Suchergebnisse

While the relationship between environmental pressures and globalization is often claimed to be unambiguously positive, there is a substantial gap in the literature regarding systematic evidence. We fill this gap by empirically disentangling the nexus between globalization and environmental degradation while at the same time taking the multidimensionality of the concepts serious. The Ecological Footprint (EF) provides a holistic approach to environmental degradation. We generate a data set covering 146 countries over the 1981-2009 period and use an Extreme Bounds Analysis (EBA) to identify a robust set of controls testing different claims of the literature. Subsequently, we test our hypothesis regarding globalization controlling for this vector of controls. Our findings suggest that the simple positive correlation has to be interpreted with care, since the multivariate analysis reveals a more detailed picture of the complex relationship.

Globalisation is a complex process which leads to an increasing connectedness and interrelatedness in the political, economic, social and cultural, technological, and environmental domain on many different scales. While this is a truly global phenomenon, it also has different impacts and manifestations in different geographic localities. As a result, different nations exhibit different levels of globalisation or connectedness. Further, perspectives on globalisation are manifold and change over time, therefore it is crucial to continuously reflect upon and revise existing methodologies. Composite indices are a powerful tool to capture and measure complex concepts that allow for monitoring complex systems over time and yield relative rankings and comparisons. This article presents a revised and updated Maastricht Globalisation Index for 117 countries and three points in time-2000, 2008, and 2012-including a new calculation methodology and data. Results show that globalisation still continues but has slowed down, due to the recent economic crisis.

Whether globalization is sustainable is a contested issue. The quantitative literature on the Maastricht Globalization Index (MGI) and the KOF index of globalization shows that globalization contributes positively to economic and human development, environmental performance, mortality, gender equality and physical integrity rights. However, globalization also drives within-country income inequality, especially in developing countries. Evidence on the effects of globalization on the ecological environment does not provide clear patterns; various dimensions of globalization have different effects on various pollutants. This article analyzes the statistical relationship between the most recent MGI (2012 edition) and the ecological dimension of sustainable development. The latter will be operationalized by considering four variants of the Ecological Footprint. The relation between globalization and sustainable development will be controlled for GDP per capita as a proxy for affluence and report the results for Pearson's correlations and multivariate regressions for up to 171 countries. We conclude that the overall index of globalization significantly increases the Ecological Footprint of consumption, exports and imports. The decomposition of globalization into different domains reveals that apart from the political dimension, all dimensions drive human pressures and demands on the environment. Globalization needs to go into new directions if it is to make a contribution toward all aspects of sustainable development.

This paper discusses the measurement of globalization with a view to advancing the construction of globalization indices. It critically analyzes the types of indices that can contribute to knowledge and policy on globalization. Three issues are particularly highlighted: (a) the focus of measurement (i.e. on activities or policies); (b) the dimensions of measurement (i.e. cultural, ecological, economic, political, and/or social); and (c) the units of measurement (i.e. local, national, regional, and/or global). This paper argues that a workable forward strategy should not seek to identify the single best composite globalization index, but rather should work in an interdisciplinary mode towards a set of complementary globalization indices. These quantitative analyses can then be productively blended with qualitative approaches in a fuller assessment of globalization's extent and impact.