The global liberalization of factor movements is a messy, selective and uneven process. Capital might be flowing more freely than persons:
A study of global visa regimes has signalled that governments will have to reconcile their push for democracy, free trade and open-market globalisation with the increasingly restrictive and inequitable visa curbs on free movement of people. The study says that visa restrictions have created a system that ”is one of highly unequal access to foreign spaces, reinforcing existing inequalities”.
When it comes to enjoying visa-free travel to foreign countries, passport holders from rich nations form an exclusive club of 25 countries facing the fewest restrictions for going abroad, according to the research conducted by Dr Eric Neumayer, a geographer from the London School of Economics. [Bangkok Post]
Trade Diversion 
I totally agree with Bangkok Post. I used to be a South Korean citizen, and had to plan months in advance before going places. Now, as a US citizen, I can pretty much zip to any country of choice. My sister and mom are not US citizens, so I still feel the pain of the restrictions. And when my father died — he died in Kenya but was a naturalized U.S. citizen — mad chaos ensued. We have yet to get a death certificate from the US government.
Okay — so that last part wasn’t as related to travelling, but perhaps you could explain to your readers what “global liberalization of factor movements” means, or at least provide a link. For non-econ majors, this is heavy jargon 🙂
Economists have traditionally divided the factors of production into land, labor, and capital. Now, clearly land won’t be moving, so factor movements involve labor (immigration) and capital (foreign direct investment). It remains much more difficult for these factors to traverse borders than traded goods.
(Technically, these visa restrictions are impeding human travel for non-labor purposes, so this issue isn’t about factor movements in a strict sense.)