Globalization and Economic Development: A Study of Nagaland

  • Komol Singha
Keywords: international trade, North East India, distance, Nagaland, Economic Development


With the emergence of globalization, economic integration among nations has become a necessity. Cross border trade is the most important medium of the current wave of globalization. In this process, knowingly or unknowingly the North East economy has emerged in to a new dimension of cross border trade (informal trade) with neighboring nations and that increases Social Welfare of the poor masses of the region. But the formal arrangements, like ‘Look East Policy’ stumbles the social welfare of the region. Border trade is the first and foremost important component of globalization and informal trade is multiple times more than the formal trade in this region. By this process, sustainable development is generated and it is visible now in this region. With the help of primary and secondary data, this paper tries to analyze the impact of globalization or cross border trade in the North East India (NEI). How far this globalization through cross border trade increases social welfare or generates sustainable economic development of the region is the core issue of this paper. For this purpose, the author has selected Nagaland as an area of study. Of late, the Government has initiated several pro-active measures to strengthen its economic growth further. In this direction, India’s Look East Policy is worth mentioning. Under this policy, India seeks economic cooperation with ASEAN and other neighbouring countries through the gateway of the North-Eastern Region. Despite initiatives of economic development, still the process is not heading towards the right direction. There are some institutional lacunae in this process. This paper is the modest attempt to highlight these lacunae and tries to recommend some feasible suggestions to overcome in this direction.
How to Cite
Singha, K. (2010). Globalization and Economic Development: A Study of Nagaland. Journal of Global Economy, 6(3), 199-211. Retrieved from