The Unassuming Economist

From a paper by Zheng Chris Cao:

“In recent years, international tourism has grappled with various impediments to cross-border activities triggered by geopolitical shifts. This study examines whether globalization is in retreat through the lens of international tourism. We employed spatial autoregressive models, in which several connectivity mechanisms are embedded, to analyze a global dataset of tourist flows. Our findings reveal that spatial dependence in tourism flows significantly weakened during the 2008 Global Financial Crisis and became increasingly driven by institutional factors, while the effects of trade links and geographical proximity diminished. This study contributes to the literature on tourism globalization by providing empirical evidence of the megatrends of deglobalization. For tourism firms operating under the assumption of ongoing globalization, these megatrends signal a significant change in the business environment. Firms should be prepared to reorient their market focus and reallocate their resources toward institutionally aligned regions in an evolving global landscape.”

From a paper by Alyshia Gálvez:

“Since Jan. 1, 1994, the economies of the US, Mexico and Canada have been linked in the North American Free Trade Agreement which facilitated the flow of certain kinds of goods and capital across borders and around the continent, while limiting others. Designed as a strategy for ‘mutual prosperity’ (in Bill Clinton’s words at the inaugural ceremony), NAFTA, and its successor, the USMCA, has been a failure. While untangling the entwined economies could be even more destructive than maintaining the deal, what imaginative possibilities have been foreclosed by the current agreement and how could these be opened back up? This article will engage in grounded speculation: what could an alternative or ‘anti-’ Nafta look like? What would it mean to design for mobility, freedom and abundance? How could a reconfigured agreement allow for and facilitate participation in economic, cultural, social and other kinds of exchanges at all scales, not only in ways that facilitate the participation of massive transnational corporations? What could a model for hemispheric food sovereignty designed for health and sustainability look like?”

From a chapter by Oliver Fiala and Aristide Kielem:

“The chapter highlights the challenges in assessing the impacts of shocks and crises on child poverty due to the limitations of traditional data sources, proposing the use of alternative data, nowcasting exercises, and simulations when estimating impact in an emergent crisis. The chapter suggests a three-step framework for analysing impacts: conceptualisation, data identification, and simulation. Examples from the global financial crisis in 2008/2009 and the COVID-19 pandemic illustrate how such exercises can help to track the impact of shocks on child poverty.”

From a paper by James Galbraith, Ravi Kanbur, Kunal Sen, and Andy Sumner:

“Seven decades ago, Simon Kuznets put forward the hypothesis that as economies developed, national inequality would first increase and then decrease—an inverted U-shape. He provided preliminary evidence for the hypothesis on the basis of the limited data available at the time, and theorized the genesis of the curve as arising from the twin forces of structural transformation of the economy and political economy pressures. Seven decades on, the Kuznets curve still has a hold on the development discourse as new data is used to test the hypothesis, new theories are elaborated to explain the evolution of inequality, and the metaphor of an inverse U-shape is extended beyond its original realm of national inequality. With this rich history and background, the time is right to examine the Kuznets curve literature broadly construed. This overview takes stock of what has been learned and highlights emerging research and policy questions.”

From a book edited by Ulrich Mückenberger, Heiner Fechner, and Irene Dingeldey:

“The volume Constructing Worlds of Labour aims to break new ground in presenting results on different types of labour standards around the world as regulatory social policy. The specifc topic is to make visible that, and to explain why, employment law worldwide not only has a protective role but also a segmenting role—creating social differentiation based on status, gender and/or race. We conceptualised this role of law as legal segmentation and identifed various historical and power-related reasons for it. We also want to identify how segmenting employment law interacts with segmentative implications of other (current and/or historical) legal institutions—such as social law, family law, tax law, but also legislation based on slavery, gender, race and ethnicity. As explanations, not only path dependent institutional developments are the subject of in-depth investigations but also colonial infuences, international organisations and
epistemic communities including postcolonial thought. The research outcomes are comprehensively discussed in order to derive propositions on how to overcome the described situation in the different worlds of labour. Hence, not only applying a global perspective but also treading new paths in interdisciplinary co-operation—both theoretically/normatively and empirically—makes this book outstanding.”

Continue reading here.