Apples and Oranges? The Problem of Equivalence in Comparative Research

Researchers in comparative research are increasingly relying on individual level data to test theories involving unobservable constructs like attitudes and preferences. Estimation is carried out using large-scale cross-national survey data providing responses from individuals living in widely varying contexts. This strategy rests on the assumption of equivalence, that is, no systematic distortion in response behavior of individuals from different countries exists. However, this assumption is frequently violated with rather grave consequences for comparability and interpretation. I present a multilevel mixture ordinal item response model with item bias effects that is able to establish equivalence. It corrects for systematic measurement error induced by unobserved country heterogeneity, and it allows for the simultaneous estimation of structural parameters of interest.</jats:p

All These Worlds are Yours, Except India: The Effectiveness of Cash Subsidies to Export in Nepal

This paper studies the impact of a `textbook' ad-valorem export subsidy on firm-level export performance. The Cash Incentive Scheme for Exports (CISE) program offered by the government of Nepal offers a cash subsidy to firms exporting a select group of products to countries other than India. Using customs transactions data combined with subsidy disbursements at the firm level from 2011 to 2014, we estimate the impact of the subsidy on exports of targeted and non-target product-destination combinations and their extensive and intensive margins. We employ a range of doubly-robust matching estimators to control for the non-random selection of exporters into the scheme. We find that subsidized firms increased their exports of targeted product-destinations relative to firms in the control group and that this rise is fully accounted for by the extensive margin: a higher number of targeted products exported and foreign markets served. We do not find any significant changes along the intensive margin nor among non-targeted product-destination combinations. While our results show that the CISE scheme fomented export diversification, its limited impact on total exports and high fiscal cost call into question its effectiveness

Trade openness, income levels, and economic growth: the case of developing countries, 1970–2009.

This paper attempts to investigate the extent to which trade openness has had an impact on the levels of income and rates of growth in a sample of 115 developing countries for the period 1970–2009. Additionally, to assess whether there is an income level threshold for a country to benefit from international trade, the sample is broken down into three mutually exclusive groups of countries: low-income, lower middle-income, and upper middleincome countries. The main novelty of the paper lies on the use, on the one hand, of a new and better trade openness measure and, on the other hand, of non-stationary heterogeneous panel cointegration techniques to cope with the problem of cross-sectional dependence. The results show a positive bidirectional relationship between trade openness and income level in the long run, thus suggesting that trade openness is both a cause and a consequence of the level of income. The results for the short run, that is, the link between openness growth and economic growth, go in the same direction

Globalization, uneven development and the North-South ‘big switch’

An apparent ‘big switch’ in attitudes towards and discourse over economic globalization has occurred since the turn of the Millennium. Economic globalization was formerly widely identified as being orchestrated in the interests of the global North. Sceptics, mostly left - leaning, expressed particular concern for its impacts in the global South. However, a recent backlash against globalization has emerged within the global North from the political right, while support for globalization has been expressed within the global South. This ‘big switch’ defies many theoretical predictions, and can be situated in relation to a shifting geography of global uneven developmen

Earth incorporated: centralization and variegation in the global company network

Over the past 20 years, a widening gulf has appeared between the increasingly internationalized financing arrangements of the world’s leading corporations, and the persistence of nationally compartmentalized approaches to the study of corporate control. In lieu of direct empirical evidence on corporate control at the global level, the most widespread assumption is that the globalization of ownership has taken the form of an expansion of arms-length, market-based arrangements traditionally prevailing in the Anglo-American economies. Here, however, we challenge this assumption, both empirically and conceptually. Empirically, we show that three quarters of the world’s 205 largest firms by sales are linked to a single global company network of concentrated (5%) ownership ties. This network has a hierarchically centralized organization, with a dominant “global network core” of US fund managers ringed by a more geographically diverse “state capitalist periphery.” Conceptually, we argue that the this architecture can be broadly explained through a Polanyian “variegated capitalist” model of contradictory market institutionalization, with the formation of the global company network actually a counterintuitive product of global financial marketization. In order to understand this process of network formation, however, it is necessary to extend Polanyi’s model of a double movement mediated through political interventions in the market, to incorporate Veblenian processes of evolutionary institutional change mediated through the market