Thursday, 12 April 2018

Liberal peace and deglobalization

We may have reached a stage where economic interactions have become so internationalised that further increases in globalisation cannot deliver greater prospects of peace. But the logic of the capitalist peace still holds water; the intricate nature of the economic interdependence between advanced market economies almost entirely rules out war, but other hostile attitudes can still persist, and even grow.  - Mansoob Murshed on deglobalization and the liberal peace

Friday, 23 March 2018

anti-globalism and the increasingly-less-Global North

A remarkable ‘big switch’  has emerged from the turn of the millennium in terms of attitudes towards and discourses over globalisation. But while the world is currently witnessing a new backlash against economic globalisation, considerable support for globalisation within some parts of the Global South should not be overlooked.:

Friday, 16 March 2018

Deglobalisation 2.0

A new blog series on deglobalisation with Peter van Bergeijk as gueast editor is appearing at BLISS

gobalisation or deglobalisation?

Google scholar hits date accessed March 16 2018

A discussion between webeditors about the proper spelling of the word deglobalization or deglobalisation stimulated some research that reveals that spelling matters and that an internet search should recognize this. On the brink was incidentally launched at the top of the deglobalization wave

Saturday, 10 March 2018

Role of uncertainty now also confirmed at micro economic level

Economic and Policy Uncertainty: Export Dynamics and the Value of Agreements

Jeronimo CarballoKyle HandleyNuno Limão

NBER Working Paper No. 24368
Issued in March 2018, Revised in March 2018
NBER Program(s):International Trade and Investment 
We examine the interaction of economic and policy uncertainty in a dynamic, heterogeneous firms model. Uncertainty about foreign income, trade protection and their interaction dampens export investment. This can be mitigated by trade agreements, which are particularly valuable in periods of increased demand volatility. We use firm data to establish new facts about U.S. export dynamics in 2003-2011 and estimate the model. We find a significant role for uncertainty in explaining the trade collapse in the 2008 crisis and partial recovery in its aftermath. Consistent with the model predictions, we find that the negative effects worked (1) through the extensive margin, (2) in destinations without preferential agreements with the U.S. (accounting for over half its trade) and (3) in industries with higher potential protection. U.S. exports to non-preferential markets would have been 6.5% higher under an agreement—equivalent to an 8% foreign GDP increase. These findings highlight and quantify the value of international policy commitments through agreements that mitigate uncertainty, particularly during downturns.

Tuesday, 30 January 2018

unpacking the possibility of deglobalisation

Finbarr Livesey argues that he interpretation of the global economy has been framed as an inevitable journey towards ever greater integration—a story of hyper-globalisation. This article discusses the nature of manufacturing to understand whether this interpretation holds and to investigate the possibility of deglobalisation at the level of physical goods trade in the coming decades, and what that may imply for other non-physical elements of globalisation.

Tuesday, 23 January 2018

On the Brink of Deglobalization Again (contribution to special issue on deglobalization CJRES)

This article provides an empirical analysis of the disruption of (neo)classical/liberal globalisation
during the Great Depression and the Great Recession, identifying challenges to
existing knowledges and approaches, in particular the mainstream analysis that studied the
Great Recession in isolation, treating it as a special case and ignoring political covariates of
deglobalisation processes. The econometric analysis (an unbalanced panel of 31 countries
in the 1928–1932 and 128 countries in 2008–2012) does not find an impact from the level of
development on deglobalisation. The manufacturing import share is significantly associated
with stronger deglobalisation (this effect is stronger in the 1930s than in the 2000s). The
political system is highly significant in both 1930s and 2000s, but the sign of its impact is
opposite. In the 1930s, autocratic rule and dictatorship are associated with stronger deglobalisation;
in the 2000s, democracy is associated with stronger deglobalisation.

link to article