The case against globaloney

Economist by Schumpeter, Pankaj Ghemawat | Apr. 29, 2011 (Opinion)

Mr Ghemawat points out that many indicators of global integration are surprisingly low. Only 2% of students are at universities outside their home countries; and only 3% of people live outside their country of birth. Only 7% of rice is traded across borders. Only 7% of directors of S&P 500 companies are foreigners—and, according to a study a few years ago, less than 1% of all American companies have any foreign operations. Exports are equivalent to only ... Full Story »

Posted by Fabrice Florin

More Info

Tags Help
Subjects: World, Business
Topics: Global Economy, Globalization
Stats Help
# Tweets: 1 (as of 2011-04-29)
Editorial Help
Posted by: Posted by Fabrice Florin - Apr 29, 2011 - 9:35 AM PDT
Reviewed by: Fabrice Florin (review), Naomi Isler (review), Warrior Wheatman (review), Walter Cox (review), Sirajul Islam (review), Mike Carlson (review)
Content Type: Article
Edit Lock: This story can be edited
Edited by: Fabrice Florin - Apr 29, 2011 - 9:38 AM PDT
Related Comments: Global Economy (2)

Reviews

Show All Comments
Show All | Notes | Comments | Quotes | Links
Sirajul Islam
4.1
 by Sirajul Islam - Apr. 30, 2011

This is a good book review. Data can be selective and the extent of globalisation may be overstated. In this article, the blogger however gone too far the other way.

See Full Review » (18 answers)
Mike Carlson
4.1
 by Mike Carlson - May. 1, 2011

Mr Ghemawat's evidence flies in the face of media reports. Yet, who is the expert in matters economic? I applaud Mr. Ghemawat's wide ranging analysis in an area where a the available raw data is questionnable and limited source analyses are destined to be stained by observational bias.

See Full Review » (4 answers)
Walter Cox
4.5
 by Walter Cox - Apr. 29, 2011
See Full Review » (10 answers)
Fabrice Florin
4.0
 by Fabrice Florin - Apr. 29, 2011
Fabrice posted this story.
See Full Review » (10 answers)
Warrior Wheatman
2.1
 by Warrior Wheatman - Apr. 29, 2011

This book-review did a disservice to both the author and to the Economist. He simplified into black/white, perceiving the author to mean the glass is half empty, then cited the data for support. The author's comment to this article seems to suggest we're at the half-full stage in globalization, and the statistics are significant.

"Exports are equivalent to "only" 20% of wolrd GDP." "Foreign direct investment accounts for "only" 9% of all fixed investment". ""Less" than 20% of venture capital", ""only" 20% of shares traded owned by foreigners". Instead, the author apears to sugest we're half way to a Global Union.

See Full Review » (7 answers)
Naomi Isler
4.0
 by Naomi Isler - Apr. 29, 2011

Well, it's journalism based on statistics, but are the statistics verifiable? And even small percentages of something 'worldwide' will turn out to be pretty big.

So why is almost everything I buy made in China?

See Full Review » (5 answers)
| Hide 1 Comment

Comments on this story (3)Help (BETA)

Sort by: Oldest | Newest Hide All Replies
NT Rating | My Rating

Ratings

3.9

Good
from 6 reviews (70% confidence)
Quality
3.9
Facts
4.0
Fairness
4.0
Information
4.2
Insight
3.8
Style
3.2
Accuracy
4.0
Balance
4.0
Context
4.3
Depth
4.0
Enterprise
4.0
Expertise
4.0
Originality
4.0
Relevance
4.0
Transparency
2.0
Responsibility
4.0
Popularity
3.9
Recommendation
3.7
Credibility
4.0
# Reviews
3.0
# Views
5.0
# Likes
1.0
# Emails
1.0
More
How our ratings work »
(See these related stories.)

Links Help

No links yet. Please review this story to add some!