[雙語(yǔ)翻譯]經(jīng)濟(jì)全球化外文翻譯--經(jīng)濟(jì)全球化會(huì)影響地區(qū)不平等嗎？跨國(guó)分析（節(jié)選）

1、2200 英文單詞， 英文單詞，1.3 萬(wàn)英文字符，中文 萬(wàn)英文字符，中文 3900 字文獻(xiàn)出處： 文獻(xiàn)出處：Ezcurra R, Rodríguez-Pose A. Does economic globalization affect regional inequality? A cross-country analysis[J]. World Development, 2013, 52: 92-103.Does Econo

2、mic Globalization affect Regional Inequality? A Cross-country AnalysisROBERTO EZCURRA and ANDRE´ S RODRI´GUEZ-POSESummary— This paper investigates the relationship between economic globalization and regional in

3、equality in a panel of 47 countries over the period 1990–2007, using a measure of globalization that distinguishes the different dimensions of economic integration. The results show that there is a positive and statistic

4、ally significant association between economic globalization and the magnitude of regional disparities. Countries with a greater degree of economic integration with the rest of the world tend to register higher levels of

5、regional inequality. This finding is robust to the inclusion of additional explanatory variables and to the choice of the specific measure used to quantify the relevance of spatial inequality within the sample countries.

6、 Our analysis also reveals that the spatial impact of economic globalization is greater in low- and middle-income countries, whose levels of regional disparities are on average significantly higher than in high-income co

7、untries.Key words: regional inequality, economic globalization1. INTRODUCTIONThe territorial impact of globalization remains a hotly de- bated topic (e.g., Bhagwati, 2004; Stiglitz, 2002). The unprecedented levels of int

8、egration have surpassed the previous peak reached before the First World War (Findlay Frankel Wade, 2004), labor markets (Dreher Tomohara Frankel Rudra, 2005), or the quality of government (Al-Marhubi, 2004; Ezcurra

9、, 2012).Globalization also has an important impact on regional inequality (i.e., inequality across the various regions within a country) worldwide (e.g., Rodr´?guez-Pose, 2012; Rodr´?guez-Pose Kanbur Zhang J

10、ordaan, 2008; Sa´nchez-Reaza & Rodr´?guez-Pose, 2002) also tend to highlight a positive association between the evolution of regional inequality and the rise in the degree of trade openness. The integration

11、 of Mexico in the General Agreement on Tariff and Trade (GATT) and the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) contributed to the development of states bordering the US and to further industrialization in and around

12、the former economic hubs of the Centre of the country, while the more impoverished South languished behind.In stark contrast to the number of single-country case studies, there are few cross-country analyses to date addr

13、essing the spatial implications of a greater degree of economic integration. In a recent review of this literature, Bru¨ lhart (2011) only identifies 11 cross-country studies exploring this issue. The majority of th

14、ese papers use an indicator of urban primacy as dependent variable, which does not allow to properly discern the extent to which changes in trade patterns influence regional convergence or divergence trends. Research by

15、Rodr´?guez-Pose and Gill (2006) and Rodr´?guez-Pose (2012), by contrast, tackles the spatial consequences of trade openness head on. These analyses use different measures of spatial inequality in order to qua

16、ntify the relevance of regional disparities within the sample countries. Rodr´?guez-Pose and Gill (2006) focus their attention on eight countries—Brazil, China, Germany, India, Italy, Mexico, Spain, and the United S

17、tates—over various time spans during 1970–2000. The authors conclude that there is no clear-cut connection between changes in the degree of trade openness and regional inequality, although the association seems to be str

18、onger when sectoral shifts in trade composition are considered. Rodr´?guezPose (2012), using a range of panel data techniques, examines this issue in a sample of 15 developed and 13 emerging countries throughout the

19、 period 1970–2005. His results show that trade openness has a positive and statistically significant association with regional inequality in combination with certain country-specific conditions. Rodr´?guez-Pose (201

20、2) also finds that the spatial impact of international trade is greater in low- and middle-income countries than in high-income countries.A limited number of additional studies not dealing specifically with the spatial i

21、mplications of trade liberalizations include a measure of the degree of trade openness as a control variable in cross-country regressions whose dependent variable is an indicator of within-country spatial inequality. The