Search

The aim of this article is to contribute to the discussion on designing alternative economic development indices by measuring economic progress in the face of the discontinuity of globalisation. To this end, we use different evaluation criteria for the 'old' (1960–1990) and the 'new' (1990–2019) globalisation. First, the historical context that has shaped the contemporary globalisation processes is outlined, which makes it possible to identify the 1990s and the subsequent change in the structure of the world industrial production and the world GDP as the most important tipping point. Based on the observation that none of the existing indices sufficiently cover all the issues, a new pilot measure of economic progress is proposed, which takes into account two time periods: the old (1960–1990) and the new (1990–2019) globalisation. The analysis of the data sample of 18 countries (G6, I6 and selected LDCs) using this measure makes it possible to assign their economies to four categories, depending on the results they have achieved; the 'winners', the 'losers', the 'late‐bloomers' and the 'inmates of industry'. Furthermore, possible directions for the future research on the subject are indicated. The data set supporting this study has been made publicly available to help in its continuation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Asia's food systems have undergone rapid economic and socio‐cultural transformations in the past 60 years. During the period, almost all the countries in the region eradicated famines and achieved food self‐sufficiency and heterogeneous levels of poverty reduction. Food system transformation in Asian countries has had similarities and differences and has been closely tied to structural transformation, political processes, and integration with the global economy. This article conducts a historical assessment of food systems transformations in seven Asian countries between 1960 and 2020 and their main economic, social, and demographic drivers. Food systems transformations are presented in terms of four phases. In the first phase, between 1960 and 1980, when most Asian countries were low‐income and low‐middle‐income, the central focus was on hunger reduction. We explore the policies and the politics of the green revolution as various Asian countries tried to achieve self‐sufficiency in food grains. In the second phase (1980–2000), agricultural productivity growth led to structural transformation, income growth, and the divergence of lower‐middle‐income and middle‐income economies, directly impacting demand for food quantity, quality, and diversity in various countries. The third phase (2000 onwards) marked a quantum change in food systems as globalization, trade integration, and changes in consumer tastes were significant drivers of food systems. We assess the changing trends in organized retail expansion, increased consumption of processed foods, and rising incidence of obesity in lower and upper‐middle‐income countries. In the final phase (beyond 2020), we highlight how the digital revolution has changed consumer behavior, and is further transforming food systems. Future food systems challenges of hunger, malnutrition, rising non‐communicable diseases, and climate change are discussed and multisectoral and multicountry policy interventions for addressing them are presented. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The need to reduce environmental degradation has led to the identification of several factors influencing environmental degradation, with the inflows of foreign direct investments (FDI) touted as a key factor. However, findings produced from the existing studies on FDI‐environmental degradation nexus are far from being conclusive, leaving policymakers under quandary regarding the precise effect of FDI on environmental degradation. We contribute to the FDI‐environmental degradation nexus debate by examining how economic development and globalization thresholds influences the role of FDI in environmental degradation in industrialized countries over the 1991–2016 period. We invoke a recently developed fixed effect panel threshold model estimation procedure that does not impose a prior functional form of the threshold. We find that FDI inflows mitigate environmental degradation when countries' levels of economic development and globalization are below the estimated thresholds. However, above the thresholds, higher FDI inflows significantly degrade the environment. Thus, unbridled economic development and globalization do not permit FDI to reduce environmental degradation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Conservation Biology is the property of Wiley-Blackwell and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)