Globalization’s mobility gap: capital crosses borders easily, people still can’t

Globalization’s mobility gap: capital crosses borders easily, people still can’t | Photo: Agus Dietrich

By Patrick Lumumba

Researcher and policy analyst

The great global paradox

In today’s global order, money travels at unprecedented speed. Trillions of dollars move daily through global financial markets, supply chains span continents, and multinational corporations function smoothly across jurisdictions. Yet for millions of people, crossing those same borders remains an almost impossible task.

The World Bank reports that global foreign direct investment flows have exceeded $1.3 trillion in recent years, while the number of international migrants worldwide is around 280 million—only 3.6% of the global population. This disparity highlights a defining paradox of modern globalization: capital is global, but people are not.

The liberalization of capital

Over the last four decades, globalization has been driven by policies designed to promote the free movement of capital. International financial institutions have pushed deregulation, market openness, and investor-friendly conditions, especially across developing economies.

Today, more than 90% of countries actively compete for foreign investment through tax incentives and looser regulatory frameworks. Capital can enter, depart, and relocate with striking ease, often without lasting commitments to local communities.

This model rewards speed and flexibility—advantages capital holds in abundance. People, by contrast, remain limited by borders, paperwork, and political authorization.

The restriction of human mobility

As capital mobility has grown, migration policies have become increasingly restrictive. United Nations data indicates that nearly 75% of the world’s migrants reside in just 20% of countries, showing how mobility opportunities are concentrated in a small number of destinations.

Meanwhile, visa regimes have become more complicated. Citizens of high-income countries can access over 75% of the world visa-free, while many Global South passport holders face heavy constraints, lengthy processing times, and high rejection rates.

This is especially ironic given demographic change and labor shortages in many advanced economies. The OECD estimates that by 2030, high-income countries will face major gaps in healthcare, construction, and caregiving—sectors often staffed by migrants.

A hierarchy of passports

Mobility in the global system follows a clear hierarchy. Passport strength is closely tied to national income, geopolitical influence, and historical power.

This hierarchy is not random. It reflects centuries of unequal global integration, shaped by colonial and post-colonial structures that determined who could move freely and who could not. In many respects, globalization has reinforced these inequalities rather than dismantling them.

The human cost of selective globalization

Restrictive mobility does not end migration; it makes movement more dangerous. The International Organization for Migration reports that thousands of migrants die each year attempting irregular crossings through deserts, seas, and militarized borders.

Remittances—money sent home by migrants—reveal another reality. In 2023, global remittances to low- and middle-income countries exceeded $650 billion, surpassing foreign aid and, in some cases, foreign direct investment. Migrants are not a burden; they are a pillar of global economic stability.

Yet they remain among the least protected actors in the global economy.

Global governance and the missing people

Unlike trade and finance, migration lacks a binding global governance framework. There is no enforceable international system guaranteeing mobility rights, mutual recognition of skills, or fair treatment for migrant workers.

Most global migration agreements remain voluntary, allowing states to prioritize domestic politics over shared responsibility. The result is a globalization that advances economically while stalling socially.

Rethinking globalization

A more balanced globalization would treat mobility as a development tool, not a threat. Expanding legal migration pathways, aligning skills recognition, and safeguarding migrant rights would strengthen—not weaken—global economic resilience.

Evidence consistently shows that migrants contribute more through taxes and productivity than they receive in public benefits, particularly over the long term. The issue is not migration itself, but the failure to govern it cooperatively.

Globalization without mobility is incomplete and unstable. A system that enables capital to move freely while confining people to unequal geographies risks worsening inequality and fueling political backlash.

If globalization is to benefit global society, it must evolve beyond markets alone. A truly global order is one where opportunity is not determined by birthplace, and where people are recognized not as barriers to globalization, but as its most essential participants.