Suchergebnisse

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.

This exciting book provides an illuminating account of contemporary globalization that is grounded in actual transformations in the areas of production and the workplace. It reveals the social and political contests that give 'global' its meaning, by examining the contested nature of globalization as it is expressed in the restructuring of work. Rejecting conventional explanations of globalization as a process that automatically leads to transformations in working lives, or as a project that is strategically designed to bring about lean and flexible forms of production, this book advances an understanding of the social practices that constitute global change. Through case studies that span from the labour flexibility debates in Britain and Germany, to the strategies and tactics of corporations and workers, the author examines how globalization is interpreted and experienced in everyday life. Contestation, she argues, is about more than just direct protests and resistances. It has become a central feature of the practices that enable or confound global restructuring. This book offers students and scholars of international political economy, sociology and industrial relations an innovative framework for the analysis of globalisation and the restructuring of work.

Globalisation is a complex phenomenon; it is the interactive co-evolution of millions of technological, cultural, economic, social and environmental trends at all conceivable spatiotemporal scales. Given this complexity, any attempt to give a satisfactory definition of globalisation is doomed to failure. Rather, it makes sense to take a pluralistic approach, analysing past and current processes taking place in multiple domains. In this paper we therefore identify key historical landmarks of economic, political, technological, socialcultural, and environmental developments that have pushed the process of globalisation further. Using the globalisation timeline prevents a simplification of the complexities involved in approaching globalisation, while allowing a flexible definition of contemporary globalisation.

It is clear that globalisation is something more than a purely economic phenomenon manifesting itself on a global scale. Among the visible manifestations of globalisation are the greater international movement of goods and services, financial capital, information and people. In addition, there are technological developments, more international cultural exchanges, facilitated by the freer trade of more differentiated products as well as by tourism and immigration, changes in the political landscape and ecological consequences. In this paper, we link the Maastricht Globalisation Index with Sustainability Indices to analyse if more globalised countries are doing better in terms of sustainable development and its dimensions. The results seem to suggest that the process of globalisation may render world development more sustainable.

This paper addresses a complex of globalization issues: the effect of globalization on the skill premium; the effect of globalization on unemployment; the relative importance of globalization and exogenous technical change; the effect of globalization on the ability of national governments to conduct independent social policies. Thinking about these topics has been dominated by a large empirical literature concluding that trade has played a relatively minor role in the rise of the skill premium, while exogenous skill-biased technical change has played a major role. This paper replaces the focus on inter-sectoral substitution at the heart of the Stolper-Samuelson theorem with attention to intra-sectoral relations between inputs. Specifically, I assume that out-sourcing and unskilled labor are highIy substitutable and that equipment and skilIed labor are complementary , that production methods are flexible, and that the country undertaking out-sourcing has a significantIy different structure from that providing it. Globalization then offers a simple and immediate possible explanation for the prominent stylized facts regarding the emergence of the skill premium and for the presence of skill-biased technical change. Trade vs. technology remains as an empirical issue, though, because exogenous neutral technological change offers an alter-native possible explanation.

Accepting Globalisation means accepting diffusion, but globalisation has much to offer archaeologists, i.a. a monopoly on the sources of information for the early history and nature of globalisation. Beyond that, the elementary units of globalisation are not the states and boundaries we cannot find, but rather the cultures and civilisations we do and thus, there is less of a methodological confrontation with theory. Furthermore, globalisation offers a different approach to questions of economics which vex archaeological research. Approaching history from this vantage point allows a clearer means of structuring our understanding of history by combining cognitive, political, economic, social and cultural elements relating to identity and exchange to organise spatial and temporal groupings. ; Globalisierung anzunehmen bedeutet Diffusion anzuerkennen, aber Globalisierung bietet dem Archäologen vieles, u.a. ein Monopol für die Erfassung der frühen Geschichte und Natur der Globalisierung. Wichtig ist, dass die Elementareinheiten der Globalisierung nicht die Staaten und Grenzen sind, die wir nicht finden, sondern die Kulturen und Zivilisationen die wir gut erkennen können; daraus ergibt sich weniger Streit mit sozialer Theoriebildung. Weiterhin eröffnet die Globalisierung eine Möglichkeit der Wirtschaft näher zu kommen als es bisher der Fall war. Geschichte auf diese Weise aufzufassen bedeutet die Vereinheitlichung von kognitiven, politischen, wirtschaftlichen, sozialen und kulturellen Elementen, die mit Identität und Austausch verbunden sind, um letztere räumlich und zeitlich einzugrenzen.

- ; Globalisation is shorthand for changes in space, time and the relationship between them. This paper, which will be forthcoming as a chapter in a book edited by Andrew Cooper and published by the United Nations University Press, argues that changes in deterritorialisation will not have thoroughgoing effects for diplomacy. A change in time, notably the change to zero lag-time in information flows, is, on the other hand, of key importance. So is the increase in the sheer mass and density of communication. If transcending boundaries is the essence of globalisation, then it stands to reason that state diplomats must sooner or later take cognizance of the other kinds of polities that exist within the system.

International audience ; Is market and economic globalization factors of peace ? What kind of peace? What are the links between market and democracy? What are the sector of competence of States or international organisations? Is globalization a process for the long run? Conflicts are not confined to arms production, but also find expression in economic, political and cultural domination. In an increasingly interdependent world, geopolitical considerations involve a definition of security that is both economic and military. Underdevelopment is a threat to world peace. And despite the internationalization of financial markets and the increasing importance of international trade, it is not still true that national economies are completely dominated by a global economy governed by world market forces.

International audience ; Is market and economic globalization factors of peace ? What kind of peace? What are the links between market and democracy? What are the sector of competence of States or international organisations? Is globalization a process for the long run? Conflicts are not confined to arms production, but also find expression in economic, political and cultural domination. In an increasingly interdependent world, geopolitical considerations involve a definition of security that is both economic and military. Underdevelopment is a threat to world peace. And despite the internationalization of financial markets and the increasing importance of international trade, it is not still true that national economies are completely dominated by a global economy governed by world market forces.

Summary: Economics calls no morals or ethics. It claims to be science and it affirms that the proper functioning of individual interest constitutes the best economic and social solution for all economic agents. Any measure aimed at modifying the relentless and fair game of the market leads to perverse effects, such as unemployment, public debt or capital transfers, which will strain the future horizons of collective well-being. In this context, economic globalization constitutes major social progress. Heterodox economists question this sketchy concept of man. Concretely, the deviations from hypotheses compared to reality are numerous, such as the existence of competitive monopolies or oligopolies, the necessary political, strategic and sovereign interventions of the States, economic crises, growing inequalities, all the problems collective pollution and the excessive exploitation of the Earth that the particular economic interests can easily neglect to the detriment of the world community. ; Résumé : La science économique n'appelle aucune morale ou éthique. Elle se veut science et elle affirme que le bon fonctionnement de l'intérêt individuel constitue la meilleure solution économique et sociale pour l'ensemble des agents économiques. Toute mesure tendant à modifier le jeu implacable et juste du marché conduit à des effets pervers, comme le chômage, l'endettement public ou les transferts de capitaux, qui grèveront les futurs horizons du bien-être collectif. Dans ce contexte, la globalisation économique constitue un progrès social majeur. Les économistes hétérodoxes s'interrogent sur cette conception sommaire de l'homme. Concrètement, les entorses des hypothèses par rapport à la réalité sont nombreuses, comme l'existence de monopoles ou d'oligopoles concurrentiels, les interventions politiques, stratégiques et régaliennes nécessaires des Etats, les crises économiques, les inégalités croissantes, l'ensemble des problèmes de pollution collective, notamment le réchauffement climatique, et l'exploitation excessive de ...

Summary: Economics calls no morals or ethics. It claims to be science and it affirms that the proper functioning of individual interest constitutes the best economic and social solution for all economic agents. Any measure aimed at modifying the relentless and fair game of the market leads to perverse effects, such as unemployment, public debt or capital transfers, which will strain the future horizons of collective well-being. In this context, economic globalization constitutes major social progress. Heterodox economists question this sketchy concept of man. Concretely, the deviations from hypotheses compared to reality are numerous, such as the existence of competitive monopolies or oligopolies, the necessary political, strategic and sovereign interventions of the States, economic crises, growing inequalities, all the problems collective pollution and the excessive exploitation of the Earth that the particular economic interests can easily neglect to the detriment of the world community. ; Résumé : La science économique n'appelle aucune morale ou éthique. Elle se veut science et elle affirme que le bon fonctionnement de l'intérêt individuel constitue la meilleure solution économique et sociale pour l'ensemble des agents économiques. Toute mesure tendant à modifier le jeu implacable et juste du marché conduit à des effets pervers, comme le chômage, l'endettement public ou les transferts de capitaux, qui grèveront les futurs horizons du bien-être collectif. Dans ce contexte, la globalisation économique constitue un progrès social majeur. Les économistes hétérodoxes s'interrogent sur cette conception sommaire de l'homme. Concrètement, les entorses des hypothèses par rapport à la réalité sont nombreuses, comme l'existence de monopoles ou d'oligopoles concurrentiels, les interventions politiques, stratégiques et régaliennes nécessaires des Etats, les crises économiques, les inégalités croissantes, l'ensemble des problèmes de pollution collective, notamment le réchauffement climatique, et l'exploitation excessive de ...

Summary: Economics calls no morals or ethics. It claims to be science and it affirms that the proper functioning of individual interest constitutes the best economic and social solution for all economic agents. Any measure aimed at modifying the relentless and fair game of the market leads to perverse effects, such as unemployment, public debt or capital transfers, which will strain the future horizons of collective well-being. In this context, economic globalization constitutes major social progress. Heterodox economists question this sketchy concept of man. Concretely, the deviations from hypotheses compared to reality are numerous, such as the existence of competitive monopolies or oligopolies, the necessary political, strategic and sovereign interventions of the States, economic crises, growing inequalities, all the problems collective pollution and the excessive exploitation of the Earth that the particular economic interests can easily neglect to the detriment of the world community. ; Résumé : La science économique n'appelle aucune morale ou éthique. Elle se veut science et elle affirme que le bon fonctionnement de l'intérêt individuel constitue la meilleure solution économique et sociale pour l'ensemble des agents économiques. Toute mesure tendant à modifier le jeu implacable et juste du marché conduit à des effets pervers, comme le chômage, l'endettement public ou les transferts de capitaux, qui grèveront les futurs horizons du bien-être collectif. Dans ce contexte, la globalisation économique constitue un progrès social majeur. Les économistes hétérodoxes s'interrogent sur cette conception sommaire de l'homme. Concrètement, les entorses des hypothèses par rapport à la réalité sont nombreuses, comme l'existence de monopoles ou d'oligopoles concurrentiels, les interventions politiques, stratégiques et régaliennes nécessaires des Etats, les crises économiques, les inégalités croissantes, l'ensemble des problèmes de pollution collective, notamment le réchauffement climatique, et l'exploitation excessive de ...

In a globalised world, companies are encouraged to change the location of their activities in order to take advantage of the different advantages of the many eligible territories. For their part, public authorities at the various territorial levels are engaged in actions that can increase their attractiveness. However, it would be dangerous to perceive territories as simply competitors to capture market shares on the market for localisations of undertakings on the basis of generic advantages. The development of territories is, admittedly, dependent on the local advantages enjoyed by undertakings, but also on the link between territories, which, although in competition, are in competition with each other, but competition of multiple dimensions which can be beneficial to everyone. The question raised is not so much to identify the advantages of proximity, but to show how and how the performance of territories depends both on the agglomeration of activities and on the globalisation of trade in a context of permanent restructuring. The objective of public action is less to address direct cost benefits for businesses than to contribute to a coherent functioning of markets and to the development of cooperation between innovation actors in an open environment. The effectiveness of this action is conditional on the size of the geographical area concerned and/or the degree of cooperation between the different regions. The evolution of a policy aimed at the development of technopoles towards a policy of pole of competitiveness is significant of this requirement. ; In a globalised world, firms are looking for the best place to produce goods and services. Local governments, on the other hand, are looking to attract these firms and associated jobs on their territory. This leads to the outsourcing and relocation phenomena that are the most visible aspects of globalisation. However, it would be dangerous to consider that competition amongst geographical regions is a simple struggle for a larger share of activity.Regional ...

There has been no shortage of theories which purport to explain why globalisation may have, adverse, insignificant or even beneficial effects on income and earnings inequality. Surprisingly, the empirical realities remain an almost complete mystery. In this paper we use data on industrial wage inequality, household income inequality as well as measures of the economic, social and political dimensions of globalisation to examine this controversial issue. We find that the economic dimension of globalisation, and – less robustly – political integration, have exacerbated wage inequality in developed countries. In contrast, the impact of globalisation on both income and earnings inequality in less-developed countries has been negligible.

Antonio Gramsci's point that battles are won and lost on the terrain of ideology is a much earlier and more complex explanation of the mediations between objective economic and social conditions and politics. It accounts generally for the fact that the continuation of contradiction—as must ever be the case under capitalism—and the worsening conditions for the majority of the world's population do not mean the emergence of a political opposition to capitalism. Put simply, the great traditional workforces cannot strike at capitalism in its new heart. On the other hand, the two percent might be able to do so if it was not disaggregated because of its dispersal in new workforces that have no central workplaces or sufficient shared experience to overcome cultural differences, which divide rather than unite—if it did not live the new space-time relation. This labour mobility undoes class formation, even among those who do not share in the benefits of globalisation but dream of doing so. It remains to be seen whether the new nationalism and its closed borders, which keep such migrants at home with their contradictions, will foster conditions for the constitution of new collective working-class consciousness. Global capitalism fixes class relations in an impure state—a pure duality of capitalists and proletariat never develops anywhere. This means that any socialist transformation requires the building of a cross-class alliance of majorities on national-popular bases, rather than class. Therefore, that hegemony, which permits new ideas to become social forces, has to win out over the old hegemony in an organisational "war of position."