Progressive governance and globalisation

Jean Pisani-Ferry discusses the development of globalisation during the last decade and the challenges ahead. The speed and magnitude of the transformation affecting the world economy are larger than initially envisaged, while domestic policy reforms and redistribution have often been insufficient to cope with this adjustment challenge. Against this background, the definition of a renewed agenda that builds on the success of the initial one should be a priority for progressive governments. This paper was presented at the Progressive Governance Summit 2008.

Justice unbound? Globalisation, states and the transformation of the social bond

Conventional accounts of justice suppose the presence of a stable political society, stable identities, and a Westphalian cartography of clear lines of authority--usually a state--where justice can be realised. They also assume a stable social bond. But what if, in an age of globalisation, the territorial boundaries of politics unbundle and a stable social bond deteriorates? How then are we to think about justice? Can there be justice in a world where that bond is constantly being disrupted or transformed by globalisation? Thus the paper argues that we need to think about the relationship between globalisation, governance and justice. It does so in three stages: (i) It explains how, under conditions of globalisation, assumptions made about the social bond are changing. (ii) It demonsrates how strains on the social bond within states give rise to a search for newer forms of global political theory and organisation and the emergence of new global (non state) actors which contest with states over the policy agendas emanating from globalisation. (iii) Despite the new forms of activity identified at (ii) the paper concludes that the prospects for a satisfactory synthesis of a liberal economic theory of globalisation, a normative political theory of the global public domain and a new social bond are remote

Globalisation Effect on Inflation in the Great Moderation Era: New Evidence from G10 Countries

The effect of globalisation on inflation is modeled and simulated for ten countries from G10 during the Great Moderation period. The results are supportive of the globalisation hypothesis. In particular, the results show that dynamic channels and magnitudes of globalisation to domestic inflation are highly heterogeneous from country to country, that increases in trade openness could be either inflationary or deflationary, while increased imports from low-cost emerging-market economies have been mostly deflationary, and that there has been almost no direct globalisation impact as far as inflation persistence is concerned while the impact on inflation variability can be positive as well as negative. Overall, globalisation is shown to have contributed positively to the aspect of low inflation rather than that of stable inflation during the Great Moderation era

Globalisation effect on inflation in the great moderation era: new evidence from G10 countries

The effect of globalisation on inflation is modelled and simulated for ten countries from G10 during the Great Moderation period. The results are supportive of the globalisation hypothesis. In particular, the results show that dynamic channels and magnitudes of globalisation to domestic inflation are highly heterogeneous from country to country, that increases in trade openness could be either inflationary or deflationary, while increased imports from low-cost emerging-market economies have been mostly deflationary, and that there has been almost no direct globalisation impact as far as inflation persistence is concerned while the impact on inflation variability can be positive as well as negative. Overall, globalisation is shown to have contributed positively to the aspect of low inflation rather than that of stable inflation during the Great Moderation era.Inflation dynamics; globalisation

RESISTING DEGLOBALISATION: THE CASE OF EUROPE. Bruegel Working Paper Issue 1 3 February 2020

Global trade and finance data indicates that the pre-2008 pace of economic globalisation has stalled or even reversed. The European Union has defied this trend, with trade flows and financial claims continuing to grow after the recovery from the 2008 global economic and financial crisis. Immigration, including intra-EU mobility, has also continued to increase. Our analysis of public opinion in EU countries shows that support for globalisation, free trade and immigration, is on the rise. EU public opinion on these issues does not differ greatly from the rest of the world. Our panel-model estimates for EU countries from 2009 to 2019 find a strong association between the unemployment rate and the prevailing view on whether globalisation is an opportunity for economic growth. A regression for 19 non-EU countries shows the unemployment rate is significantly associated with public support for trade. These findings suggest that cyclical economic factors partially drive views about globalisation. Our analysis suggests younger and better-educated people in the EU view globalisation more positively, as do those in better economic situations, those who feel politically included and those with a positive view of the EU. Increased support for globalisation among EU citizens might also have been boosted by policies to improve social fairness, and by some success in containing asylum-seeker pressure. However, the EU continues to have pressing social problems, concentrated in some member countries with weaker economic outlooks. With global and European economic growth slowing and the risk of a European recession increasing, unemployment tensions could re-emerge, which might reverse recent increases in support for globalisation

Globalisation, Policy Transfer, and Global Governance: an Assessment in Developing Countries

Dari perspektif ekonomi politik, globalisasi identik dengan liberalisasi, sedangkan dariperspektif kebijakan publik, globalisasi identik dengan policy transfer. Ekonomi politik menekankanbahwa globalisasi merupakan sistem yang menyediakan ruang bagi pembukaan interelasi daninteraksi ekonomi antar negara, baik dalam bentuk perdagangan bebas, mobilitas aktivitas produksi,dan pertukaran teknologi. Sementara itu, perspektif kebijakan publik mengartikankan globalisasisebagai ruang yang lebih luas untuk pertukaran pengetahuan yang berguna bagi pembangunan danpengembangan kebijakan dalam konteks yang disebut policy transfer. Meskipun kedua perspektifseolah-olah memberikan penekanan yang berbeda, pada dasarnya kedua penekanan itu sama-samamensyaratkan adanya entitas bernama global governance. Bahkan, terkadang entitas ini berperanmenentukan dalam keputusan di sebuah negara, mendorong perdebatan pro dan kontra.Pengalaman Indonesia di akhir 1990an, misalnya, menunjukkan kepada kita betapa lembaga globalgovernance berperan dominatif dalam reformasi ekonomi dan politik, memunculkan pertanyaantentang kedaulatan negara. Paper ini menganalisis keterkaitan globalisasi dan policy transfer sertamendiskusikan peran lembaga-lembaga global governance di dalamnya

Globalisation, Inequality and Health

As we suggested in a previous work (Borghesi and Vercelli, Sustainable globalisation, Ecological Economics, vol.44, n.1, 2003), the process of globalisation affects the sustainability of development mainly through three channels: economic growth, inequality and environmental degradation. This conceptual framework may help us to understand also the causal influence of globalisation on health that represents a fundamental dimension of the quality of life enjoyed by the people and of sustainability. For this purpose, the present paper aims to investigate both the direct and the indirect effects of post-war globalisation, with particular attention to the role played by inequality in the globalisation-health relationship. A few policy implications emerging from the analysis are also discussed, suggesting a policy strategy that can at the same time improve health and make the current globalisation process more compatible with sustainable development.globalisation, inequality, health, sustainable development

Building the normative dimension(s) of a global polity

Globalisation is not what it used to be. Earlier debates over how to read the indicators of economic liberalisation and the impact of technological expansion have now been joined by the increasingly pressing need to explore the social, environmental and political aspects of global change. Earlier discussions emphasised a number of dichotomies within the international political economy – open/closed, state/market and so on. These have proved limited in their ability to inform explanations of change under conditions of globalisation. To these we must now add what we might call the ‘governance from above’, ‘resistance from below’ dichotomy as a popular metaphor for understanding order and change in international relations under conditions of globalisation. But this new binary axis is in many ways as unsatisfactory as those that went before. It too can obscure as much as it reveals in terms of understanding the normative possibilities of reforming globalisation. In this article we wish to suggest that there is perhaps a more useful way of thinking about politics and the changing contours of political life in the contemporary global order. This approach blurs the distinction between governance and resistance by emphasising an ethical take on globalisation

Feminist studies of globalisation : beyond gender, beyond economism?

This article offers a distinctive mapping of the feminist literature on globalisation. Part I sets the 'new wave' of debate in the context of long-standing feminist theorising and organisation around global power and politics, drawing attention to a growing focus on economic processes. Part II explores the marginalisation of feminist arguments within globalisation studies, pointing to the dominance of an economistic model of globalisation as a key factor. It also identifies a parallel feminist tendency to neglect non-feminist efforts to develop non-economistic analyses of globalisation. Part III seeks to pinpoint the originality of the contribution of feminism. Although the most obvious starting point for such an evaluation is an emphasis upon gender, the feminist contribution is not reducible to this. Feminists have integrated gender analyses into accounts of multiple, intersecting relations of global power. They also offer distinctive analyses of the relation between the local and the global and the character of agency and resistance. The article indicates that the feminist response to economism still remains incomplete. Nonetheless, it demonstrates that feminist insights pose a significant challenge to non-feminist accounts of globalisation and to those organising within and against global power relations

Constructing 'the anti-globalisation movement'

This article interrogates the claim that a transnational anti-globalisation social movement has emerged. I draw on constructivist social movement theory, globalisation studies, feminist praxis and activist websites to make two main arguments, mapping on to the two parts of the article. First, a movement has indeed emerged, albeit in a highly contested and complex form with activists, opponents and commentators constructing competing movement identities. This article is itself complicit in such a process – and seeks to further a particular construction of the movement as a site of radical-democratic politics. Second, the movement is not anti-globalisation in any straightforward sense. Focusing their opposition on globalised neoliberalism and corporate power, activists represent their movement either as anti-capitalist or as constructing alternative kinds of globalised relationships. Threading through both my arguments is a normative plea to confront the diverse relations of power involved in both globalisation and movement construction in order that globalised solidarities be truly democratic. This is to challenge hierarchical visions of how best to construct ‘the anti-globalisation movement’