How to Measure Globalization? A New Globalization Index (NGI)

This paper presents the New Globalization Index (NGI). It is a composite index constructed to measure the relative globalization level of a group of countries. With its 21 variables, it accounts for the multidimensionality of this phenomenon instead of relying purely on economic indicators. As compared to other existing globalization indices, three major innovations are introduced in the NGI. Firstly, five variables that have until now not been used in globalization indices enter the calculations, introducing some new and important aspects to the measure, such as international student mobility and environmental issues. Secondly, the NGI forms a weighted sum of bilateral trade flows using the geographical distances between trading partners as weights. This modifies the usual trade openness measure by placing more weight on distant trading partners. In effect, intra-regional trade is given a lower weight in the NGI. One of the effects of this procedure is a significant downward movement in the ranking of some EU countries, whose international openness comes primarily from trade within their region and reflects regional integration more than globalization. A final innovation in the NGI is the use of a statistical method (principal component analysis) to form subcomponents of globalization according to the statistical features of the variable structure. The goal of this step is the analysis of the multidimensionality of globalization. Three dimensions emerge by the use of this technique: finance, trade and politics, and social globalization. Principal component analysis is also employed for producing weights for individual indicators within the overall index. Additionally, a control for country size is employed for some of the variables, as has been done in some other globalization indices before. The final index contains 70 countries and covers a period between 1995 and 2005.     

Old Wine in a New Bottle: Growth Convergence Dynamics in the EU

In this paper, we explore convergence of real per capita output across the European Union (EU) countries, as well as the transitional behavior of possible underlying factors that are responsible for any convergence or divergence pattern. The new panel convergence methodology developed by Phillips and Sul (2007) is employed in a production function growth accounting approach and data from the Total Economy Database and the Total Economy Growth Accounting Database. The empirical findings suggest that the EU countries form two distinct convergent clubs, exhibiting considerable heterogeneity in the underlying growth factors. These findings should help policy makers in designing appropriate growth-oriented programs as well as in setting priorities in their implementation.     

Lessons of the crisis for emerging markets

This paper analyzes the impact of the global financial crisis on emerging markets. It argues that the crisis will have enduring implications for policy toward the development and liberalization of financial markets. In particular, emerging markets will rely (even) less on external finance and adopt a less permissive approach to foreign bank presence. In contrast, the crisis will have a much more limited impact on other aspects of globalization. More controversially, the paper argues that the crisis is unlikely to have a major impact on the structure of the international monetary system.     

Overreaction to Fearsome Risks

When risks threaten, cognitive mechanisms bias people toward action or inaction. Fearsome risks are highly available. The availability bias tells us that this leads people to overestimate their frequency. Therefore, they also overreact to curtail the likelihood or consequences of such risks. More generally, fear can paralyze efforts to think clearly about risks. We draw on a range of environmental risks to show the following: (1) Fear leads us to neglect probability of occurrence; (2) As fearsome environmental risks are usually imposed by others (as externalities), indignation stirs excess reaction; (3) We often misperceive or miscalculate such risks. Two experiments demonstrate probability neglect when fearsome risks arise: (a) willingness-to-pay to eliminate the cancer risk from arsenic in water (described in vivid terms) did not vary despite a 10-fold variation in risk; (b) the willingness-to-accept price for a painful but non dangerous electric shock did not vary between a 1 and 100% chance. Possible explanations relate to the role of the amygdala in impairing cognitive brain function. Government and the law, both made by mortals and both responding to public pressures, similarly neglect probabilities for fearsome risks. Examples relating to shark attacks, Love Canal, alar and terrorism are discussed.