National policy space: reframing the political economy of globalization and its implications for national sovereignty and democracy

ABSTRACT This paper critiques the trilemma framing of the political economy of globalization, and offers an alternative framing based on the construction of national policy space. The paper makes three main contributions. First, building on Stein (2016), it deconstructs the categories used by Rodrik (2011) and introduces distinctions between the “degree”, “type”, and “dimensions” of globalization; “effective” versus “formal” national sovereignty; “content” versus “process” of democracy; and “national” versus “global” democracy. The deconstruction shows countries face choices involving a series of margins, not a trilemma. Second, that suggests reframing the problematic in terms of national policy space, which is the “funnel” through which globalization impacts democracy and national sovereignty. Third, the paper shows a country can be impacted by globalization even if it does nothing because other countries’ actions change its possibility set. The reframing shows globalization is an intrinsically political project. To the extent it is now driving a nationalistic anti-democratic turn in politics, responsibility lies with political elites.

摘要 本文对全球化政治经济领域的三元悖论（trilemma）框架展开批判性评析，并提出基于国家政策空间构建的替代分析框架。本文主要作出三项核心贡献：其一，以Stein（2016）的研究为基础，本文解构了Rodrik（2011）所使用的分析范畴，并厘清了多组关键区分：全球化的“程度”“类型”与“维度”；实质性（effective）与形式性（formal）国家主权；民主的“内容”与“程序”；以及国家层面民主与全球层面民主。此番解构表明，各国面临的并非三元悖论框架下的固定抉择，而是一系列边际维度上的权衡。其二，这一研究路径提示我们应基于国家政策空间重构分析议题——国家政策空间正是全球化作用于民主与国家主权的“漏斗”。其三，本文证明，即便一国未采取任何主动政策，也可能受到全球化的影响：其他国家的政策行为会改变该国的可选集合（possibility set）。这一重构后的分析框架表明，全球化本质上属于一项政治性事业。就当前全球化正推动政治领域出现民族主义化的反民主转向而言，相关责任应归咎于政治精英群体。