Search results

This paper aims to examine the effect of natural resources on the national productivity of high and low globalized economies in Africa.

This study uses two-step generalized method of moments dynamic panel data of 30 African economies between 2006 and 2016 to achieve the purpose of the study.

The results suggest that natural resources promote productivity within African economies regardless of the level of globalization. However, while natural resources have an overall enhancing effect on national productivity in both high and low globalized economies, the enhancing effect varies according to the forms of globalization. The findings of this study suggest that globalization can alter the nexus between natural resources and national productivity in Africa. The results imply that African Governments and their related policymakers can rely on globalization to promote the effect of natural resources on productivity of African economies.

This result is good and welcoming news, especially when natural resources in Africa have been described by prior studies as a curse to the continent. While globalization can be a tool for policymakers in Africa to deploy the positive effect of natural resources on national productivity, they might as well be careful as to which form of globalization they pursue, given that different forms and different levels or extent (high or low) of globalization yields different results on the nexus between natural resources and national productivity.

To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this study is the first of its kind to examine how natural resources affect national productivity in high and low globalized economies, especially in Africa.

This paper aims to empirically investigate the dynamic interlinkages among globalization, digitalization and economic development in the top 75 most globalized countries from 2000 to 2019. The selection of the 75 most globalized developing countries is based on the overall scores of the KOF Globalization Index (2021).

The research design is based on secondary data collected from the World Bank (2021), the International Telecommunication Union (2021) and the KOF Globalization Index (2021). The study uses panel unit root tests followed by the panel cointegration techniques. Further, the estimation uses panel fully modified ordinary least squares and panel dynamic ordinary least squares methods.

The empirical results reveal that the effect of globalization on economic development is sensitive to different estimation procedures; in some cases, but not in every case, the effect is positive and significant. However, the positive and significant effect of digitalization on economic development is robust across all estimated models. Long-run equilibrium relationships and bidirectional causalities strongly affirm the nexus among globalization, digitalization and economic development, substantiating the interconnectedness among 75 developing economies.

The study reinstates that the forces of globalization and digitalization will be instrumental in shaping the selected most globalized economies in the long run. Adopting various econometric methodologies takes care of the time-specific and cross-sectional dynamics, as evident in the panel framework considered in this study. The empirical findings truly ascertain the theoretical synergy among the forces of globalization leading to more digitalization and economic development. This makes the empirical interplay highly conducive to framing long-term policies to expand the information communication network in terms of its access and reach.

This study examines whether the gains from export sophistication is conditional on the level of globalisation. Previous studies have shown that the impact of export sophistication on growth varies depending on the level of a country's economic development. The authors argue that globalisation plays an important role in influencing the gains from export sophistication, mainly through the competition and scale effects. The competition effect disincentivises domestic firms to engage in export markets, while the scale effect incentivises knowledge accumulation and innovation.

The authors employ data from 163 economies from 1995 to 2018. The authors re-estimate values for export sophistication using ordinary goods from 1995 to 2018 and estimate a growth model using the generalised method of moments (GMM) to control for endogeneity and simultaneity issues.

The results show that the gains from export sophistication and globalisation is greater for economies with higher levels of economic development compared to economies with low levels of economic development. Moreover, the authors find that the gains from export sophistication are conditional on the level of globalisation. The authors’ results show that the marginal impact of export sophistication diminishes as developing economies become more globalised, while advanced economies gain more from export sophistication when globalisation precedes at a higher level.

Previous studies have generally examined the conditional growth effects of export sophistication on trade, economic development and other structural factors. To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this is the first study to examine the impact of globalisation, and the authors exploit the multidimensional concept of globalisation to test the hypothesis.

The peer review history for this article is available at: https://publons.com/publon/10.1108/IJSE-01-2023-0001.

Canada's rural economy today is a dynamic source of economic growth and jobs are available in the natural resource extraction, manufacturing, agri-food and service sectors, yet despite this relatively favourable outlook, a profound socio-economic transformation is taking place. Within Ontario, the nation's largest and most economically diversified province and the focus of this study, the agri-food sector seeks new ways to deal with heightened competitive pressures and unstable commodity prices, in part by securing a relatively inexpensive and reliable labour force, while transnational auto-parts firms have looked increasingly to small town Ontario as fertile ground to transplant new ‘flexible’, niche manufacturing facilities. This multifaceted process has had a distinct impact on the regional economy, migratory labour flows and community social dynamics. As Harvey (1996) makes note, the effects of capital's re-spatialization have been uneven, and the state's role in this process contradictory, simultaneously facilitating capital mobility while regulating labour's (im)mobility (see also, Peck, 1996; Antonio & Bonanno, 2000). This chapter presents research findings and examines the impact of capital/labour flows on the changing character of three small communities in the heart of rural south-western Ontario – Bradford, Strathroy and Tillsonburg – with a particular focus on the conditions under which migrants and immigrants are socially included and excluded from the communities where they work. Based on these case studies, I argue that while small town Canada has managed to benefit partially from opportunities linked to a globalizing economy, the formal and informal means of socially incorporating this new transnationalized labour force is lagging significantly behind, reflecting in fact a regressive turn in Canadian labour-market regulation, while the concern for sustainable community development is largely ignored.

This paper aims to address the ethical and social issues raised by economic development in a globalized world. It argues that development has not delivered economic wellbeing to all nations and peoples and questions the view of development as the main achievement by economics. It attempts to define what a just economy is and examines how economic justice can be achieved when the economic system is structurally unjust.

Most large enterprises have “a global view” in the expansion of their activities and, thus, in the creation of their investment projects. They invest in specific countries when they conclude that the countries in question fulfill their goals. It is not enough that an economy of a country has as a target to become a market economy, to open its borders and to attract foreign direct investment (FDI) flows for the economy to become globalized, but it is necessary for this result to be shown by significant foreign participation and huge FDI and trade inflows into the host country. If this never happens, then the country will not benefit from globalization. From one point of view, multinational enterprises (MNEs) “decide” which countries benefit from economic integration and which countries successfully participate in the huge worldwide globalized economic chain. On the other hand, due to the large investment opportunities that a few countries offer to MNEs and due to the large number of host countries, at the end, MNEs invest only in specific countries. Thus, there are a lot of countries that are isolated from the whole system. Moreover, smaller MNEs in economic magnitude often extend their activities mainly to neighboring countries, in order to maximize their profits and minimize their costs. The share of FDI is not the same in all countries and the FDI inflows in less‐developing or poor countries show little growth or no growth at all. Today's FDI orientation is not as global as expected and there is a regional trend in those flows, when at the same time a few countries, especially from specific regions (such as the Balkan region) still live cut off from the world of FDI flows.

This article argues that the transformation of the economies of Central and Eastern Europe (CEE) has to be understood in the context of the dynamics and development of the global economy. The analysis draws on the notion of combined and uneven development in which there has recently been renewed interest. Too often this notion has been a slogan that lacks substance, but the article elaborates how change is a dynamic process of interaction between economic change and political and social forces. The neoliberal analysis, as well as some Marxist accounts, are criticised for being deterministic, linear and prescriptive. This account emphasises the institutional dimension and role of the state as being critical to understanding the varied outcomes between and within economies in CEE in terms of the way that it has mediated the reinsertion of these countries into the global economy. The story focuses on agency, a neglected aspect of analysis, in emphasising the ideological and discursive aspects of transformation, which attempt to justify and reinforce economic and material changes and to close down debate about alternatives. Crucially, the form and content of development, in its widest sense, cannot be known or predicted because the process of transformation has been contested by different factions of the ruling class and by workers. Despite the marginalisation of organised labour in mainstream and many radical accounts, it is argued that trade unions and workers have been central to the process and outcomes of transformation.

The paper proposes that globalization has opened up opportunities for developing countries that adopt the right type of political economy doctrine and opt to externalize their economies through contemporarily relevant global integration models and country‐level strategies.

Portraying the various phases of globalization, the experiences of developed and developing countries are reviewed to recommend a “global participation model” for developing countries to benefit from the globalization process.

In profiling the global participation model, the paper introduces the concept of global business chain and shows how countries have formed strategic groups to participate in the global chain as “opportunity exploiters” and “opportunity providers.” If equipped with appropriate and efficient economic doctrine, developing countries could act both as opportunity providers and opportunity exploiters and transform themselves into “twin advantage countries” – with substantial enhancements in their total factor productivity and consequent gains in the quality of life of populations.

Global business chain and twin advantage strategy, the two major propositions of this paper, are a new stream of thought in the discussions on globalization.

Incorporating local space, matter, and society into our concepts of the global in analytically compatible ways poses a major challenge for contemporary scholars of both world systems and globalization. Many analysts ignore both materiality and locality of production. They assume the global as their point of departure, and attempt to incorporate the local into it. In this chapter, we aim to reverse that logic. We will take into account and theorize the interaction of natural and social processes. In other words, we will integrate ecologic or materio-spatial logic with sociologic within the economic logic of global markets.

Globally, Denmark stands out in terms of achieving high employment rates, containing unemployment and providing a labour market model combining flexibility, security and activation with a strong role for the social partners. The Danish labour market institutions and policies are seen as the catalyst for the transformation from industrial economy to a globalised, post-industrial and knowledge-based economy in which socio-economic equality and workforce security go hand in hand with competitiveness and the adaptability of business. In the 2000s, this mutual relationship came to be known as the Danish flexicurity model. Meanwhile, as a policy blueprint, ‘flexicurity’ has never really influenced Danish politics, and the reforms implemented since the 2000s have deviated from the premises of the model. This paper critically assesses the Danish model and its institutional components. It tracks the emergence of the Danish collective bargaining model as well as the flexicurity model. It scrutinises the challenges and performance of the current Danish labour market institutions and policies in a comparative perspective and discusses the extent to which the Danish experiences can and should be imitated abroad.