According to Friedberg, in his article about the future of globalization, what does “hegemonic stability theory” tell us about the global economy?
The correct answer and explanation is:
Correct Answer:
According to Friedberg, hegemonic stability theory suggests that the global economy functions best when a single, dominant power—usually a hegemon—provides the leadership and stability necessary to maintain an open and orderly international economic system.
300-Word Explanation:
In his article on the future of globalization, Aaron Friedberg refers to hegemonic stability theory to explain the conditions under which the global economy thrives. This theory, widely discussed in international relations and political economy, posits that the world economy operates more smoothly and predictably when there is a clear and dominant power—typically a hegemon—that is capable and willing to enforce rules, provide public goods (like open trade routes or a stable currency), and discourage destabilizing behavior by other states.
Friedberg applies this theory in the context of American leadership after World War II. The United States, as the postwar hegemon, took on the role of economic stabilizer. It supported institutions like the International Monetary Fund (IMF), the World Bank, and the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT), which later evolved into the World Trade Organization (WTO). These institutions helped create and maintain the liberal international economic order that underpinned globalization. The U.S. provided security, maintained relatively open markets, and upheld the rules of the economic system.
Friedberg warns that as U.S. dominance declines and rivals like China rise—especially if they do not share the same commitment to an open, rules-based order—the global economy may face more instability. Without a willing and able hegemon, international cooperation could deteriorate, leading to protectionism, regional fragmentation, or even economic conflict.
Thus, hegemonic stability theory, as used by Friedberg, underscores the idea that globalization’s success depends not just on market forces, but also on geopolitical leadership. The future of globalization may hinge on whether another power can—or will—take on the stabilizing role the U.S. once played, or whether multipolarity will lead to disorder.