You cant look at the metropole without looking at the colony. The exploitation of work and environment can be made in another country, the difference between a social democracy and a full liberal state, its that one wants better condition to its own people, while they explore other countries, and liberals dont care to explore even then workers of their own country.
About allocation the world produces more food than its needed in the world, yet people die of starvation, so its not that efficient in allocation. Its a capitalist genocide in favor of economy.
But Bolshevism also had mass famines (the ones that weren't engineered deliberately to target recalcitrant peasant populations). Although a lot of work and study has been done on famines even in the last 15 years and the instances of famine have been reduced except in cases where armed conflict is the source of disruption (as in Yemen currently). Stuff like the Malawi famine of the early 00's was studied extensively because it wasn't the case that there was even insufficient food being produced domestically. Something bizarre happened in the market and a bunch of people starved, but the peculiar conditions were learned and lessons applied.
Exporting exploitation is definitely the biggest issue of globalization, because it allows the owner class to roll back advances in advanced economies by threatening shutdown of operations to outsource, and then exploiting the places they outsource to. However it just means that the fight for fairness needs to be brought to other places. That's what stuff like Fair Trade is all about. There is still genuinely a lower cost of production in the Global South even if you're not being "unfair," however, so that pressure for outsourcing will still exist (until the other economies advance enough to be converged with developed economies).