+0
And they have, therefore, become even greater victims of the dictates of macroeconomics rather than the compulsions of microeconomics, which affects the poor and the environment in greater measure.

1. victims of the dictates of macroeconomics

2. the compulsions of microeconomics

Question 1) Does 'which' refer to 1 only or 1 and 2?

Question 2) If there is no comma after 2, does 'which' refer to both 1 and 2? or what's the difference between comma and no comma?

Question 3) And they have, therefore, become even greater victims of the dictates of macroeconomics which affects the poor and the environment in greater measure rather than the compulsions of microeconomics.<= Is this structure clearer what 'which' refers to? (if 'which' is decided to refer to 1 only; to avoid ambiguity between 1 and 2)
+0
And they have, therefore, become even greater victims of the dictates of macroeconomics rather than the compulsions of microeconomics, which affects the poor and the environment in greater measure.

-------------------------

What does "which" refer to? Actually, it refers to "the compulsions of microeconomics." It would help if you gave more context, because the reference would then be clearer from the surrounding text.

If the writer had wanted to relate "which" to the dictates of macroeconomics, then he would have written this:

And they have, therefore, become even greater victims of the dictates of macroeconomics, which affects the poor and the environment in greater measure, rather than the compulsions of microeconomics.

If that were used, and not which, then the comma would not be used. It would change the clause from a non-restrictive clause to a restrictive clause. A non-restrictive clause gives additional information, and is not essential to the meaning of the sentence. Thus it is set off by commas.
Comments  
I belive it refers to "the dictates of macroeconomics" and you should not include victimes.
because they said rather than, and so they are explaining why it is the dictates of macroeconomics rather than the compulsions of microeconomics by saying that it (which) affects the poor and the environment in greater measure.(macro)