Suchergebnisse

How does economic globalization shape the regulations that states enact to control negative externalities? Previous research downplays the role of international cooperation and the present historical context, so it cannot offer a coherent theoretic account of the empirical record. I construct a formal model in which states can engage in regulatory cooperation to coordinate their policies. I prove three main results. First, a 'race to the bottom' is unlikely because it requires non-cooperative adjustments by industrialized countries. Second, a partial 'race to the top' is likely because many emerging countries stand to gain from reduced negative externalities and the competitiveness problem is limited when the most lucrative export markets are already regulated. Finally, powerful industrialized countries with a high regulatory capacity benefit from a global expansion of regulation. Adapted from the source document.

We address two questions that are central to the literature on the emergence of democracy & economic globalization. First, does democratization foster higher levels of trade & capital account openness? Second, do trade & capital account openness increase the likelihood of democratization? We review the literature in international political economy & comparative politics that has theoretically & empirically addressed these questions. We then conduct some empirical tests in a sample of developing countries to briefly evaluate the empirical relationship between democracy & economic globalization. Our analysis reveals that evidence for the claim that democracy fosters trade & capital account liberalization is robust but that empirical support for the predicted positive effect of economic openness on democracy among developing countries is weak. More theoretical work is needed to clarify the link between democracy & economic liberalization, & to this end we provide possible topics for future research. Adapted from the source document.

We address two questions that are central to the literature on the emergence of democracy and economic globalization. First, does democratization foster higher levels of trade and capital account openness? Second, do trade and capital account openness increase the likelihood of democratization? We review the literature in international political economy and comparative politics that has theoretically and empirically addressed these questions. We then conduct some empirical tests in a sample of developing countries to briefly evaluate the empirical relationship between democracy and economic globalization. Our analysis reveals that evidence for the claim that democracy fosters trade and capital account liberalization is robust but that empirical support for the predicted positive effect of economic openness on democracy among developing countries is weak. More theoretical work is needed to clarify the link between democracy and economic liberalization, and to this end we provide possible topics for future research.

Role of Peace Economics and Peace Science in Peace Movement ; International audience ; For liberal economists, with the end of the Soviet Union, globalization is a step towards peace. However, war is still a threat for a humanity capable today of committing suicide, with nuclear and cybernetic weapons. The analyses of mercantilism do not disappear and the relations of force are still alive. The nature of "war" has changed. National security cannot be limited to the military, it also includes health, education, industrial risks or the protection of natural resources. The economy is both a cause of war and a means of armed conflict. Economic warfare uses weapons adapted to obtain a right or the exercise of a domination. As such, blockades, embargoes, boycotts or mercantilist-type power actions are techniques of war or conflict recognized by States. The international economic system is largely dominated and organized by the great powers and by multinational corporations. Moreover, the coercive power of states is mainly controlled by the largest multinationals. The current globalization is criticized, it is accused of developing inequalities and factors of conflicts, by giving power to the actors of international finance and to an unscrupulous commercial world. With the process of digitalization, a new type of colonialism in a dematerialized world deeply influenced by mercantilist behavior. There is a need for economic and social democratization of democracy.

Role of Peace Economics and Peace Science in Peace Movement ; International audience ; For liberal economists, with the end of the Soviet Union, globalization is a step towards peace. However, war is still a threat for a humanity capable today of committing suicide, with nuclear and cybernetic weapons. The analyses of mercantilism do not disappear and the relations of force are still alive. The nature of "war" has changed. National security cannot be limited to the military, it also includes health, education, industrial risks or the protection of natural resources. The economy is both a cause of war and a means of armed conflict. Economic warfare uses weapons adapted to obtain a right or the exercise of a domination. As such, blockades, embargoes, boycotts or mercantilist-type power actions are techniques of war or conflict recognized by States. The international economic system is largely dominated and organized by the great powers and by multinational corporations. Moreover, the coercive power of states is mainly controlled by the largest multinationals. The current globalization is criticized, it is accused of developing inequalities and factors of conflicts, by giving power to the actors of international finance and to an unscrupulous commercial world. With the process of digitalization, a new type of colonialism in a dematerialized world deeply influenced by mercantilist behavior. There is a need for economic and social democratization of democracy.

Role of Peace Economics and Peace Science in Peace Movement ; International audience ; For liberal economists, with the end of the Soviet Union, globalization is a step towards peace. However, war is still a threat for a humanity capable today of committing suicide, with nuclear and cybernetic weapons. The analyses of mercantilism do not disappear and the relations of force are still alive. The nature of "war" has changed. National security cannot be limited to the military, it also includes health, education, industrial risks or the protection of natural resources. The economy is both a cause of war and a means of armed conflict. Economic warfare uses weapons adapted to obtain a right or the exercise of a domination. As such, blockades, embargoes, boycotts or mercantilist-type power actions are techniques of war or conflict recognized by States. The international economic system is largely dominated and organized by the great powers and by multinational corporations. Moreover, the coercive power of states is mainly controlled by the largest multinationals. The current globalization is criticized, it is accused of developing inequalities and factors of conflicts, by giving power to the actors of international finance and to an unscrupulous commercial world. With the process of digitalization, a new type of colonialism in a dematerialized world deeply influenced by mercantilist behavior. There is a need for economic and social democratization of democracy.

International audience ; For mercantilism, the main objective of economic action is to increase the power of the Prince (Machiavelli). With the rise of capitalism and the market economy, liberal economists strongly criticized state management of the national economy. The centralization of political power was often seen as a major brake on the market economy and thus on economic development. Since 1990, the history of capitalism seems to have stopped being written within national borders. We are moving from the wealth of nations to the wealth of the world. However, despite the existence of the World Trade Organization, there is in fact no supranational authority capable of imposing rules on multinational markets, which are often speculative and interested mainly in short-term profit, thus threatening the sovereignty of nations. Yet market system generalization is often perceived as a factor of democracy. This statement is debatable. As states have lost most of their economic power, the electorate is the victim of a democratic illusion comparable to Keynes' monetary illusion. The risk is the progressive establishment of international plutocratic systems which, within each state, will defend private interests, sometimes in competition from state to state. War and economic war are not over. ; Pour le mercantilisme, l'objectif principal de l'action économique est d'accroître le pouvoir du Prince (Machiavel). Avec l'essor du capitalisme et de l'économie de marché, les économistes libéraux ont fortement critiqué la gestion étatique de l'économie nationale. La centralisation du pouvoir politique était souvent considérée comme un frein majeur à l'économie de marché et donc au développement économique. Depuis 1990, l'histoire du capitalisme semble avoir cessé de s'écrire à l'intérieur des frontières nationales. On passe de la richesse des nations à la richesse du monde. Cependant, malgré l'existence de l'Organisation mondiale du commerce, il n'existe en fait aucune autoritésupranationale capable d'imposer des règles aux ...

International audience ; For mercantilism, the main objective of economic action is to increase the power of the Prince (Machiavelli). With the rise of capitalism and the market economy, liberal economists strongly criticized state management of the national economy. The centralization of political power was often seen as a major brake on the market economy and thus on economic development. Since 1990, the history of capitalism seems to have stopped being written within national borders. We are moving from the wealth of nations to the wealth of the world. However, despite the existence of the World Trade Organization, there is in fact no supranational authority capable of imposing rules on multinational markets, which are often speculative and interested mainly in short-term profit, thus threatening the sovereignty of nations. Yet market system generalization is often perceived as a factor of democracy. This statement is debatable. As states have lost most of their economic power, the electorate is the victim of a democratic illusion comparable to Keynes' monetary illusion. The risk is the progressive establishment of international plutocratic systems which, within each state, will defend private interests, sometimes in competition from state to state. War and economic war are not over. ; Pour le mercantilisme, l'objectif principal de l'action économique est d'accroître le pouvoir du Prince (Machiavel). Avec l'essor du capitalisme et de l'économie de marché, les économistes libéraux ont fortement critiqué la gestion étatique de l'économie nationale. La centralisation du pouvoir politique était souvent considérée comme un frein majeur à l'économie de marché et donc au développement économique. Depuis 1990, l'histoire du capitalisme semble avoir cessé de s'écrire à l'intérieur des frontières nationales. On passe de la richesse des nations à la richesse du monde. Cependant, malgré l'existence de l'Organisation mondiale du commerce, il n'existe en fait aucune autoritésupranationale capable d'imposer des règles aux ...