political domain: - number of in-country embassies and high commissions

R. Shanthini 17 Feb 2013

Political Domain: - Number of in-country embassies and high commissions - Number of memberships in international organizations - Trade in conventional arms as a share of military spending

Economic domain: - Trade (imports + exports) of goods and services as a

share of GDP - Gross foreign direct stocks (FDI) as a share of GDP - Gross private capital flows as a share of GDP

Maastricht Globalisation Index (MGI) variablesMaastricht Globalisation Index (MGI) variables


Social & Cultural Domain: - Migrants (who changes their country of usual residence

per 100 inhabitant) - Tourism (international arrivals + departures

per 100 inhabitants)

Technological Domain: - Phone (incoming + outgoing international telephone

traffic in minutes per capita) - Internet users as a share of population

Ecological Domain: - Eco footprint (ecological deficit in global ha)

Maastricht Globalisation Index (MGI) variables Maastricht Globalisation Index (MGI) variables contd


Maastricht Globalisation Index (MGI) Maastricht Globalisation Index (MGI)

versusversus

Sustainability IndicesSustainability Indices


Sustainability Indices considered:Sustainability Indices considered:

Human Development Index (HDI)

Environmental Performance Index (EPI) - reducing environmental stresses to human health - promoting ecosystem vitality and sound natural resource management.

Global Environment Facility (GEF) Benefits Index (GBI) - biodiversity potential

Responsible Competitiveness Index (RCI) - countries efforts to promote responsible business practices

Sustainable Society Index (SSI) - integrates various aspects of sustainability and quality of

life of a national society in a simple and transparent way, consisting of personal development, clean

environment, well-balanced society, sustainable use of resources, and sustainable world.


Spearman‘s correlations for Spearman‘s correlations for MGI and the sustainability indices:MGI and the sustainability indices:

HDI EPI GBI RCI SSI

MGI 0.795** 0.628** –0.291* 0.759** 0.170

MGI domains

Political 0.447** 0.286** 0.086 0.369** –0.051

Economical 0.413** 0.376** –0.404** 0.406** 0.202*

Social & cultural 0.724** 0.631** –0.492** 0.682** 0.247**

Technological 0.906** 0.817** –0.228* 0.869** 0.349**

Ecological 0.356** 0.202* –0.311** 0.319** 0.021


Explain the lack of (or low) relationship

between the level of globalisation and the

biodiversity potential (measured by GBI):


Explain the lack of (or low) relationship

between Society Sustainability Index (SSI)

and the level of globalisation:

As the SSI is the most comprehensive index, it is

likely that both positive and negative implications of

globalisation are reflected in the sub-indicators of

the SSI.


2010 KOF Index of Globalization2010 KOF Index of Globalization

Weights

Economic Globalization [37%]

Social Globalization [39%]

Political Globalization [25%]


2010 KOF Index of Globalization2010 KOF Index of Globalization Weights

Economic Globalization [37%] i) Actual Flows (50%)

Trade (% of GDP) (19%)Foreign Direct Investment, flows (% of GDP) (20%)Foreign Direct Investment, stocks (% of GDP) (24%)Portfolio Investment (% of GDP) (17%)Income Payments to Foreign Nationals (% of GDP) (20%)

ii) Restrictions (50%)Hidden Import Barriers (22%)Mean Tariff Rate (28%)Taxes on International Trade (% of current revenue)(27%)Capital Account Restrictions (22%)



Social Globalization [39%]

i) Data on Personal Contact (33%)Telephone Traffic (26%)Transfers (% of GDP) (3%)International Tourism (26%)Foreign Population (% of total population) (20%)International letters (per capita) (25%)

ii) Data on Information Flows (36%)Internet Users (per 1000 people) (36%)Television (per 1000 people) (36%)Trade in Newspapers (% of GDP) (28%)

iii) Data on Cultural Proximity (31%)Number of McDonald's Restaurants (per capita) (43%)Number of Ikea (per capita) (44%)Trade in books (% of GDP) (12%)



Political Globalization [25%]

Embassies in Country (25%)Membership in International Organizations (28%)Participation in U.N. Security Council Missions (22%)International Treaties (25%)


Alternative world scenarios to achieve sustainability:Alternative world scenarios to achieve sustainability:

http://www.tellus.org/programs/taxonomy.html


Conventional Worlds:Conventional Worlds:

Global system of the 21st century evolves - without major surprises,

- sharp discontinuities - or fundamental transformations

in the basis for human civilization.

Dominant values and institutions shape the future.

World economy grows rapidly.

Developing countries gradually converge toward the norms set by highly industrialized countries.



Conventional Worlds – Market Forces (MF):Conventional Worlds – Market Forces (MF):

MF incorporates - mid-range population projection (40% expansion by 2050)- mid-range development projection (global economy expands over three-fold by 2050, eightfold by 2100)- typical technological change assumptions.

MF is constructed as a future in which free trade and deregulation drive growth.

The problem of resolving the social and environmental stress arising from global population and economic growth is left to the self-correcting logic of competitive markets.



Conventional Worlds – Policy Reform (PR):Conventional Worlds – Policy Reform (PR):

PR assumes the emergence of a massive government-led effort achieves sustainability without major changes in the state-centric international order, modern institutional structures, and consumerist values.

Strong and harmonized policies are implemented that, by redirecting the world economy and promoting technological innovation, are able to achieve internationally recognized goals for

- poverty reduction, - climate change stabilization, - ecosystem preservation, - freshwater protection, and - pollution control.


If the market adaptations and policy reforms of Conventional Worlds were to prove insufficient for redirecting development away from destabilization, the global trajectory could move in an unwelcome direction.


Barbarization:Barbarization:

Barbarization scenarios envision the grim possibility that the social, economic and moral underpinnings of civilization deteriorate, as emerging problems overwhelm the coping capacity of both markets and policy reforms.



Barbarization – Fortress World:Barbarization – Fortress World:

Fortress World features an authoritarian response to the threat of breakdown.

Ensconced in protected enclaves, elites safeguard their privilege by controlling an impoverished majority and managing critical natural resources, while outside the fortress there is repression, environmental destruction and misery.



Barbarization – Fortress World:Barbarization – Fortress World:

In our troubled times, Fortress World seems the true (business-as-usual) scenario to many.

In this dark vision, the global archipelago of connected fortresses seeks to control a damaged environment and restive population.

Authorities employ geo-engineering techniques to stabilize the global climate, while dispatching (peace-keeping) militia to multiple hotspots in an attempt to quell social conflict and mass migration.

But the results are mixed: emergency measures and spotty infrastructure investment cannot keep pace with habitat loss and climate change, nor provide adequate food and water to desperate billions.



Barbarization – Breakdown:Barbarization – Breakdown:

In this scenario, crises combine and spin out of control, leading to unbridled conflict, institutional disintegration and economic collapse.



GREAT TRANSITIONS:GREAT TRANSITIONS:

Great Transitions explore visionary solutions to the sustainability challenge, including new socioeconomic arrangements and fundamental changes in values.

They depict a transition to a society that preserves natural systems, provides high levels of welfare through material sufficiency and equitable distribution, and enjoys a strong sense of social solidarity.

Population levels are stabilized at moderate levels and material flows through the economy are radically reduced through lower consumerism and massive use of green technologies.



Great Transition envisions a values-led change in the guiding paradigm of global development.

The transformation is catalyzed by the (push of) deepening crises and the (pull of) desire for a just, sustainable, and planetary civilization.



A pluralistic transnational world order coalesces as a growing cultural and political movement of global citizens spurs the establishment of effective governance institutions.

The new paradigm is rooted in a triad of ascendant values: human solidarity ecological resiliencequality of life



Less consumerist lifestyles moderate the growth thrust of Conventional Worlds scenarios, as notions of the good life turn toward qualitative dimensions of well-being:

creativity

leisure

relationships

community engagement



Population stabilizes more rapidly than in other scenarios as more equal gender roles and universal access to education and health care services lower birth rates in developing countries.



The world approaches a steady-state economy with incomes reaching about $30,000 per person by 2100, three times the current average.

Although this figure is well below the $50,000 of Conventional Worlds, the egalitarian income distributions of Great Transition leave most people far better off, while the improved social cohesion reduces conflict.

In this deeply sustainable vision, crises still linger, but the world is able to confront them with enhanced institutions for reconciliation and cooperation.



The Eco-Communalism variant incorporates the green vision of bio-regionalism, localism, face-to-face democracy, small technology and economic autarky.

GREAT TRANSITIONS – Eco-Communalism:GREAT TRANSITIONS – Eco-Communalism:



This variant shares some of the goals of the Eco-Communalism scenarios, but would seek to change the character of the urban, industrial situation (rather than to replace it), to build a more humane and equitable global civilization rather than retreat into localism.

GREAT TRANSITIONS – GREAT TRANSITIONS – The New Sustainablity Paradigm:The New Sustainablity Paradigm:



Year in which conventional fossil fuels exhausted:

Market Policy Fortress Great Forces Reform World Transition

Crude Oil 2034 2071 2034 >2105 Natural Gas 2047 2088 2049 >2123


Social dimensions of sustainability:

Enhance social stability and resilience Enhance social cohesion

Democratize governance of key institutions

Strengthen cultural diversity

Reduce poverty and hunger Decrease income and wealth disparities

Raise income to a sufficient level for all

Stabilize then reduce population

Improve access to adequate nutrition, sanitation, and freshwater

De-materialize lifestyles Moderate materialistic values

Reduce formal work time

Promote quality of life activities


Environmental and resource dimensions of sustainability:

Mitigate greenhouse gas emissions Reduce combustion of fossil-fuels and sequester CO2 emissions Minimize then reverse emissions from land-use changes Reduce other greenhouse gas emissions

Protect natural resources Reduce air and water pollution Eliminate emissions of toxic chemicals Reduce mineral flows through economy, and recycle intensively Reduce water stress

Preserve habitats Reduce urban sprawl Protect forests and other ecosystems Fish sustainably Promote ecological agriculture


Selected sustainability measures in 2005 POVERTY Chronic hunger 893 millions

CLIMATE CO2 concentration 380 ppm

FRESHWATER People in water stress 1.73 billions

ECOSYSTEM PRESSURE Deforestation Varies by region Land degradation Varies by region Marine over-fishing Pervasive


Selected sustainability targets POVERTY Chronic hunger 56 millions in 2100

CLIMATE CO2 concentration < 350 ppm by 2100Warming < 2.0 deg CCumulative CO2 emissions since 2005 < 265 GtC

FRESHWATER People in water stress < 2 billions

ECOSYSTEM PRESSURE Deforestation slow and reverse Land degradation slow and reverse Marine over-fishing slow and restore stocks

political domain: - number of in-country embassies and high commissions

Documents