economic and political aspects of the international order in the contemporary context. Therefore, it is necessary to discuss globalization and legitimacy together. In this sense, it is very important to think about the role of globalization today. Generally speaking, legitimacy refers to the recognition of governance rights, which is related to the establishment of policies, institutions, principles, standards, values, and other factors. Globalization has influenced and even shaped the political, economic and social life of various countries in the past four decades. Today, globalization, or at least Western globalization, is facing a legitimacy crisis. In Europe and the US, more and more people are beginning to question the contribution of globalization and its legitimacy.

Based on this, Prof. Coicaud’s lecture started from three aspects: the historical form of globalization, the price that globalization has brought to the West and other countries in the past few decades, and the structural challenges facing globalization and future prospects.

Prof. Coicaud pointed out that globalization is not a new phenomenon. If we define globalization as a process that includes economy, norms, control, information and all kinds of flows, then globalization has been around for a long time and its form has been constantly changing. Coicaud described and evaluated the form of globalization from four dimensions: spatiality, density, speed, and impact. According to these four dimensions, he established a priority of historical forms of globalization, namely, premodern globalization (prior to the 15th century), early modern globalization (1500–1800), modern industrial globalization (1800–1945), post-World War II globalization (1945–1980s), hyper-globalization (1980s–2010s), and new globalization (2010s–?).

Prof. Coicaud then introduced the definition, impact and cost of hyper-globalization. The concept of hyper-globalization first appear in the 2011 work of Dani Rodrik, an economist and professor of international political economy at the Kennedy School of Government at Harvard University, who described it in his book The Globalization Paradox. Broadly speaking, hyper-globalization is an expression or embodiment of neoliberal views, rules and policies, often described as a typical example of the Washington Consensus, close to the fundamentalist approach of the free market. In the context of neoliberalism, hyper-globalization has reached historical highs in terms of spatiality, density, speed and impact.

In the past four decades, “hyper-globalization” has brought positive impacts to Western countries, but in recent years, the impact of globalization on Western countries has become increasingly negative, which has also led to a legitimacy crisis for globalization in the West. The West is facing five major costs brought about by “hyper globalization,” namely economic costs, social costs, political costs, geopolitical costs and reputational costs.

Finally, Prof. Coicaud said that the development of scientific and technological innovation and the need to overcome the legitimacy crisis of globalization will promote the emergence of a more reasonable new form of globalization, so globalization must change. To design these changes, we can try to build a better research framework for globalization and re-understand economic growth. The problems that globalization is facing are also China’s problems. Thinking about a better form of globalization is also necessary for the development of relations between China and the West. Common interests and common foundations are destined to be the core of the legitimacy of globalization in the future. Under this premise, China can play an important role globally. Although competition is an important feature of globalization, this competition is not unrestrained. Ideally, wealth and economic wealth should become a tool to promote social and economic inclusion, so that people can communicate freely with each other. Therefore, if we want a safe and stable international order, we must ensure fairness and justice between and within societies as much as possible, which is the goal of legitimate globalization.

Entering the discussion session, the teachers and students at the meeting had an in-depth exchange and discussion with Prof. Coicaud on the content of the lecture. Zhang Yongle thanked the professor for his good introduction to the discussion of globalization and raised questions about the current globalization narrative in the US. Wei Nanzhi focused on the recent tragic narrative of globalization in the US and explored the responsibility of the US itself for the unexpected consequences of globalization. At the same time, Wei Nanzhi also proposed how to think about the value of people in the discussion of globalization and the leadership of the global market. Marc Uzan supplemented Wei Nanzhi’s comments and pointed out that the Eastern perspective is very important in the discussion of globalization. Since China joined the WTO, it has been actively participating in the wave of globalization. In recent years, China has also been working hard to build a new global governance system. Especially in the field of climate, China has become a major leading force. In the future, China will also play a more important bridge role in the development of new forms of globalization. Chen Yifeng proposed from the perspective of distinguishing the actual impact of globalization from narratives that whether this crisis is the actual result of globalization or the actual result of relaxing the regulation of the US financial market, and whether globalization has become a scapegoat for many problems in the US regulatory system, are issues that we need to be vigilant about. When thinking about China’s role in globalization, it is inappropriate to adopt the set of standards established by the US. Zan Tao pointed out from a historical perspective that the examination of the historical form of globalization should adhere to a longer period of perspective. It is not China and other factors that drive “super-globalization,” and globalization is not the basis of today’s crisis, but capitalism. After the fifteenth century, capitalism became an important factor in shaping the world. When we discuss the future, we should start from the fifteenth century, not the 1980s. Cao Wenjiao engaged in a detailed discussion with Prof. Coicaud on the significance of new growth areas and development paradigm shifts to the development of globalization and China’s role in them. Lin Zhaoran had an in-depth discussion with Coicaud on the left-right opposition hidden behind globalization and the contribution of a community with a shared future for mankind. Prof. Coicaud responded positively to the above discussions one by one.