Globalization is the ultimate stage of this process opening up domestic economies by reducing protection, increasing foreign trade and liberalizing the flow of foreign investments. The world as a whole benefits from this; but there can be, and there are, losses to some. While companies in major, powerful, and rich countries can gain investment in poor countries, the local people may suffer. The influx of foreign capital can eas ily damage or destroy the existing local industry and agriculture. It is a specific case of an extremely wide income distribution producing a poor market solution in this case on the global scale- the market operates to supply what is demanded by those with the money to spend. So with globalization many of those living in richer countries (including their poor) gain; the world as a whole is better off; but this is scant consolation to those in poor countries who may suffer. There are often the poorest of the poor. Is globalization acceptable? Is it fair or just?...

The John Williamson was develop the idea of Washington Consensus. As originally he hasn't formulated this for policy prescription for development. However, this gave great policy departure for contemporary development landscape. He has prescribed policy or trinity strategy for economy in transition. He gave emphasized on privatization, liberalization and stabilization. The Writer ignore limitation of privatization liberalization and stabilization such as information asymmetr y, highly affect by externalities, power resource base, role of private sector on social development has been limited etc. In my opinion, this policy have useful for Latin American countries like Argentina but not so useful for South Asian counties like Nepal. I think for Nepal that type of policy will be work which more focuses on the area of comparative advantage with the cooperation and partnership between public and private sector that compatible in our social and cultural dynamics.