Has Globalisation Affected Collective Bargaining? An Empirical Test, 1980–2009

We investigate whether globalisation has affected the nature of collective bargaining in OECD and emerging countries. The main innovations over the existing empirical literature are (i) the consideration of three distinct aspects of collective bargaining (union density, decentralised bargaining and the extent of government intervention), (ii) the reliance on a sample with a larger cross‐sectional and time dimension (44 countries from 1980 to 2009), and (iii) the application of a more appropriate empirical methodology (dynamic panel data models). We find that globalisation, on average, depresses unionisation but neither affects the degree of decentralisation nor government intervention in collective bargaining. We also uncover significant heterogeneity effects, both across countries and over time.     

Monetary integration,soft budget constraints,and the EMU sovereign debt crises

One possible explanation for the European sovereign debt crises is that the European Economic and Monetary Union (EMU) gave rise to consolidation fatigue or even deliberate over‐borrowing. This paper explores the validity of this explanation by studying how three decisive stages in the history of the EMU affected public borrowing in EU member states: the signing of the Maastricht Treaty, the introduction of the Euro, and the suspension of the Stability and Growth Pact (SGP). The methodology relies on difference‐in‐difference regressions for 26 OECD countries over the 1975–2009 period. The findings indicate that the Maastricht treaty reduced deficits especially in traditionally high‐deficit countries. In contrast, the introduction of the Euro and the watering down of the original SGP led on average to higher borrowing. These results indicate that the introduction of the Euro and the suspension of the SGP led to soft budget constraints in the EMU.     

Globalization’s winners and losers—Evidence from life satisfaction data, 1975-2001

Using data for the EU-15 countries from 1975 to 2001, we find that globalization has especially increased the subjective well-being of high-skilled workers, right-wing voters, high-income earners, and of respondents that trust the WTO, the World Bank, and the IMF.     

A political-economy perspective on social expenditures: corruption and in-kind versus cash transfers

This paper presents a novel political-economy perspective on the composition of social expenditures. We take into account the possibility that institutions are weak, i.e. there is corruption, and analyze how this affects the government’s choice between cash and in-kind transfers. Our results show that the share of in-kind transfers (e.g. basic health care, public housing or food stamps), whose appropriation by corrupt politicians is more easily observed than in the case of cash transfers, increases with corruption. This positive relationship exists, however, only in highly democratic countries. We argue that voters use their political influence in democratic countries to ensure that a higher share of transfers is provided in kind thereby shielding transfers from appropriation by corrupt politicians.     

Public education spending in a globalized world:

This paper studies the effect of globalization on public expenditures allocated to different stages of education. First, we derive theoretically that globalization’s influence on education expenditures depends on the type of government. For benevolent governments, the model suggests that expenditures for higher education will increase and expenditures for basic education will decline with deepening economic integration. For Leviathan governments, on the other hand, the effects of globalization on public education spending cannot be unambiguously predicted. In the second part of the paper, we empirically analyze globalization’s influence on primary, secondary, and tertiary education expenditures with panel data covering 104 countries over the 1992–2006 period. The results indicate that globalization has led in both industrialized and developing countries to more spending for secondary and tertiary and to less spending for primary education.