globalisation : hier et aujourd`hui

GLOBALISATION : HIER ET AUJOURD’HUI
DOSSIER, P. Martin, Cours de Licence Paris1, Commerce International 2003
I.
Exportations de marchandises en % du PIB
Pays
1820 1890 1913 1929 1950 1973 1992 1998
France
Allemagne
Pays-Bas
UK
USA
Argentina
Brésil
Mexico
China
Inde
Japon
Corée
Thaïlande
Monde
1.3
nd
nd
3.1
2.0
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
nd
0.0
nd
1.0
14.2
15.9
17.4
27.3
5.6
9.4
12.2
3.9
0.7
2.6
0.2
0.0
2.2
4.6
15.5
19.9
17.3
29.8
6.1
6.8
9.8
9.1
1.7
4.6
2.4
1.2
6.8
7.9
8.6
12.8
17.2
13.3
3.6
6.1
6.9
12.5
1.8
3.7
3.5
4.5
6.6
9.0
7.6
6.2
12.2
11.3
3.0
2.4
3.9
3.0
2.6
2.9
2.2
0.7
7.0
5.5
15.2
23.8
40.7
14.0
4.9
2.1
2.5
1.9
1.5
2.0
7.7
8.2
4.1
10.5
22.9
32.6
55.3
21.4
8.2
4.3
4.7
6.4
2.3
1.7
12.4
17.8
11.4
13.5
28.7
38.9
61.2
25.0
10.1
7.0
5.4
10.7
4.9
2.4
13.4
36.3
13.1
17.2
Source: Feenstra et Findlay and O™Rourke (2001). nd = non disponible
II.
Investissement direct étranger, 1913-1995
1913
Pays développés
1938
France
Allemagne
Pays Bas
UK
US
23
11
82
49
7
21
1
91
38
8
1914
1930s
40
51
PVD
Moyenne
1950
1971
stock de IDE sortant /PIB (%)
9
4
5
3
35
17
8
1950s
1970
stock de IDE entrant/ PIB (%)
30
13
Source: Twomey (2000), Table 3.4, p. 35; Table 7.2, p. 195.
1980
1995
4
25
15
8
25
10
47
28
18
1995
18
III.
Sales price/purchase price
Figure 1. Spice and coffee markups:
Amsterdam vs. Southeast Asia 1580-1939
25
20
15
10
5
0
1580s1620s1660s1700s1740s1780s1820s1860s1900s
Year
Cloves
Black pepper Coffee
Source: O'Rourke and Williamson (2002a).
IV.
13
Figure 4: Transportation v. Communication
Cost
1920-1950
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
Ocean freight
Air
Satellite
Transatlantic phone
0
1920
1930
1940
Source: World Bank (1995).
1950
1960
1970
1980
1990
Frances Cairncross further documents the remarkable decline in the cost of trading
The Death of Distance
.8 The costs of a 3-minute call from New York to London fell from abou
1930 to a few pennies today. Even as recently as 1960, the call would have cost somet
very recent expansion of telephone capacity is
Table
8: last
Tariffs on Manufactured Goods, 1820,
equally impressive, as Table 7 shows.
The
1875,
1913on the
column in the table also presents figures
exponential growth of the most recent form ofcirca
(Percentages)
1820
1875 1913
communications, the Internet.
AustriaCommunications that are this cheap
have prohibi15- 13Belgium
9-10 9
altered the nature of international
trade/a and
Denmark
30
15- 14
investment. Cairncross (1997) is full
of antidotes
France
prohibi12- 20of the following type. Using the Germany
internet,
an
/b na
4-6 13
accountancy firm in Southern England
Italy(Dyer na
8-10 18Portugal for
15 a
20- na
Partnership) acts as the finance department
Russia Dyer prohibi15- 84
Ukrainian manufacturer of wind turbines.
Spain
prohibi1534handles all the financial reporting, include profit
Sweden
prohibi3-5 20and loss statements. In addition to
changes
in
Switzerland10
4-6 8-9
transport and communications cost, the
two waves
Netherlands7
3-5 4
50
0
0
witnessed important changes in trade UK
policy.
US
45
40- 44
Although it is difficult to document,
the
Argentina
na 28
increased ease, reliability and lower
cost na
of
Brazil
na
na 50telecommunications has undoubtedly Colombia
promoted na
na 40the explosion of foreign direct investment.
Mexico This
na is
na 40especially true of FDI in the service
sector where
China
na
na 4-5
na or na 3-4
foreign affiliates are often sellingIran
information
Siam
na
na 2-3
expertise.
Turkey
na
na 5-10
Notes
: “prohibition” indicates many import
Tariffs: Then and Now
prohibitions. (a) Belgium part of Netherlands in
th
century saw both the rise of trade
The 19
1820; (b) Prussian data for Germany in 1820;
liberalisation and the development of modern
Sources
: Bairoch (1989) Tables
; Bairoch
3, 5, 9
and Kozul-Wright (1996) Tab 2
8
The demise of distance has been greatly exaggerated when it comes to commodity trade.
model, which uses distance and partner country GDPs as its main explanatory variables,
excellent job of accounting for the geographical pattern of trade. In particular, the d
elasticity is about
; See–0.7
Baldwin (1994 Chapter 3) for further details.
Figure 3. International grain prices
Coefficient of variation
0.7
Coefficient of variation
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
1966 1968 1970 1972 1974 1976 1978 1980 1982 1984 1986 1988 1990 1992 1994
Year
Wheat
Source: see text.
Maize
VI.
Figure 2.2: Unweighted World Average Own Tariff, 35 Countries, %
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
1860
1880
1900
1920
1940
5
1960
1980
2000
VII.
Tarifs moyens sur les produits manufacturés : 1913-1998
Tarifs
moyens
sur lestariffs
produits
manufacturés : selected
1913-1998
Table 2.1.
Average
on manufactures,
countries, 1913-1998
Austria
Belgium
Denmark
France
Germany
Italy
Netherlands
Spain
Sweden
UK
EU
Russia
Switzerland
Australia
Canada
Japan
New Zealand
USA
Argentina
Brazil
Colombia
Mexico
China
India
Iran
Thailand
Turkey
1913
18
9
14
20
13
18
4
41
20
0
NA
84
9
16
26
25-30
15-20
44
28
50-70
40-60
40-50
4-5
approx. 5
3-4
2-3
5-10
1931
24
14
–
30
21
46
-63
21
-NA
**
19
----48
----------
1950
18
11
3
18
26
25
11
-9
23
NA
**
-----14
----------
1980
14.6
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
8.3
6.2
NA
8.3
**
3.3
--9.9
-7
----------
1998/99
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
4.1
13.4a
3.2b
6
4.9
5.5
4.4
4.5
14
15.2
11.4
12.6
17.4
34.2
-47.2c
0.25
Sources: Bairoch (1989; 1993); World Development Indicators 2000.
Notes:: NA
= not
= not available;
** refers
fact that the
Notes
NA=
nonapplicable;
applicable –(Union
Européenne)
; - = to
pasthe
disponible
; **USSR
la
a
ran
such
a
restrictive
trade
policy
that
average
tariffs
were
irrelevant;
=
1997; b
politiquec commerciale de l’URSS était si restrictive qu’un tarif moyen n’est
= 1996; = 1993.
pas calculable ; a= 1997 ; b= 1996 ; c= 1993
1
VIII.
Niveaux de protection (tarifs et autres barrières, équivalents tarifs en %), 1996
(post – Uruguay Round)
NAFTA
(Can, US, Mex)
Céréales
Autres agri.
Vêtements
Chimie, plastiques
Produit métal.
Transport
Manuf (autres)
2
38
19
7
6
3
5
U.E.
Afrique
Am. du Sud Asie
Sub-Sahara
71
52
10
12
2
5
3
20
6
20
8
13
10
14
Source : Global Trade Analysis Poject dataset, 1996.
2
3
23
13
16
19
18
17
20
21
12
19
23
17
IX.
Intégration économique
internationale
Temps
Une histoire brève de la globalisation
X.
Parts respectives des différentes régions dans le PIB mondial
Figure 2.3: Regions' share of world GDP
100%
Reste du
monde
80%
Inde
Rest World
Br. India
Other E.Asia
Japan
China
N.America
Rest W.Eu
UK
60%
Japon
Chine
Am. Du Nord
40%
20%
UK
Autre Eur. Occ.
0%
1820
1870
1913
1950
1998
PartsFigure
respectives
des différentes
dans la production
2.4: Regions'
share inrégions
world industrial
production
industrielle mondiale
100%
Reste du
monde
80%
Inde
Rest World
Br. India
Other E.Asia
Japan
China
N.America
Rest W.Eur
UK
60%
Japon
Am. Du Nord
40%
Chine
Autre Eur. Occ.
20%
UK
0%
1750
1830
1880
1913
6
1953
1998
XI.
Distribution mondiale du revenu et espérance de vie:
Inégalité et indices de pauvreté
Année
1820 1870 1910 1929 1950 1970 1992
Revenu mondial moyen
(PPP $ 1990)
659
890
1460 1817 2145 3774 4962
Population mondiale
(millions)
1057 1266 1719 2042 2511 3664 5459
parts des revenus (%)
10% les plus élevés 42,8 47,6
20% les plus bas
4,7
3,8
ratio
9,1
12,4
Coefficient de Gini
50,9
3,0
16,8
49,8
2,9
17,2
51,3
2,4
21,2
50,8
2,2
23,4
53,4
2,2
23,8
0,500 0,560 0,610 0,616 0,640 0,650 0,657
Pauvreté (per cent)
Pauvreté ($2 par jour,
ajusté de l’inflation) 94,4
Extrême pauvreté
($1 par jour)
83,9
89,6
82,4
75,9
71,9
60,1
51,3
75,4
65,6
56,3
54,8
35,6
23,7
Pauvreté ( Millions de personnes)
Pauvreté ($2 par jour)
998
1134 1416 1550 1543 2266 2545
Extrême pauvreté
($1 par jour)
887
954
1128 1150 1376 1305 1294
Espérance de vie
Moyenne
26,5
32,8
38,5
50,1
59,4
61,1
Source: Bourguignon & Morrison (2001, table 1)
Note : Le coefficient de Gini est une mesure de l’inégalité souvent utilisée par les
économistes. Un coefficient de Gini de zéro implique une égalité parfaite des revenus dans
la population. Un coefficient de 1 implique une inégalité maximale. En France, ce coefficient
est de 0,33 (un peu en dessous de la moyenne OCDE). Il est de 0,25 en Suède, 0,40 aux
Etats-Unis et 0,63 au Brésil.
XII.
Commerce en % du PIB
Figure 1: Trade/GDP
70.0%
Rich Countries
Globalizers
60.0%
Non-Globalizers
Trade/GDP
50.0%
40.0%
30.0%
20.0%
10.0%
0.0%
1960s
1970s
1980s
1990s
Note:
Rich
countries
refers to the
OECD
economies
expansions,
Chile,
Les
pays
riches
représentent
2424
pays
OCDE,
plus lebefore
Chili,recent
Hong-Kong,
la plus
Corée,
Hong Kong, Korea, Taiwan, and Singapore. Globalizers refers to the top one-third in terms
Taiwan et Singapour. Les « globalizers » représentent, parmi 72 PVD, le groupe
of their growth in trade relative to GDP between 1975-79 and 1995-97 of a group of 72
(premier
tiers)
qui afor
connu
plus
grosse
augmentation
duofcommerce
par rapport
developing
countries
whichlawe
have
data on
trade as a share
GDP in constant
local au
PIB
entreunits
1975-1979
1995-1997.
Les « non-globalizers
représentent
le reste du
currency
since theet
mid-1970s.
Non-globalizers
refers to the»remaining
developing
groupe
des
PVD.
Chiffres
pondérés
parand
la are
population.
countries
in this
group.
Averages
decadal
population-weighted. Unweighted
averages and alternative definitions of globalizers are reported in Table 3. Variable
definitions and data sources are reported in Table 8.
28
XIII.
Taux
de3:croissance
du PIBGDP
par habitant
Figure
Real Per Capita
Growth
6.0%
Rich Countries
Real Per Capita GDP Growth
Globalizers
5.0%
Non-Globalizers
4.0%
3.0%
2.0%
1.0%
0.0%
1960s
1970s
1980s
1990s
Note: Rich countries refers to the 24 OECD economies before recent expansions, plus Chile,
Les pays
riches
représentent
pays OCDE,
plus lerefers
Chili,
la in
Corée,
Hong
Kong,
Korea,
Taiwan, and24
Singapore.
Globalizers
to Hong-Kong,
the top one-third
terms
Taiwan
et Singapour.
Les « globalizers
» représentent,
le of
groupe
of
their growth
in trade relative
to GDP between
1975-79 and parmi
1995-9772ofPVD,
a group
72
(premier tiers)
qui aforconnu
par rapport
developing
countries
whichlaweplus
havegrosse
data onaugmentation
trade as a shareduofcommerce
GDP in constant
local au
PIB entre
1975-1979
et 1995-1997.
Les « non-globalizers
représentent
le reste du
currency
units
since the mid-1970s.
Non-globalizers
refers to the »remaining
developing
countries
in this
group.
Averages
decadalpar
andlaare
population-weighted. Unweighted
groupe des
PVD.
Chiffres
pondérés
population.
averages and alternative definitions of globalizers are reported in Table 3. Variable
definitions and data sources are reported in Table 8.
30
XIV.
Commerce, tarifs et croissance
(pondérés par la population)
1960s
Volumes
commerce
Pays riches 20.5%
Globalizers 15.7%
Non-Globalizers 49.7%
1970s
1980s
1990s
29.3%
16.0%
59.9%
36.8%
24.7%
51.8%
50.0%
32.6%
49.1%
5.0%
57.4%
30.6%
5.0%
34.5%
20.3%
2.3%
3.5%
0.8%
2.2%
5.0%
1.4%
Tarifs moyens
Pays riches
Globalizers
Non-Globalizers
Croissance moyenne
Pays riches 4.7%
Globalizers 1.4%
Non-Globalizers 2.4%
Source : Dollar et Kraay
3.1%
2.9%
3.3%
XV.
Variation des mesures d’inégalité parmi les pays « globalizers »
Coefficient de Gini
Initial
Bangladesh
28.9 (1989)
Brésil
57.8 (1980)
China
32 (1980)
Colombie
54.5 (1978)
Costa Rica
47.5 (1981)
République
Dominicaine
43.3 (1984)
Hongrie
24.2 (1987)
Inde
31.5 (1983)
Indonésie
33.1 (1987)
Cote d’Ivoire
41.2 (1985)
Jamaïque
43.2 (1988)
Jordanie
36.1 (1986)
Malaisie
51 (1979)
Mali
36.5 (1989)
Mexico
50.6 (1984)
Philippines
46.1 (1985)
Thaïlande
45.2 (1980)
Final
Croissance du PIB/habitant
Moyenne
20% les plus pauvres
33.6 (1996)
3.1%
1.8%
60 (1996)
0.1%
-0.8%
40.3 (1998)
5.4%
3.8%
57.1 (1996)
1.6%
1.4%
47 (1996)
0.6%
1.8%
48.7 (1996)
1.3%
-0.8%
24.6 (1997)
-0.8%
-1.4%
29.7 (1994)
3.2%
3.8%
31.5 (1999)
2.5%
3.0%
36.7 (1995)
-3.4%
-1.2%
36.4 (1996)
-0.2%
3.2%
36.4 (1997)
-2.0%
-1.6%
48.5 (1995)
4.3%
5.4%
50.5 (1994)
-2.6%
-11.0%
53.7 (1995)
0.6%
-0.5%
45.1 (1994)
1.2%
2.6%
41.4 (1998)
4.0%
4.7%
Dollar et Kraay (2001)