Towards crisis protection(ism)? COVID-19 and selective de-globalization

IF 2 Q3 BUSINESS

Critical Perspectives on International Business Pub Date : 2021-03-04 DOI:10.1108/CPOIB-05-2020-0046

L. Branicki, Bridgette Sullivan-Taylor, Stephen Brammer

{"title":"Towards crisis protection(ism)? COVID-19 and selective de-globalization","authors":"L. Branicki, Bridgette Sullivan-Taylor, Stephen Brammer","doi":"10.1108/CPOIB-05-2020-0046","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Purpose: Drawing on Wendt’s (1995, 1999) thin constructivist approach to international relations this paper aims to critically examine how the measures taken by the Australian Government to protect the country from coronavirus (COVID-19) have prompted politicians and opinion-makers to mobilize globalizing and de-globalizing discourses towards divergent conceptualizations of national resilience Design/methodology/approach: The paper examines 172 Australian political and media articles, which focus on both COVID-19 and globalization/de-globalization published between February and June 2020 The data were imported to NVivo to enable in-depth thematic analysis Findings: The paper develops the concept of crisis protectionism to explain how COVID-19 has been mobilized in discourses aimed at accelerating selective de-globalization in Australia Selective de-globalization is inductively theorized as involving material structures (i e border closures), ideational structures (i e national identity) and intersubjectivities (i e pre-existing inter-country antagonisms) Research limitations/implications: The paper relies upon publicly available data about Australian discourses that relate to a unique globally disrupting extreme event Practical implications: Crisis protectionism and selective de-globalization are important to multinational enterprises (MNE) that operate in essential industry sectors (e g medical supply firms), rely upon open borders (e g the university sector) and for MNEs entering/operating in a host country experiencing antagonistic relationships with their home country Originality/value: The paper extends Witt’s (2019) political theorization of de-globalization towards a socialized theory of de-globalization By rejecting liberal and realist explanations of the relationship between COVID-19 and de-globalization, this study highlights the importance and endogeneity of non-market risks and non-economic logic to international business and MNE strategy © 2020, Emerald Publishing Limited","PeriodicalId":46124,"journal":{"name":"Critical Perspectives on International Business","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-03-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"11","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Critical Perspectives on International Business","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/CPOIB-05-2020-0046","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"BUSINESS","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 11

Abstract

Purpose: Drawing on Wendt’s (1995, 1999) thin constructivist approach to international relations this paper aims to critically examine how the measures taken by the Australian Government to protect the country from coronavirus (COVID-19) have prompted politicians and opinion-makers to mobilize globalizing and de-globalizing discourses towards divergent conceptualizations of national resilience Design/methodology/approach: The paper examines 172 Australian political and media articles, which focus on both COVID-19 and globalization/de-globalization published between February and June 2020 The data were imported to NVivo to enable in-depth thematic analysis Findings: The paper develops the concept of crisis protectionism to explain how COVID-19 has been mobilized in discourses aimed at accelerating selective de-globalization in Australia Selective de-globalization is inductively theorized as involving material structures (i e border closures), ideational structures (i e national identity) and intersubjectivities (i e pre-existing inter-country antagonisms) Research limitations/implications: The paper relies upon publicly available data about Australian discourses that relate to a unique globally disrupting extreme event Practical implications: Crisis protectionism and selective de-globalization are important to multinational enterprises (MNE) that operate in essential industry sectors (e g medical supply firms), rely upon open borders (e g the university sector) and for MNEs entering/operating in a host country experiencing antagonistic relationships with their home country Originality/value: The paper extends Witt’s (2019) political theorization of de-globalization towards a socialized theory of de-globalization By rejecting liberal and realist explanations of the relationship between COVID-19 and de-globalization, this study highlights the importance and endogeneity of non-market risks and non-economic logic to international business and MNE strategy © 2020, Emerald Publishing Limited

查看原文本刊更多论文

走向危机保护(主义)?COVID-19和选择性去全球化

目的:利用Wendt(1999,1999)对国际关系的建构主义方法，本文旨在批判性地研究澳大利亚政府为保护国家免受冠状病毒(COVID-19)的侵害而采取的措施如何促使政治家和舆论制造者动员全球化和去全球化的话语，以实现国家复原力设计/方法/方法的不同概念:该论文研究了2020年2月至6月期间发表的172篇澳大利亚政治和媒体文章，重点关注COVID-19和全球化/去全球化。数据导入NVivo，以便进行深入的专题分析。本文发展了危机保护主义的概念，以解释COVID-19如何在旨在加速澳大利亚选择性去全球化的话语中被动员起来。选择性去全球化被归纳为涉及物质结构(如边境关闭)、观念结构(如国家认同)和主体间性(如预先存在的国家间对抗)。这篇论文依赖于澳大利亚的公开数据，这些数据与一个独特的全球破坏性极端事件有关。危机保护主义和选择性去全球化对于在重要工业部门(如医疗用品公司)经营、依赖开放边界(如大学部门)的跨国企业(MNE)以及进入/在东道国经营的与本国存在敌对关系的跨国企业(MNE)来说非常重要。本文将Witt(2019)的去全球化政治理论扩展到社会化的去全球化理论，通过拒绝对COVID-19与去全球化之间关系的自由主义和现实主义解释，本研究突出了非市场风险和非经济逻辑对国际商业和跨国公司战略的重要性和内生性©2020,Emerald Publishing Limited

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Critical Perspectives on International Business BUSINESS-

CiteScore

4.20

自引率

15.00%

发文量

期刊介绍： In recent years, the business practices and management philosophies of global enterprises have been subject to increasingly close scrutiny by commentators in the fields of journalism and academia. Such scrutiny has been motivated by a growing desire to examine the nature of globalisation, its impact on specific communities and its benefits for society as a whole. Coverage includes, but is not restricted to, issues of: ■Globalization ■Production and consumption ■Economic change ■Societal change ■Politics and power of organizations and governments ■Environmental impact