Skip to main content

Shrinking States? Globalization and National Autonomy

  • Chapter
The Political Economy of Globalization

Abstract

Throughout the world today, politics lags behind economics, like a horse and buggy haplessly trailing a sports car. While politicians go through the motions of national elections — offering chimerical programs and slogans — world markets, the Internet and the furious pace of trade involve people in a global game in which elected representatives figure as little more than bit players. Hence the prevailing sense, in America and Europe, that politicians and ideologies are either uninteresting or irrelevant. (Roger Cohen, ‘Global Forces Batter Politics’, The New York Times Week in Review, 17 November 1996, p. 1)

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Notes

  1. R. Barro and X. Sala-I-Martin, Economic Growth (New York: Macmillan, 1995).

    Google Scholar 

  2. For a preliminary analysis of developments in the rest of the world, see Geoffrey Garrett, ‘Governing in the Global Economy’, Annual Meetings of the American Political Science Association, Boston, MA (1998).

    Google Scholar 

  3. Geoffrey Garrett, Partisan Politics in the Global Economy (New York: Cambridge University Press, 1998). Studies that have focused on microeconomic policies (deregulation, most importantly) lend no more consistent support to the globalization thesis than does my evidence on macroeconomic policy. See, for example, Suzanne Berger and Ronald Dore (eds), National Diversity and Global Capitalism (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1996); D. Vogel, Trading Up: Consumer and Environmental Regulation in a Global Economy (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1995); S. Vogel,

    Google Scholar 

  4. Freer Markets, More Rules: Regulatory Reform in Advanced Industrial Countries (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1996).

    Google Scholar 

  5. Of course, this is an old argument that goes back at least to K. Polanyi, The Great Transformation (Boston: Beacon Press, 1944). John Ruggie, ‘International Regimes, Transactions and Change: Embedded Liberalism in the Postwar Economic Order’, in Stephen D. Krasner (ed.), International Regimes (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1983) believes that this was at the core of the Brettons Woods system. More recently, it has been argued that the mix of domestic interventionism and international openness is still critical throughout the world: Dani Rodrik, Has Globalization Gone Too Far? Washington, DC: Institute for International Economics, 1997).

    Google Scholar 

  6. P. Pierson, ‘The New Politics of the Welfare State’, World Politics, 48 (1996) 143–79.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Geoffrey Garrett and P. Lange, ‘Internationalization, Institutions and Political Change’, Inleznational Organization, 49 1995) 627–55.

    Google Scholar 

  8. See also R. E. Caves. Multinational Enterprise and Economic Analysis, 2nd edn (New York: Cambridge University Press, 1996).

    Google Scholar 

  9. Paul R. Krugman, Geography and Trade (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1991).

    Google Scholar 

  10. Barry Eichengreen, Toward A New International Financial Architecture: A Practical Post-AsiaAgenda, (Washington: IIE Press, 1999).

    Google Scholar 

  11. G. Corsetti and N. Roubini, ‘Political Biases in Fiscal Policy’, in Barry Eichengreen,J. Frieden and J. von Hagen (eds), Monetary and Fiscal Policy in an Integrated Europe New York: Springer, 1995).

    Google Scholar 

  12. G. Corsetti and N. Roubini Fiscal Deficits, ‘Public Debt and Government Insolvency Evidence from OECD Countries’, Journal of the Japanese and Internalional Economies, 5 (1991) 354–80.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. David id Soskice, ‘Divergent Production Regimes’, in H. Kitschelt, P. Lange, G. Marks and J. Stephens, Continuity and Change in Contemporary Capitalism (New York: Cambridge University Press, 1999) 101–34.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  14. R. M. Alvarez, G. Garrett and P. Lange, ‘Government Partisanship, Labour Organization and Macroeconomic Performance’, American Political ScienceReview, 85 (1991), 541–56.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Garrett, PartisanPolitics, Chapter 5.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Alberto Alesina and R. Perotti, ‘The Welfare State and Competitiveness’, American Economic Review, 87 (1997) 921–39.

    Google Scholar 

  17. T. Iversen, ‘Power, Flexibility and the Breakdown of Centralized Wage Bargaining’, Comparative Politics, 28 (1996) 399–436; J. Pontusson and P. Swenson, ‘Labour Markets, Production Strategies and Wage — Bargaining Institutions: The Swedish Employers’ Offensive in Comparative Perspective’, Comparative Political Studies, 29 (1996) 223–50.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Robert Wade, ‘Globalization and Its Limits’, in S. Berger and R. Dore (eds), National Diversity and Global Capitalism (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1996), pp. 67–76.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Wade, ‘Globalization and its Limits’ at p. 69.

    Google Scholar 

  20. D. Quinn and M. Yoyoda, ‘Measuring International Financial Regulation’ (Washington DC; Georgetown University, manuscript, 1997).

    Google Scholar 

  21. M. Feldstein and C. Horioka, ‘Domestic Savings and International Capital Flows’, The Economic Jonrnal, 90, (1980) 314–29.

    Google Scholar 

  22. T. Bayoumi, ‘Savings-Investment Correlations’, IMF Staff Papers, 37 (1990) 360–387; M. Dooley, J. Frankel and D. Mathieson, ‘International Capital Mobility: What Do Savings-Investment Correlations Tell Us?’, IMFStaff Papers, 34 1987 503–30.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. The covered interest rate is typically measured as a differential against some

    Google Scholar 

  24. numeraire such as the offshore rate for short term US debt (i.e. Eurodollar rates): Richard Marston, International Financial Integration (New York: Cambridge University Press, 1995).

    Google Scholar 

  25. Jeffrey Frankel, On Exchange Rates (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1993) pp. 58–9. Frankel analyses average covered interest rate differentials for the 1982–8 period (the local three month interest rate minus the Eurodollar rate, less the forward discount on the local currency). Countries with negative covered interest rate differentials were able to offer lower effective rates of return than were available in the euromarkets undoubtedly because their domestic conditions created impediments to outflows of capital.

    Google Scholar 

  26. Perhaps the prudent conclusion to draw from these data is that flow measures are at best ‘noisy’ indicators of real capital mobility because they may simply reflect short-term volatility in market condition. This ‘noise’ might be muted when countries are aggregated, resulting in a strong correlation between capital flows and the reduction of barriers to capital movements (see Figure 5.2).

    Google Scholar 

  27. A. Wagner, ‘The Nature of the Fiscal Economy’, in R. A. Musgrave and A. R. Peacock (eds), Classics in the Theory of Public Finance (London: Macmillan, 1958) 1–15.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  28. D. R. Cameron, ‘The Expansion of the Public Economy: A Comparative Analysis’, American Political Science Review, 72 (1978) 1243–61; D. R. Cameron, ‘Social Democracy, Corporatism, Labour Quiescence, and the Representation of Economic Interest in Advanced Capitalist Society’, in J. H. Goldthorpe (ed.), Order and Conflict in Contemporary Capitalism (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1984); Geoffrey Garrett and P. Lange, ‘Political Responses to Interdependence: What’s “Left” for the Left?’, International Organization, 45 (1991) 539–64.

    Google Scholar 

  29. Garrett, Partisan Politics, chapter 4; E. Huber and J. Stephens, ‘Political Power and Gender in the Making of the Social Democratic Service State’ (Canberra: Research Committee 19, International Sociological Association, Australian National University 19–23 August 1996).

    Google Scholar 

  30. Garrett, Partisan Politics, chapter 4.

    Google Scholar 

  31. Elsewhere, I have presented more sophisticated analysis (using panel regressions with multiplicative interactions between globalization and partisan politics) that supports this interpretation: Garrett, Partisan Politics. Essentially, strong left-labour regimes have mitigated the distributional asymmetries generated by capital market integration with ever-higher levels of public spending. In contrast, governments in countries with much weaker left parties and trade unions have chosen to exacerbate the effects of market forces by combining openness to international financial markets with cut backs in the public economy.

    Google Scholar 

  32. Ruggie, ‘International Regimes’.

    Google Scholar 

  33. E. Mendoza, G. Milesi-Ferreti and P. Asea, ‘On the Effectiveness of Tax Policy in Altering Long-Run Growth’, Journal of Public Economics 66 (1997) 99–126.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. D. Quinn, ‘The Correlates of Change in International Financial Regulation’, American Political Science Review 91 (1997) 531–52; D. Swank, ‘Funding the Welfare State’, Political Studies, 46 (1998) 671–92.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Geoffrey Garrett, ‘Globalization and Taxation’ (New Haven: Yale University/manuscript, 1997).

    Google Scholar 

  36. J. G. Cummins, K. A. Hassett, and R. G. Hubbard, ‘Tax Reforms and Investment: A Cross Country Comparison’, NBER Working Paper Series No. 5232 (1995).

    Google Scholar 

  37. Swank, ‘Funding the Welfare State’.

    Google Scholar 

  38. A. Auerbach and J. Slemrod, ‘The Economic Effects of the Tax Reform Act of 1986’, Journal of Economic Literature, 35 (1997) 589–632.

    Google Scholar 

  39. OECD, Consumption Tax Trends, 2nd edn (Paris: OECD, 1997).

    Google Scholar 

  40. Garrett, Partisan Politics.

    Google Scholar 

  41. Dani Rodrik has recently sought to challenge both of these shibboleths of mainstream economics: F. Rodriguez and Dani Rodrik, ‘Trade Policy and Economic Growth: A Sceptic’s Guide’ (Cambridge, MA: Harvard Kennedy School of Government Manuscript, 1999). Dani Rodrik, ‘Who Needs Capital Account Convertibility?’ (Cambridge, MA: Harvard Kennedy School of Government Manuscript, 1998).

    Google Scholar 

  42. See also Quinn, ‘The Correlates of Change’.

    Google Scholar 

  43. J. Slemrod, ‘What Do Cross Country Studies Teach Us about Government Involvement, Prosperity and Economic Growth?’, Brookings Papers on Economic Activity, 2 (1995) 373–431.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Geoffrey Garrett, ‘The Transition to Economic and Monetary Union’ in Barry Eichengreen and J. Frieden (eds), Forging an Integrated Europe (Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 1998); and Geoffrey Garrett, ‘The Politics of Maastricht’, in Barry Eichengreen and J. Frieden (eds), The Political Economy of European Monetary Unification (Boulder: Westview Press, 1994) 47–66.

    Google Scholar 

  45. Rodrik, Has Globalization Gone Too Far?

    Google Scholar 

  46. Garrett, ‘Governing in the Global Economy’.

    Google Scholar 

  47. Alesina and Perotti, ‘The Welfare State and Competitiveness’.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Copyright information

© 2000 Geoffrey Garrett

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Garrett, G. (2000). Shrinking States? Globalization and National Autonomy. In: Woods, N. (eds) The Political Economy of Globalization. Palgrave, London. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-333-98562-5_5

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics