Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Global Social Policy
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Carroll, E.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

Journal Artical

The Clear and Present Danger of the `Globaloney' Industry

Globalization Concepts in Welfare Research and Social Opinion Pieces Since 1995

Eero Carroll

Stockholm University, Sweden

To what extent is globalization given an institutionally elaborated definition in studies on its welfare, welfare state and/or social policy impacts published since 1995? And, is it seen to inhibit or stimulate welfare (state) development? These questions are addressed through a study sample (N = 161) from the International Bibliography of the Social Sciences, subjected to combinatory analysis similar to qualitative comparative analysis (QCA) using a pre-typological classification of definition components. Disaggregated definitions oriented to relations and actors (most often trade and/or competition as well as international organizations) coincide with polarized welfare (state) impacts, envisioned or real, of globalization. Positive overall globalization impacts are rare in this literature. Mixed or zero impacts claims are more common in studies including an arena-related component (often global market integration) in defining globalization, possibly indicating less determinism in views thereof, but also conventionalism in perspectives on markets. Future research needs more methodological rigour and scepticism of overgeneralized assertions on globalization's impacts.

Key Words: globalization • institutions • international organizations • trade • welfare state

Global Social Policy, Vol. 3, No. 2, 195-211 (2003)
DOI: 10.1177/1468018103003002007
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?