Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in
Book cover

Trying to Measure Globalization pp 19–34Cite as

Measuring Complexity

  • Chapter
  • First Online:

  • 1127 Accesses

Part of the book series: SpringerBriefs in Political Science ((BRIEFSPOLITICAL))

Abstract

Notwithstanding the marked heterogeneity of interpretations and analyses of globalization processes, commentators agree on their extraordinary complexity; a complexity which makes it particularly difficult to design a synthetic measure of globalization. Given this difficulty, the chapter describes a procedure with which it is possible to construct an instrument that measures any whatever complex phenomenon, with a special focus on the problems to be addressed and on the options open to the researcher. In this regard, one of the main aims of the chapter is to show that constructing a globalization index requires the researcher to take decisions at each stage of the procedure. These decisions, however, will be based on subjective evaluations.

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

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    As the Handbook on Constructing Composite Indicators (OECD 2008, p. 22) puts it, “what is badly defined is likely to be badly measured”.

  2. 2.

    This obviously does not rule out that such indicators, besides their use to measure a third concept, can themselves constitute interesting objects of analysis.

  3. 3.

    Once an indicator has been given an operational definition, it becomes a variable. The concept of ‘variable’ is therefore more specific than that of ‘indicator’ (Corbetta 1999, p. 118), and it will be used in this way here. It should be pointed out, however, that the distinction between the two terms is not always clearly defined in the current scientific debate, and they are used in different ways by different authors.

  4. 4.

    This situation occurs rather frequently: for example, when attempts are made to measure the concept of development. For a critical survey see Caselli (2001).

  5. 5.

    This section draws on and develops discussion in Caselli (2008, pp. 385–387).

  6. 6.

    This is a subjective but not entirely arbitrary selection, in that it is in any case conditioned by constraints of a technical nature, i.e. the possibility of obtaining the data, and secondly by the need to be able to defend the choices made before the scientific community.

  7. 7.

    Also the choice, which will be illustrated in the next chapter, to attribute the weights by means of statistical procedures ultimately derives from a particular theoretical position.

  8. 8.

    That is to say, to use more common terminology, if they assume the form of ratio or interval variables.

  9. 9.

    For a complete survey of techniques for normalizing the value of the indicators see OECD (2008, pp. 27–31).

  10. 10.

    In this regard, Sachs (1995, p. 7) maintains that it is impossible to handle measurement instruments consisting of more than 15 or 20 indicators.

  11. 11.

    An example of a single indicator used to measure a complex phenomenon is provided by the concept of ‘development’, which is usually measured in terms of per capita GDP, that is, with a single indicator. On this see Caselli (2001).

  12. 12.

    This section draws on and develops discussion conducted in Caselli (2008, p. 387).

  13. 13.

    Without specifications for each of the points that follow, these are the texts referred to here to identify the desirable features of an index constructed to measure a complex social phenomenon: UNDP (2000), Scamuzzi (1996), Graziosi (1979), Cipolla (1987), United Nations (1989), Morris (1979), Scidà (1997), Alberti et al. (1995), Drewnowski (1970), Cartwright (2000), Church and McHarry (1994).

References

  • Alberti, M., Solera, G., & Tsetsi, V. (1995). La città sostenibile. Analisi, scenari e proposte per un’ecologia urbana in Europa. Milano: FrancoAngeli.

    Google Scholar 

  • Atta Mills, C. (1980). On social indicators and development. Dakar: United Nations African Institute for Economic Development and Planning.

    Google Scholar 

  • Axford, B. (2007). Editorial. Globalizations, 4(3), 321–326.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bauer, R. A. (1967). Detection and anticipation of impact: the nature of the task. In R. A. Bauer (Ed.), Social Indicators. Cambridge Mass: The MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beck, U. (2004). Der kosmopolitische Blick order: Krieg ist Frieden. Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cartocci, R. (1984). Concetti e indicatori: il contributo della nuova retorica. Sociologia e Ricerca Sociale, 5(13), 69–98.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cartwright, L. E. (2000). Selecting local sustainable development indicators: does consensus exist in their choice and purpose? Planning Practice & Research, 15(1–2), 1565–1578.

    Google Scholar 

  • Caselli, M. (2001). Misurare lo sviluppo. Tecniche e problemi. Genova: Ecig.

    Google Scholar 

  • Caselli, M. (2008). Measuring. What? Notes on some globalization indices. Globalizations, 5(3), 383–404.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Church, C. J., & McHarry, J. (1994). Indications of sustainability. Town & Country Planning, 63(7–8), 208–209.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cipolla, C. (1987). Indicatore Sociale. In F. Demarchi, A. Ellena & B. Cattarinussi (a cura di) Nuovo Dizionario di Sociologia (pp. 999–1004), Torino: Edizioni Paoline.

    Google Scholar 

  • Corbetta, P. (1999). Metodologia e tecniche della ricerca sociale. Bologna: Il Mulino.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dreher, A. (2006). Does globalization affect growth? Evidence from a new index of globalization. Applied Economies, 38(10), 1091–1110.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dreher, A., Gaston, N., & Martens, P. (2008). Measuring globalisation. Gauging its consequences. New York: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Drewnowski, J. (1970). Studies in the measurement of levels of living and welfare. Geneva: Unrisd.

    Google Scholar 

  • Giaccardi, C., & Magatti, M. (2003). L’io globale. Dinamiche della socialità contemporanea. Roma-Bari: Laterza.

    Google Scholar 

  • Graziosi, M. (1979). Problemi nella misurazione del benessere sociale: indicatori oggettivi e soggettivi. Quaderni di Sociologia, 28(1), 71–101.

    Google Scholar 

  • Horn, R. V. (1993). Statistical indicators for the economic and social sciences. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Lazarsfeld, P. F. (1959). Problems in methodology. In R. K. Merton, L. Broom, & L. S. Cottrel Jr. (Eds.), Sociology Today. Problems and Prospects. New York: Basic Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lazarsfeld, P. F., & Barton, A. H. (1961). Some functions of qualitative analysis in social research. In S. M. Lipset & N. J. Smelser (Eds.), Sociology. The progress of a decade. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marradi, A. (1980). Concetti e metodo per la ricerca sociale. Firenze: Giuntina.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marradi, A. (1994). Referenti, pensiero e linguaggio: una questione rilevante per gli indicatori. Sociologia e Ricerca Sociale, 15(43), 137–207.

    Google Scholar 

  • Martell, L. (2007). The third wave in globalization theory. International Studies Review, 9, 173–196.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Martens, P., & Zywietz, D. (2006). Rethinking globalisation: a modified globalisation index. Journal of International Development, 18, 331–350.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McGranahan, D. (1971). Analysis of socio-economic development through a system of indicators. The Annals of The American Academy of Political and Social Science, 393, 65–81.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McGranahan, D. (1972). Development indicators and development models. In N. Baster (Ed.), Measuring Development. London: Frank Class.

    Google Scholar 

  • Morris, M. D. (1979). Measuring the condition of the world’s poor. The physical quality of life index. New York: Pergamon Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Oecd. (2008). Handbook on constructing composite indicators. Methodology and user guide Oecd Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Parra Saiani, P. (2009). Gli indicatori sociali. Milano: FrancoAngeli.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ray, L. (2007). Globalization and everyday life. Abingdon: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rosenberg, J. (2005). Globalization Theory: A Post Mortem. International Politics, 42, 2–74.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sachs, I. (1995). Introduction: the quantitative and qualitative measurement of development–its implications and limitations. International Social Science Journal, 143, 1–10.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sassen, S. (2000). New frontiers facing urban sociology at the Millennium. British Journal of Sociology, 51(1), 143–159.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sassen, S. (2007). A Sociology of Globalization. New York: Norton.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scamuzzi, S. (1996). Misurare le società. Indicatori sociali di modernizzazione, benessere, disuguaglianza. Torino: Il Segnalibro.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scholte, J. A. (2000). Globalization. A critical introduction. Basingstoke: Palgrave.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scholte, J. A. (2005). Globalization. A critical introduction (2nd ed.). Basingstoke: Palgrave.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scidà, G. (1997). Sociologia dello sviluppo. Milano: Jacka Book.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sharpe, A. (2004). Literature review of frameworks for macro-indicators. Ottawa: Centre for the Study of Living Standards.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sklair, L. (1999). Competing conceptions of globalization. Journal of World-Systems Research, 5(2), 143–163.

    Google Scholar 

  • Streeten, P. (1995). Human development: the debate about the index. International Social Science Journal, 143, 25–37.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tufte, E. R. (Ed.). (1970). The Quantitative Analysis of Social Problems. Reading: Addison-Wesley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Undp. (2000). Human Development Report 2000. Human Rights and Human Development. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • United Nations. (1989). Handbook on Social Indicators. New York: UN Pubblications.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Dipartimento di Sociologia, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Largo Gemelli 1, 20123, Milan, Italy

    Assoc. Prof. Marco Caselli

Authors
  1. Assoc. Prof. Marco Caselli
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Marco Caselli .

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2012 The Author(s)

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Caselli, M. (2012). Measuring Complexity. In: Trying to Measure Globalization. SpringerBriefs in Political Science. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-2807-3_2

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation