Ever since the first power looms put weavers out of work in the late 18th century, technology has increased productivity but threatened jobs for humans.

Predictably, open markets made it possible for countries to drive rapid growth by hitching their wagon to the world economy and using global demand to pull people and resources out of subsistence activities into more productive work.

I think that when voters react negatively to trade and investment, they are really expressing their angst about the pace of technological change.

Look at a map of the world: the countries which do not trade much, or which trade only in oil and gas, tend to be in regions which suffer the most social and political instability.

Trade and investment are good for innovation - open economies allow new ideas and technologies to diffuse more quickly from wherever they are created.

In a climate where governments are limited in what they can spend, trade and investment offer a path to fiscally responsible growth.

Inward-looking unilateral trade policies invite retaliation.

If governments start to go it alone on trade, it will become harder, not easier, to generate the jobs and rising incomes that angry electorates want.

Policy and business elites did not speak frankly about the unequal distribution of benefits from trade and failed to adequately accompany market-opening with good domestic policies to equip displaced workers to upskill, adjust, and share in the new opportunities being created.

Some of the anti-trade sentiment is the result of rising wealth inequality and stagnating real wages.

Economic policy that adheres to the tenets of orthodoxy while failing to deliver for large sections of society is doomed to fail.

The populists are right in one key area: voters want jobs and equitable growth, and can hardly be faulted for that. The challenge is to find a more inclusive growth trajectory that can be sustained economically, ecologically, and politically.

Latin Americans are all too familiar with the boom and bust cycles associated with economic populism.

Fully implementing the WTO trade facilitation agreement is one ingredient to reduce border delays and costs for traded merchandise.

Through trade reforms, Latin American countries can boost their competitiveness in markets for goods and services.

For Latin American countries seeking to play a bigger role in global trade, effectively implementing trade-facilitating reforms could be an important tool in their toolkits.

What exactly is trade facilitation? In a nutshell, it is an effort to enable global trade by reducing red tape and streamline customs. In even simpler words: making it easier for companies to trade across borders.

Can trade help lift people out of poverty? It can, and it has.

Sometimes all it takes to connect entrepreneurs to overseas buyers is to get them into the same room.

In my job, as head of the International Trade Centre, I have the privilege to meet entrepreneurs from across the world almost on a daily basis.

Around the world, it is much more difficult for women than for men to run a successful business. Even when laws are not explicitly biased against them, companies owned and operated by women often face discrimination every step of the way, from obtaining finance to finding customers.

ITC works to help firms in poor countries become more competitive and overcome the barriers that are keeping their goods and services out of international markets.

Economic desperation often drives wildlife destruction like poaching or illegal logging. But trade can help create powerful financial incentives for communities to preserve the biodiversity around them.

Consumers need more insight into the goods and services they purchase. Businesses need to produce those goods and services more sustainably.