Measuring the Globalization Degree of Foreign Direct Investments from 2001 to 2012: First Interpretations

Conference paper
First Online:
Part of the Springer Proceedings in Business and Economics book series (SPBE)

Abstract

This paper measures the globalization degree of financial capital investments based mainly on elaborated UNCTAD data from 2001 to 2012. The paper is a joint research project and sets the base for an annual update to gain insight into the rational logic of foreign direct investments (FDI). The globalization degree is measured with a new statistical entropy risk metric which computes the interweaving of capital flows. The FDI Capital Globalization type 2a is part of a more comprehensive globalization types model. The entropy-based metrics used to compute the interweavement of capital flows is based on a Boltzmann-derived concept of entropy, i.e., the higher the order (high inequality), the lower the entropy, leading to a new defined statistical entropy. Translated to economy, the higher the inequality (high concentration of flows), the lower the entropy, i.e., the lower the globalization degree resulting in a higher risk of the economic system. The first results show that FDI during the analyzed period are globalizing. Different than the trade globalization of type 1, where Asia has emerged to become the most globalized region, for the FDI, Europe shows to be the most globalized region. The questions to be answered in this long-term study will deal whether the weakening global trade volume will be substituted by increasing capital investment in new emerging regions or what drives the investment logic.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access

References

  1. Battiston, S., Delli Gatti, D., Gallegati, M., Greenwalt, B. C., & Stiglitz, J. E. (2006). Effects of globalization in a model of production networks embedded in geographical space. ETH working paper.Google Scholar
  2. Caselli, M. (2006). On the nature of globalization and its measurement, UNU-CRIS occasional papers, No 3.Google Scholar
  3. Donciu, E. C. (2013). Globalization and foreign direct investments. CES Working Papers, 5(2), 177–186.Google Scholar
  4. Dreher, A. (2006). Does globalization affect growth? Evidence from a new index of globalization. Applied Economics, 38(10), 1091–1110.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Dreher, A., Gaston, N., Martens, P., & Boxem, L. V. (2010). Measuring globalization - opening the black box. A critical analysis of globalization indices. Journal of Globalization Studies, 1(1), 166–185.Google Scholar
  6. Gabrielli, A. (2012). Clustering and ranking countries and their products: A network analysis. Proceedings of European Center for Theoretical studies in nuclear physics and related areas (ECT Conference), 23–27 July, Trento, Italy.Google Scholar
  7. Gallegati, M., Greenwald, B. C., Richiardi, M. G., & Stiglitz, J. E. (2008). The asymmetric effect of diffusion processes: Risk sharing and contagion. Global Economy Journal, 8(3), 1–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Ghemawat, P., & Altman, S. (2013). Depth index of globalization – And the big shift to emerging economies. Pankaj Ghemawat/IESE Report, University of Navarra, Spain.Google Scholar
  9. Gilpin, R. (2000). The challenge of global capitalism: The world economy in the 21st century. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  10. Grinin, L., Ilyin, I., & Korotayev, A. (2014). Globalistics and globalization studies - Aspects & dimensions of global views. Volgograd: Uchitel Publishing House. 978-5-7057-4028-4.Google Scholar
  11. Grossman, G. M., & Helpman, E. (1997). Innovation and growth in the global economy. Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  12. Helpman, E. (1984). A simple theory of international trade with multinational corporations. Journal of Political Economy, 92, 451–471.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Helpman, E., Melitz, M. J., & Yeaple, S. R. (2004). Export versus FDI with heterogeneous firms. The American Economic Review, 94, 300–316.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Karunaratne, N. (2012). The globalization-deglobalization policy conundrum. Modern Economy, 3, 373–383.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Luas, R. (1988). On the mechanics of economic development. Journal of Monetary Economics, 22, 3–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Markusen, J. R. (1984). Multinationals, multiplant economies and the gains from trade. Journal of International Economics, 16, 205–226.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Markusen, J. R., & Venables, A. J. (1988). Multinational firms and the new trade theory. Journal of International Economics, 46(2), 183–203.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Pietronero, L., Cristella, M., & Tacchella, A. (2013). New metrics for economic complexity: Measuring the intangible growth potential of countries. Proceedings of conference at Institute for New Economic Thinking (INET), 4–7 April, Hong Kong, China.Google Scholar
  19. Rüttimann, B. (2009). Modelling economic globalization – The basic globalization types. Proceedings of Global Studies Association (GSA) conference, 2–4 September, London, UK.Google Scholar
  20. Rüttimann, B. (2011a). A comprehensive globalization model to analyze industry logics: The seven economic globalization types. Proceedings of international conference on applied economics (ICOAE), 25–27 August, Perugia, Italy.Google Scholar
  21. Rüttimann, B. (2012). Measuring spatial extension of economic globalization. Journal of European Economy, 11(7), 509–517.Google Scholar
  22. Rüttimann, B. (2007). Modeling economic globalization – A post-neoclassic view on foreign trade and competition. Münster: Wissenschaft. 978-3-86582-447-9.Google Scholar
  23. Rüttimann, B. (2008a). Which globalization for the aluminium industry – A normative analysis exploring alternative business model. ALUMINIUM, 84 1/2–2008, 16–22, 3–2008, 14–21, Giesel Verlag.Google Scholar
  24. Rüttimann, B. (2008b). Which globalization for the aluminium industry. Proceedings of the aluminium congress, 23–25 September, Essen, Germany.Google Scholar
  25. Rüttimann, B. (2010a). Globalisierung verstehen heisst märkte beherrschen – Wie man durch analyse der geschäfts - und Industrielogik ein normatives modell der globalisierungsformen erhält. iO new Management 5, Springer Verlag.Google Scholar
  26. Rüttimann, B. (2010b). Measuring economic globalization: Entropy - based inequality risk metric. Europa Regionum, XIII: 7–23, University of Stettin, Szczecin.Google Scholar
  27. Rüttimann, B. (2011). Werden die chinesischen halbzeugexporte die märkte überfluten?. DOW JONES NE Metalle Monitor, No 1.Google Scholar
  28. Rüttimann, B. (2013). World trade and associated systems risk of global inequality: Empiric study of globalization evolution between 2003–2011 and regional pattern analysis. Proceedings of International Conference on Applied Economics (ICOAE), 27–29 June, Istanbul, Turkey published by Elsevier in the series Procedia Economics and Finance, 5: 647–656.Google Scholar
  29. Rüttimann, B. (2014a). World trade logics and measure of global inequality: Regional pattern and globalization evolution between 2003–2012. Open Journal of Applied Sciences, 4(4), 184–196.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Rüttimann, B. (2014b). Modeling financial type 2b globalization and its repercussion on the real economy. Proceedings of international conference on applied economics (ICOAE), 27–29 June, Chania, Greece published by Elsevier in the series Procedia Economics and Finance, 14: 534–543.Google Scholar
  31. Rüttimann, B. (2015). Measuring the globalization degree of trade from 2003–2013: Is globalization of economy coming to an end?. Presented at Athens Institute for Education and research (ATINER) Conference, No. FIN2015–1540.Google Scholar
  32. Rüttimann, B. (2016). Modeling financial type 2b globalization and its effects on trade, investments, and unemployment. International Journal of Computational Economics and Econometrics, 6(2), 176–191.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Stamatiou, P. (2017). Foreign direct investments, exports, unemployment and economic growth: Evidence from panel cointegration and causality analysis in EU countries. PhD Dissertation, University of Macedonia, Greece.Google Scholar
  34. Stamatiou, P., & Dritsakis, N. (2015). Granger causality relationship between foreign direct investments, exports, unemployment and economic growth. A panel data approach for the new EU members. Proceedings of the 14th Annual European Economics and Finance Society (EEFS) conference, Brussels, Belgium, 11–14 June 2015.Google Scholar
  35. Stiglitz, J. E. (2004). Capital-market liberalization, globalization, and the IMF. Economic Policy, 20(1), 57–71.Google Scholar
  36. United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD). (2016). http://unctadstat.unctad.org/wds/ReportFolders/reportFolders.aspx?sCS_ChosenLang=en. Accessed 15 Apr 2017.
  37. Vintila, D. (2010). Foreign direct investment theory: An overview of the main FDI theories. European Journal of Interdisciplinary Studies, 2(2), 104–110.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Inspire AG/ETH ZürichZurichSwitzerland
  2. 2.University of MacedoniaThessalonikiGreece

Personalised recommendations