The “uneasy resilience” of global trade, with Rebeca Grynspan

Listen to this podcast in Spanish on your favorite platform.

In this episode of Do Better Podcast, marking the 15th anniversary of EsadeGeo—the Esade Center for Global Economy and Geopolitics—the Secretary-General of the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development and candidate for UN Secretary-General, Rebeca Grynspan, analyzes the current state of global trade, shaped by geopolitical, monetary, and financial uncertainty. The episode is hosted by Professor Angel Saz-Carranza, Director of EsadeGeo.

International trade: expanding?

Despite the bleak outlook it faced in 2025, global trade has displayed what Grynspan calls an “uneasy resilience,” driven by unexpected growth stemming from two main factors.

1. First, the absence of an open tariff war. Tariffs have increased and caused major disruptions to current trade flows, but the worst-case scenario has been avoided, largely thanks to negotiations between the United States and China.
2. Second, several positive structural elements in trade are asserting themselves with considerable force:

• While the flow of goods has not increased, trade in services has. Because services were not subject to tariffs, they have expanded rapidly.
• The rise of South–South trade, which has grown by 9% year over year—more than double the rate of global trade growth—leading to a decentralization of trade toward multiple hubs across the Global South.
• Growth driven by the AI industry, which requires investment and trade networks to bring projects to fruition.

This complex backdrop raises the question of whether the current situation is here to stay or merely a transitional phase. “Trade uncertainty has become the highest tariff,” Grynspan notes. That uncertainty affects investment, planning, and decision-making by governments, investment funds, and companies alike. If it persists, a future weakening of global trade is likely.

A multipolar trading system facing a unipolar monetary order

Grynspan points to a fundamental paradox: trade is highly multipolar, yet the global financial system is essentially unipolar, heavily centered on the West—particularly the United States and the dollar. This imbalance creates several challenges:

• Developing countries have little integration into monetary markets.
• Dependence on the dollar exposes economies to volatility, recession, and sharp fluctuations in interest rates.
• Countries in the Global South bear the consequences of trade and financial policies without having influence over them.

“We need a monetary system that supports better the real economy, because we are witnessing the financialization of trade,” Grynspan explains. The growing use of financial instruments in trade highlights the need for change and reveals a lack of international coordination in times of instability. “There should be a system, at both regional and global levels, that can better coordinate the situation to avoid these kinds of risks.”

The challenge of governing trade in a fragmented order

Because of limited progress at the multilateral level—particularly in emerging areas such as e-commerce—alternative mechanisms are emerging to fill institutional gaps. This process can have both positive and negative effects: it offers more agile solutions, but it also increases the risks associated with fragmentation of the global trading system.

The World Trade Organization (WTO) is under scrutiny, mainly because of rules that have disadvantaged developing countries and the failure of the Doha Round, which sought to facilitate greater access to trade for those economies. The United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD) considers it essential to preserve a common regulatory framework, as without multilateral rules, small and medium-sized countries are left exposed in a landscape dominated by major powers.

In the current context, the key question is whether the next Ministerial Conference will be able to reach substantive agreements. “The United States has already put forward proposals involving significant changes to the traditional principles that have guided international trade,” Grynspan observes—a development that adds further uncertainty to the future of global trade governance.