To solve this issue, we see an increasing role for economic diplomacy. Domestic policy influences the economies of trading partners, which should remind us that all countries are in this together and therefore need to work jointly to find a solution in the G20, International Monetary Fund (IMF), EU or any other multilateral framework that offers the opportunity to ensure strong, balanced and sustainable growth. 20 20. See P.A.G. van Bergeijk, On the Brink of Deglobalization: An Alternative Perspective on the Causes of the World Trade Collapse (Cheltenham: Edward Elgar, 2010); and S.J. Evenett, B.M. Hoekman and O. Cattaneo (eds), The Fateful Allure of Protectionism: Taking Stock for the G8 (London: World Bank and CEPR, 2009).

Veronica Rappoport of Columbia University published a 2+ page review in the  Journal of Economic Literature. Vol. XLIX (September 2011), 747-9  The review is highly critical and thus recommended for further reading:  ... he consciously  maintains an intuitive analysis, avoiding overtheoretical  arguments and overlooking thoroughness  in favor of clarity in the empirical sections. This  goal is not always achieved; important points are  often ignored or lost in spurious details, and the  most up-to-date evidence is either absent or misrepresented.  As a result, this book fails to serve  as a survey on the empirical work on the Great  Trade Collapse or as a bridge between scholarly  work and the general audience. The review gives three concrete examples of literature that was not included: Chor, Davin, and Kalina Manova. 2010. “Off the Cliff  and Back? Credit Conditions and International  Trade during the Global...

For example, 43% of respondents to the Eurobarometer public opinion surveys published by the European Commission in autumn 2008 think that globalization represents a threat to employment and companies in the European Union (European Commission, 2008). This negative feeling combined with the 2008 financial crisis led to fears of new protectionism (van Bergeijk, 2010).

The one is not enough paper that attacks the consensus view explaining that that consensus is right for the 1930s but wrong for the 2000s was presented at the European Historical Economics Society (Dublin September 2011) and the INFER workshop on the Economic History of Globalization  (Leuven, October 2011)

We ignore the negative effect of a global recession on a small open economy's exports, to keep things simple, and because this does not bear on our qualitative results. Van Bergeijk (2009) provides a quantification of this channel by looking at how major post 1980 financial crises affected import volumes of individual economies.