"on" works fine, but you need to make certain whose long-term interests are meant, the poor or the industrialized nations?

I would, however, write ". . . negative consequences for them", i.e. the people, whether the poor or the industrialized nations (personified).

"Consequences for" is correct, but not "consequences on". You could say "a negative effect on", though.

Thank you both, but who is right?

I agree with Saskia. "Consequences for" is certainly correct, but I wouldn't use "consequences on."

To refine my answer a bit:

I would be more likely to write ". . . consequences on their [=the poor's] long-term interests" and ". . . consequences for their [=the industrialized nations'] long-term interests."

From the Department of Linguistics, MacQuarie University, Sydney, Australia: "It is becoming increasingly clear, however, that this laissez-faire approach has had deep negative consequences on a whole generation of students and teachers."
http://www.ling.mq.edu.au/centres/sc/june1995.htm

A Google search of "consequences on" gives 1,850,000 hits. While certainly not a guarantee of accuracy, it does show usage.

From msn.encarta: "It is clear that the killing of the albatross brings dire consequences on the mariner."
http://uk.encarta.msn.com/sidebar_701610967/%...

From the Journal of International Business Studies: "What are the necessary changes that might be needed to accommodate and deal with some of the destabilizing consequences on well established social and cultural practices?"
http://www.palgrave-journals.com/jibs/asia_an...

From the Graduate School of the University of Louisville, "Guidelines for the Preparation and Processing of Dissertations": "And Chapter Four links writing assessment as social change to ethical inquiry, arguing that vigorous inquiry into
the validity of writing assessments— including their social consequences on individuals and writing programs—is imperative research to conduct, as it is a means of reflecting upon and changing the course of writing assessment."
graduate.louisville.edu/pubs/theses-dissertations/dissertation.pdf

I hope this helps you decide.

I'm in the "consequences for" camp or would say instead "impact/effect on". There may well be nearly 2 million google hits for "consequences on", but bear in mind that there are nearly 8 million hits for "consequences for":
http://www.google.co.uk/search?hl=en&q=%22con...

Perhaps this reflects a difference between BE and AE/Australian E usage.

@Anne(gb): I'm not exclusionary on this one. (-:

Yes, "consequences for" is correct, and apparently more common. I'm just arguing that "consequences on" isn't wrong, contra Saskia. Nor did I rely solely on the number of hits from Google, although I mentioned it. I also referenced 1) Linguistics Department of a university; 2) online encyclopedia article (encarta); 3) an online journal (business) 4) Style Manual for the Graduate Department of a university. I figured they represented not just "Joe Blow" but relatively educated sources, especially the two universities. After all, if you are writing a Style Manual for theses or an article about grammar for a journal called "Australian Style" it behooves you to use accepted grammar and forms.

@Saskia #7: Could be. All my examples come from American or Australian sources (including the International Journal of Business Studies).

Thank you very much! :-)

Robert--US: Yes, "consequences for" is correct, and apparently more common. I'm just arguing that "consequences on" isn't wrong.
I appreciate that, but I just felt that citing Google hits for the expression "consequences on" alone did not give a balanced picture of actual usage, which is overwhelmingly in favour of "consequences for", no matter how erudite the source. Compare the phrases "consequences on" and "consequences for" on .edu or .ac.uk sites.