I was watching a documentary on the Earth last week and the writers pointed out the development of trade routes between "the East" and "the West" significantly altered the course of civilization.
Indeed, in human history, the evolution of trade has been a major driving force in economic development.
As hunter/gatherers, we were dependent exclusively on our local surroundings for resources. For thousands of years, if you wanted a particular fruit or type of wood, you had to find a source and gather the material yourself.
With the development of agriculture in Mesopotamia and the rise of the city state, humanity moved to using trade as a mechanism to obtain goods and services. Farmers would bring produce to market in exchange for manufactured goods made in the city or material imported from elsewhere.
As city states grew in size and power, two major events in the development of our civilization occurred. The first was the rise of an army intended to defend against outside aggression.
The citizenry paid for such services in the form of taxes.
The second was a leisure class which had time to provide advancements outside of day to day necessities. One could argue the melding of the army and leisure class eventually gave rise to government and religion.
In any case, the driver for these developments was trade. Developing trade routes, expanding trade options and opening up new markets for products formed the basis for our modern economic system.
It was even trade which drove Christopher Columbus across the ocean. He wasn't searching for new lands. He was seeking a quicker route to old lands - the Asian continent. He just happened to run into the Americas along the way, which led to the development of new trade routes and options.
For much of our history, we have traded for goods and services not available locally. Foodstuffs were brought back from the Americas to Europe, such as potatoes, tomatoes and corn. Silk was imported from China and spices from the East Indies. Breadfruit was spread around the world.
But some of the crops shifted from one continent to another. For example, wheat became a staple of the prairies while the common potato was imported to Ireland.
Local goods began to compete with imports and trade wars began.
One could make the argument most wars have some form of trade at their origin. More damaging were the economic wars which raged in the early part of the 20th Century. Protectionism and isolationism left some countries internally dependent while others were economically devastated.
Consider, for example, the development of Cuba post-trade embargo with the United States. In many ways, Cuba has been stifled for years while in other ways it has prospered. In any case, trade had a significant impact.
Over the past 50 years, the world has collectively tried to move forward on trade issues. The European Union was founded on the principle there should be no internal economic barriers to trade amongst the member countries.
The Free Trade Agreement was struck as a way for the United States and Canada to form closer economic ties while eliminating tariffs and restrictions to the flow of goods and people across the border. Then NAFTA extended the trading zone to include Mexico.
At the same time, we saw the rise of organizations such as the WTO and agreements such as GATT. More recently, we have the TPP and CETA - both major trading deals which would create blocks of trading partners hundreds of millions strong.
We are trading creatures and in that context, these agreements would seem to make sense.
But we are also concerned about our local economies. How does a rice farmer in the Lower Mainland compete when rice can be grown in Asia more efficiently for a fraction of the price?
How does a catfish industry in the southern United States compete with fish farming in Vietnam? How does an Australian aluminum industry out-compete a Kitimat smelter?
With the facility with which we can move goods around the world, local is increasingly becoming the whole planet. And our neighbours are having trouble competing in all but place-based industries. Even service industries are finding homes based on the lowest labour costs rather than the locale.
All of this leads to the collapse of the negotiations around CETA. An internal feud within Belgium looks as if it will skewer the deal.
Farmers in one region are increasingly worried about their ability to compete in a global market or, more accurately, with Canadian farmers. They want protection.
Add to this the Brexit and the growing protectionism in the United States and it looks as though the heady days of free and open trade around the world will not be realized. What that will do to the world's economy remains to be seen.
