首页> 外文期刊>SAGE Open >Nation States, Cities, and People: Alternative Ways to Measure Globalization
【24h】

Nation States, Cities, and People: Alternative Ways to Measure Globalization

机译:民族国家,城市和人民:衡量全球化的替代方法

获取原文
       

摘要

In the first decade of the 21st century, attempts to measure globalization have multiplied, and they have led to the devising of diverse instruments, most notably the A. T. Kearney/Foreign Policy Globalization Index, the CSGR Globalisation Index, the KOF Index of Globalization, and the Maastricht Globalisation Index. Besides important similarities as regards structure, the dimensions considered, and the indicators used, the main feature shared by these instruments is the fact that they all use the same unit of analysis: the nation-state. This is a somewhat paradoxical situation, if one considers that one of the most distinctive characteristics of globalization is precisely that its dynamics extend beyond the state and the country. Gives this premise, the aim of the article is, on the one hand, to justify in any case the use of instruments that seek to measure globalization on the basis of states, and, on the other, to propose alternative approaches to such measurement. The articlea??s underlying assumption is that different approaches to the measurement of globalization are not mutually exclusive. Rather, such a plurality of perspectives is opportune and desirable given the complexity and multidimensionality of the concept of globalization.
机译:在21世纪的前十年,衡量全球化的尝试成倍增加,并导致了多种工具的设计,其中最引人注目的是AT Kearney /外交政策全球化指数,CSGR全球化指数,KOF全球化指数以及马斯特里赫特全球化指数。除了在结构,所考虑的维度和所使用的指标方面的重要相似性外,这些工具的主要特点还在于它们都使用相同的分析单位:民族国家。如果有人认为全球化最显着的特征之一就是全球化的动态范围超越了国家和国家,那将是一种有点自相矛盾的情况。在此前提下,本文的目的一方面是在任何情况下证明使用试图根据国家来衡量全球化的手段是合理的,另一方面,提出了进行这种衡量的替代方法。 Articlea的基本假设是,衡量全球化的不同方法并不相互排斥。相反,鉴于全球化概念的复杂性和多维性,这样的多个观点是适当的和可取的。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号