Nation States, Cities, and People
Nation States, Cities, and People
复制标题
民族国家、城市和人民
DOI：
--
复制
发表时间：
2013
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
M. Caselli
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
M. Caselli
在21世纪的第一个十年里，衡量全球化的尝试成倍增加，它们导致了各种工具的设计，最著名的是A.T.科尔尼/外交政策全球化指数、CSGR全球化指数、KOF全球化指数和马斯特里赫特全球化指数。除了在结构、考虑的层面和使用的指标方面有重要的相似之处外，这些工具的主要特点是它们都使用相同的分析单位：民族国家。这是一种有点自相矛盾的情况，如果人们认为全球化最明显的特征之一恰恰是它的动态超出了国家和国家的范围。在这一前提下，该条的目的一方面是为了在任何情况下证明使用试图以国家为基础衡量全球化的工具的合理性，另一方面则是提出衡量全球化的替代办法。这篇文章的基本假设是，衡量全球化的不同方法并不相互排斥。相反，考虑到全球化概念的复杂性和多面性，这种多元化的观点是恰当和可取的。
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 article’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.