Research of globalization’s interrupted character in context of social development and global security. Part 1. Analysis of pre-crisis period (up to second half of 2008)
In given research we introduce the new valuating method of globalization in scope of basic social development and global security indicators, further named as SDS. By implementing the well-known KOF and newly introduced SDS methods the comparative analysis of globalization level among different stat...
Saved in:
| Date: | 2009 |
|---|---|
| Main Author: | |
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Навчально-науковий комплекс "Інститут прикладного системного аналізу" НТУУ "КПІ" МОН та НАН України
2009
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://nasplib.isofts.kiev.ua/handle/123456789/12409 |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| Journal Title: | Digital Library of Periodicals of National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine |
| Cite this: | Research of globalization’s interrupted character in context of social development and global security. Part 1. Analysis of pre-crisis period (up to second half of 2008)/ A. Zgurovsky // Систем. дослідж. та інформ. технології. — 2009. — № 2. — С. 121-132. — Бібліогр.: 10 назв. — англ. |
Institution
Digital Library of Periodicals of National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine| _version_ | 1860058677249048576 |
|---|---|
| author | Zgurovsky, A. |
| author_facet | Zgurovsky, A. |
| citation_txt | Research of globalization’s interrupted character in context of social development and global security. Part 1. Analysis of pre-crisis period (up to second half of 2008)/ A. Zgurovsky // Систем. дослідж. та інформ. технології. — 2009. — № 2. — С. 121-132. — Бібліогр.: 10 назв. — англ. |
| collection | DSpace DC |
| description | In given research we introduce the new valuating method of globalization in scope of basic social development and global security indicators, further named as SDS. By implementing the well-known KOF and newly introduced SDS methods the comparative analysis of globalization level among different states is carried out. With the help of Principal Compound Analysis there is a reduction in the number of variables that determine characteristics of globalization to particular factors and their simplified representation of dependence on globalization level.
Запропоновано методику оцінки рівня глобалізації країн світу в просторі головних вимірів (індикаторів) їх соціального розвитку та безпеки, названу методикою МСРБ. Із використанням відомої методики КОF та запропонованої МСРБ проведено порівняльний аналіз рівня глобалізації різних країн світу. За допомогою методу Principal Compound Analysis виконано редукцію кількості змінних, які визначають властивості глобалізації щодо деяких характерних чинників, та здійснено спрощене представлення залежності рівня глобалізації від виявлених найсуттєвіших чинників.
Предложена методика оценки уровня глобализации стран мира в пространстве главных измерений (индикаторов) их социального развития и безопасности, назван ная методикой МСРБ. С использованием известной методики КОF и предложенной МСРБ проведен сравнительный анализ уровня глобализации разных стран мира. С помощью метода Principal Compound Analysis произведена редукция количества переменных, которые определяют свойства глобализации по отношению к некоторым характерным факторам, и осуществлено упрощенное представление зависимости уровня глобализации от выявленных самых существенных факторов.
|
| first_indexed | 2025-12-07T17:02:42Z |
| format | Article |
| fulltext |
© A. Zgurovsky, 2009
Системні дослідження та інформаційні технології, 2009, № 2 121
TIДC
НОВІ МЕТОДИ В СИСТЕМНОМУ АНАЛІЗІ,
ІНФОРМАТИЦІ ТА ТЕОРІЇ ПРИЙНЯТТЯ РІШЕНЬ
УДК 504.052
RESEARCH OF GLOBALIZATION’S INTERRUPTED
CHARACTER IN CONTEXT OF SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT AND
GLOBAL SECURITY
PART 1. ANALYSIS OF PRE-CRISIS PERIOD (UP TO SECOND
HALF OF 2008)
A. ZGUROVSKY
In given research we introduce the new valuating method of globalization in scope
of basic social development and global security indicators, further named as SDS.
By implementing the well-known KOF and newly introduced SDS methods the
comparative analysis of globalization level among different states is carried out.
With the help of Principal Compound Analysis there is a reduction in the number of
variables that determine characteristics of globalization to particular factors and their
simplified representation of dependence on globalization level.
INTRODUCTION
Since ancient times the mutual pervasion of cultures and economics of different
nations was creating new opportunities for further development. “The Great Silk
Way” just like the cultural pathway between East and West emerged in the 3rd
century B.C. and existed till the 16th century. It appeared to be one of the greatest
achievements of world civilization. The separated caravan routes that crossed
Europe and Asia through Mediterranean Sea to China served as an important cul-
tural communication tool for many nations. Without a slightest exaggeration it
was the first significant globalization wave. Nevertheless, it was later interrupted
by durable and cruel wars of 17-18 centuries.
The second wave of globalization started in 1880s and was periodically in-
terrupted by the First, Second and Cold wars. It is observed as a coherent interre-
lation of art prosperity of “Silver Age” and all other economic and social events
of that time (trade, science, philosophy, religion and politics). Rapid development
of railways and sea transport culturally and economically united the exchange of
countries among five continents.
The set of the 20th century and the rise of the 21st could be named as the third
wave of globalization. This wave has been abruptly accumulating since the 80s
till the end of year 2008 and has brought new opportunities, unseen before.
A. Zgurovsky
ISSN 1681–6048 System Research & Information Technologies, 2009, № 2 122
Still, at the same time, a set of new global challenges has emerged, that may
slow down or even temporarily interrupt the third wave of globalization. Such
challenges are: devaluation of fundamental human values; increase of inequality
among people and states, a great number of regional conflicts, corruption, terror-
ism, global illnesses; rapid decrease in fossil fuels resources; natural biological
imbalance; greenhouse effect, etc.
The range of these problems, first of all, cynically for humanity, stimulated
the 2008 global financial collapse that will lead to economic stagnation and de-
cline of social standards of most countries. It seems that such negative tendencies
will be a long-drawn-out. They’ll cause fundamental economic transformations,
global redistribution of property and further reformation of relations throughout
the world including emergence of new centers of power. Most importantly, these
changes will become a catalyst of reinterpretation of human values that should
become dominant at least in the first half of the 21st century.
Thereby, globalization is a variable interrupting phenomenon. Hence, the
regularity of change and accumulation of global phenomena should be studied,
analyzed for interrelations and forecasted in the frame of human life safety in long
and short term.
In this research, we attempt to analyze the dependence between general phe-
nomena like globalization, disposition of its change and most important dimen-
sions of social development and global security, such as state and political stabil-
ity, global and regional security, democracy level, and crime control, inequality
among people and states, corruption perception, state’s peace level and potential
for terrorist acts. The analysis of globalization’s phenomenon in the perspective
of abovementioned indicators is called Methods of Social Development and
Global Security (SDS).
QUANTITATIVE ASSESSMENT OF EFFECT OF SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT
AND GLOBAL SECURITY GENERAL INDICATORS ON GLOBALIZATION
Further, we will use known global indices used by reputable international organi-
zations to study quantitative dependence between globalization and general indi-
cators of social development and global security:
For quantitative measuring of globalization we’ll use KOF index [1, 2] that
generalizes and averages economic, social and political data used to calculate the
general KOF globalization index. In their turn, economical, social and political
indicators are determined by official statistics data for each country that are annu-
ally standardized and put to a common calculating base, coming out as KOF In-
dex of globalization for 122 countries.
The general indicators of social development and global security determined
by SDS are as follows:
1. Index of State Fragility )( sfI describes the level of state fragility from
domestic and foreign threats and is calculated with the help of 12 indicators, that
reflect the security level, political, economic and social stability, state’s law le-
gitimacy, conflicts the state participates in etc. This index was calculated in
Global Report on Conflicts, Governance and State Fragility [3].
Research of globalization’s interrupted character in context of social development …
Системні дослідження та інформаційні технології, 2009, № 2 123
2. Democracy index )( dI empirically calculates the average of 5 general
categories: elections and pluralism, civil freedom level, government functioning,
political participation and standards. This index is annually calculated by the
Economist Intelligence Unit for 167 states.
3. Global Peace Index )( gpI was firstly computed by Economist Intelli-
gence Unit in 2008 for 140 states. The index is calculated using 24 quantitative
and qualitative indicators of domestic and foreign factors – from military expendi-
tures to relations with neighboring states. Corruption Perception Index and poten-
tial for terrorist acts are the components of Global Peace Index [5].
4. Gini Index )( gI is calculated for 177 countries and issued by UN Human
Development Report. The main objective of this index is to demonstrate the ine-
quality between poorest and richest layers of population [6].
5. GDP per capita (PPP)[7].
6. Sustainable Development Index )( sdI is estimated within three dimen-
sions – economic )( ecI , environmental )( eI and social )( sI . This index is a vec-
tor, the norm of which determines sustainable development, while its dimensional
location on coordinate grid characterizes the extent of its “harmony” (sustainable
development harmony — G ). sdI is annually computed by Ukrainian branch of
World Data Center (http://www.wdc.org.ua/) for 113 states [8].
7. Global Security Index )( gsI is also computed by Ukrainian branch of
World Data Center (http://www.wdc.org.ua/) for 113 states [8]. It determines the
state’s remoteness from an aggregate of global threats. These are the ten threats
that compose Global Security Index: global reduction of energy security; biologi-
cal imbalance between Earth’s natural capacities and human needs, change in
demographical structure; increase of inequality between people and states; global
disease diffusion; child mortality; increase of corruption levels; lack of access to
drinking water; global warming; state instability (calculated by State Fragility
Index); global climate change and natural disasters.
8. Corruption Perception Index )( cpI is annually calculated by Transpar-
ency International [9] for 180 countries. It is scaled from 0 to 10, where 0 is
maximum and 10 is minimal corruption level respectively.
9. Potential for Terrorist Acts Index )( taI is also provided in Human De-
velopment Report and its objective is to demonstrate the risk of potential terrorist
acts in a specific country [6].
10. Crime Control Index )( ccI is for the first time introduced by the author
and calculated according to the following formula: 12=ccI — pN{ — jailed
population per 100,000 – ( number of homicides per 100,000 + number of casual-
ties caused by organized conflicts per 100,000)}. Hence, we compute a correla-
tion of all committed crimes against jailed population.
It is evident that KOF globalization index and its economic, social and po-
litical dimensions depend on the provided ten indicators of social development
and global security (SDS) and their social, economic, and political stabilization
aspects. The goal of further research is to conduct qualitative and quantitative
A. Zgurovsky
ISSN 1681–6048 System Research & Information Technologies, 2009, № 2 124
analyses of dependence on each of the ten indicators of SDS methods. Further-
more, we divide our research into two stages of world social development:
1. For pre-crisis period (up to the second half of 2008).
2. For crisis period (after August-September 2008).
We will carry out the research by establishing qualitative interrelations
among various indicators and KOF globalization index, bringing them to the same
calculation platform and substantiating an integral model of social development
and global security.
At that, we will take into account that all provided indicators and indices
have been issued by different international organizations independently from one
another. Consequently, they are measured using different physical quantities,
have different interpretations and vary on different scales. Therefore, they should
to be normalized to vary on the scale from 0 to 1. In this case the lowest value of
the abovementioned indicators will be close to 0, and the highest close to 1. This
normalization will allow analyzing interrelations among different indices and in-
dicators of an integral model of social development and global security on a sin-
gle calculation platform.
In carrying out the abovementioned normalization applied to each of the in-
dicators, we use the following formula
]1,0[1
minmax
min0 ⇒
−
−
−=
II
III , (1)
where 0I is a normalized value of the indicator; minmax , II are maximal and
minimal values of indicator deviations respectively.
Normalized data grouped by social, economic and political stability dimen-
sions are provided in table 1.
T a b l e 1 . The main dimensions of social development and global security
KOF Scores
C
ou
nt
ry
K
O
F
R
an
k
G
en
er
al
E
co
no
m
ic
So
ci
al
Po
lit
ic
al
St
at
e
Fr
ag
ili
ty
In
de
x
(I
sf
)
D
em
oc
ra
cy
In
de
x
(I
d)
G
lo
ba
l P
ea
ce
In
de
x
(I
gp
)
C
ri
m
e
С
on
tr
ol
In
de
x
(I
cc
)
Po
te
nt
ia
l f
or
T
er
ro
ri
st
A
ct
s (
It
a)
C
or
ru
pt
io
n
Pe
rc
ep
tio
n
In
de
x
(I
cp
)
G
in
i I
nd
ex
(I
g)
G
D
P
Pe
r
C
ap
ita
G
lo
ba
l S
ec
ur
ity
In
de
x
(I
gs
)
Su
st
ai
na
bl
e
D
ev
el
op
-
m
en
t (
Is
d)
Belgium 1 92,09 91,94 90,82 94,22 0 8,15 1,485 8,4 2 7,5 33 32,119 0,61 0,747
Austria 2 91,38 88,48 92,49 93,86 0 8,69 1,449 9,37 2 8,1 29,1 33,7 0,649 0,783
Sweden 3 90,02 89,51 87,43 94,69 0 9,88 1,468 8,35 1 9,3 25 32,525 0,724 0,798
Switzer-
land 4 88,6 83,13 95,38 86,15 1 9,02 1,468 8,35 1 9 33,7 35,633 0,671 0,844
Denmark 5 88,42 87,97 88,64 88,72 0 9,52 1,333 9,32 2 9,4 24,7 33,973 0,671 0,781
Nether-
lands 6 88,4 88,04 89,41 87,38 0 9,66 1,607 8,6 2 9 30,9 32,684 0,658 0,764
United
Kingdom 7 86,67 79,24 87,87 95,52 2 8,08 1,801 9,7 3 8,4 36 33,238 0,606 0,781
Czech
Republic 8 85,51 87,69 84,91 83,27 1 8,17 1,501 8,92 2 5,2 25,4 20,538 0,561 0,712
Research of globalization’s interrupted character in context of social development …
Системні дослідження та інформаційні технології, 2009, № 2 125
Table 1 (Continued)
France 9 85,38 77,42 84,17 98,64 1 8,07 1,707 9,36 2 7,3 32,7 30,386 0,632 0,788
Finland 10 84,65 88,85 83,65 80,13 0 9,52 1,432 8,31 2 9,4 26,9 32,153 0,696 0,798
Germany 11 83,01 74,22 83,3 95,17 0 8,82 1,475 8,62 2 7,8 28,3 29,461 0,628 0,787
Spain 12 82,37 82,19 77,48 91,49 1 8,34 1,683 8,69 2,5 6,7 34,7 27,169 0,605 0,756
Hungary 13 82,52 88,83 76,96 81,89 0 7,53 1,576 8,26 1 5,3 26,9 17,886 0,59 0,729
Portugal 14 81,57 83,76 76,28 86,45 0 8,16 1,412 9,56 2 6,5 38,5 20,41 0,61 0,741
Canada 15 81,21 80,83 86,85 73,21 0 9,07 1,451 9,49 2 8,7 32,6 33,375 0,736 0,795
Ireland 16 79,82 85,47 77,72 74,91 0 9,01 1,41 8,29 1 7,5 34,3 38,505 0,643 0,765
Norway 17 79,44 75,84 84,48 78,18 2 9,55 1,343 9,26 1 8,7 25,8 41,42 0,72 0,797
Italy 18 79,44 76,13 71,9 95,62 0 7,73 1,653 7,47 2 5,2 36 28,529 0,596 0,744
Poland 19 78,42 73,5 74,7 91,12 0 7,3 1,687 9,17 1 4,2 34,5 13,847 0,561 0,699
Singa-
pore 20 78,37 95,9 92,26 32,12 2 5,89 1,673 10,84 2 9,3 42,5 29,663 –
Australia 21 77,35 67,74 81,51 84,82 2 9,09 1,652 8,59 2,5 8,6 35,2 31,794 0,705 0,781
United
States 22 76,76 63,15 76,52 96,67 2 8,22 2,227 12 3,5 7,2 40,8 41,89 0,546 0,796
Slovakia 23 75,82 79,32 79,59 65,07 1 7,4 1,576 7,77 1 4,9 25,8 15,871 0,572 0,733
Malaysia 24 75,6 77,15 66,05 87,87 4 5,98 1,721 7,67 2 5,1 49,2 10,882 0,499 0,704
Greece 25 73,43 73,55 66,45 83,85 0 8,13 1,867 8,39 2 4,6 34,3 23,381 0,576 0,707
New
Zealand 26 73,4 79,68 72,37 65,94 1 9,01 1,35 8,93 2 9,4 36,2 24,996 0,692 0,799
Luxem-
bourg 27 72,88 95,14 78,1 33 0 9,1 1,446 8,82 2 8,4 – 60,228 0,648 0,779
Estonia 28 72,18 90,76 74,41 42,14 1 7,74 1,702 9,74 1 6,5 35,8 15,478 0,533 0,749
Israel 29 71,8 86,17 77,17 43,05 9 7,28 3,052 8,05 4 6,1 39,2 25,864 0,503 0,723
Slovenia 30 70,26 80,05 71,4 54,49 0 7,96 1,491 9,25 1 9,2 28,4 22,273 0,61 0,733
Croatia 31 70,17 77,2 63,7 69,92 5 7,4 1,926 8,34 1 4,1 29 13,042 0,532 0,698
Turkey 32 69,96 69,86 58,24 87,88 9 5,7 2,403 6,31 2 4,1 43,6 8,407 0,443 0,651
Russia 33 69,82 57,92 64,4 96,04 7 5,02 2,777 7,29 2 2,3 39,9 10,845 0,428 0,653
Chile 34 69,63 85,13 51,83 74,42 2 7,89 1,576 9,23 1 7 54,9 12,027 0,573 0,743
UAE 35 69,07 – 75,52 38,16 3 2,42 1,745 9,49 2 5,7 – 25,514 – 0,613
Iceland 36 67,02 81,3 83,23 21,93 0 9,71 1,176 9,11 1 9,2 – 36,51 – 0,785
Malta 37 66,96 91,93 75,96 18,27 0 8,39 – – – – – 19,089 – –
Jordan 38 65,94 67,31 55,76 79,41 0 3,92 1,969 8,47 3 4,7 38,8 5,53 0,501 0,653
Cyprus 39 65,93 86,4 69,34 31,38 3 7,6 1,847 8,31 1 5,3 – 22,699 – 0,709
Kuwait 40 65,49 67,64 76,92 45,07 4 3,09 1,786 9,61 3 4,3 – 26,321 – 0,635
Romania 41 65,31 69,65 48,35 84,82 4 7,6 1,611 8,8 1 3,7 31 9,06 0,447 0,656
Ukraine 42 64,57 62,36 57,68 78,22 5 6,94 2,096 6,87 1 2,7 28,1 6,848 0,466 0,633
China 43 64,56 61,53 49,08 92,39 10 2,97 1,981 8,55 1 3,5 46,9 6,757 0,382 0,602
Bulgaria 44 64,35 69,81 54,88 70,89 0 7,1 1,903 6,71 1 4,1 29,2 9,032 0,536 0,686
Lithua-
nia 45 63,9 78,96 61,36 46,13 1 7,43 1,723 7,23 2 4,8 36 14,494 0,571 0,744
South
Korea 46 63,56 59,36 52,56 86,28 0 7,88 1,691 8,43 1 5,1 31,6 22,029 0,461 0,733
Latvia 47 63,24 81,37 69,91 27,12 0 7,37 1,723 7,52 2 4,8 37,7 13,646 0,579 0,738
South
Africa 48 63,03 69,38 43,99 82,8 11 7,91 2,412 2,76 1 5,1 57,8 11,11 0,277 0,63
A. Zgurovsky
ISSN 1681–6048 System Research & Information Technologies, 2009, № 2 126
Table 1 (Continued)
Argen-
tina 49 62,24 54,98 52,51 87,42 2 6,63 1,895 5,67 1 2,9 51,3 14,28 0,528 0,697
Uruguay 50 62,15 68,46 50,33 71,03 1 7,96 1,606 7,96 1 6,7 44,9 9,962 0,609 0,719
Japan 51 60,91 53,84 52,66 83,59 0 8,15 1,358 9,23 1 7,5 24,9 31,267 0,644 0,775
Brazil 52 58,86 61,69 36,82 88,26 4 7,38 2,168 2,95 1 3,5 57 8,402 0,469 0,682
El Sal-
vador 53 58,36 68,8 51,7 53,5 6 6,22 2,163 1,86 1 4 52,4 5,255 0,457 0,353
Bahrain 54 57,66 85,43 53,62 26,24 4 3,53 2,025 9,42 2 5 – 21,482 – –
Peru 55 57,65 65,1 39,45 74,57 11 6,11 2,046 5,59 2 3,5 52 6,039 0,419 0,65
Jamaica 56 57,22 72,96 49,39 46,53 3 7,34 2,226 1,9 2 3,3 45,5 4,291 0,501 0,661
Philip-
pines 57 57,21 61,34 40,42 76,77 0 6,48 2,386 5,49 4 2,5 44,5 5,137 0,414 0,635
Thailand 58 57,1 63,99 43,1 68,45 5 5,67 2,424 5,42 4 3,3 42 8,677 0,503 0,672
Panama 59 56,77 77,84 55,96 27,76 5 7,35 1,797 7,92 1 3,2 56,1 7,605 0,491 0,703
Mexico 60 56,48 64,59 48,32 57,25 4 6,67 2,191 3,98 2,5 3,5 46,1 10,751 0,502 0,699
Morocco 61 56,35 51,08 44,83 81,4 8 3,9 1,954 7,86 2,5 3,5 39,5 4,555 0,424 0,605
Nigeria 62 55,95 67,16 25,74 85,73 19 3,52 2,724 2,06 3 2,2 43,7 1,128 0,23 0,491
Costa
Rica 63 55,28 65,07 62,02 31 0 8,04 1,701 5,9 1 5 49,8 10,18 0,599 0,738
Egypt 64 55,18 51,61 33,97 92,37 12 3,9 1,987 9,37 3 2,9 34,4 4,337 0,442 0,62
Ecuador 65 54,87 59,62 45,96 61,58 12 5,64 2,274 4,41 2 2,1 53,6 4,341 0,443 0,677
Indonesia 66 54,86 65,99 28,87 78,33 9 6,41 1,983 6,14 4 2,3 34,7 3,843 0,406 0,583
Honduras 67 54,16 – 47,73 43,23 9 6,25 2,335 1,79 2 2,5 53,8 3,43 0,333 0,632
Vene-
zuela 68 53,62 62,31 46,59 51,85 8 5,42 2,505 2,3 3 2 48,2 6,632 0,366 0,629
Oman 69 53,57 70,51 57 24,06 4 2,77 1,612 9,34 1,5 4,7 – 15,602 – 0,628
Tunisia 70 53,49 64,4 30,1 73,36 5 3,06 1,797 9,35 3 4,2 39,8 8,371 0,494 0,662
Namibia 71 53,47 59,75 45,97 55,42 6 6,54 2,042 6,37 2 4,5 74,3 7,586 0,43 0,613
Ghana 72 53,35 51,99 44,41 68,87 13 5,35 1,723 7,2 1 3,7 40,8 2,48 0,321 –
Colom-
bia 73 52,66 63,46 47,82 44,52 10 6,4 2,757 2,74 5 3,8 58,6 7,304 0,462 0,705
Mauri-
tius 74 52,35 53,8 59,65 39,2 14 8,04 2,435 5,03 3 2,6 – 12,715 – 0,457
Pakistan 75 51,76 44,45 35,88 86,49 15 3,92 2,694 5,21 4 2,4 30,6 2,37 0,379 0,512
Para-
guay 76 51,37 55,54 43,33 57,58 8 6,16 1,997 4,37 1 2,4 58,4 4,642 – 0,644
Guyana 77 51,36 68,9 55,34 20,14 9 6,15 – – – – – 4,508 – 0,569
Domini-
can Re-
public
78 51,07 56,42 46,88 49,77 0 6,13 2,069 3,69 1 3 51,6 8,217 0,432 0,665
Guate-
mala 79 51,04 52,67 44,24 59,03 11 6,07 2,328 1,21 2 2,8 55,1 4,568 0,441 0,632
Bolivia 80 50,63 56,79 36,14 63,79 12 5,98 2,043 6,35 1 2,9 60,1 2,819 0,358 0,583
India 81 50,54 42,89 31,04 91,1 14 7,68 2,355 6,06 4 3,5 36,8 3,452 0,377 0,548
Gabon 82 50,05 – 49,16 48,94 10 2,72 1,878 7,78 1 3,3 – 6,954 – –
Trinidad
and
Tobago
83 49,78 74,17 44,7 22,5 4 7,18 2,23 2,54 2 3,4 38,9 14,603 0,393 0,645
Zambia 84 49,37 54,5 36,15 62,09 17 5,25 1,856 5,56 1 2,6 50,8 1,023 0,231 0,49
Fiji 85 48,67 48,27 52,64 43,22 5 5,66 – – – – – 6,049 – –
Sri
Lanka 86 48,46 47,93 40,17 61,81 12 6,58 2,584 6,52 5 3,2 40,2 4,595 0,447 –
Research of globalization’s interrupted character in context of social development …
Системні дослідження та інформаційні технології, 2009, № 2 127
Table 1 (End)
Baha-
mas 87 48,32 50,36 70,68 11,46 0 – – – – – – 18,38 – –
Zim-
babwe 88 48,06 49,59 38,17 60,88 17 2,62 2,513 4,66 2 2,1 50,1 2,038 0,261 0,484
Nicara-
gua 89 47,34 58,95 49,48 27,41 0 5,68 1,919 6,44 1 2,6 43,1 3,674 0,395 0,617
Belize 90 46,74 65,14 50,22 15,05 0 – – – – – – 7,109 – –
Barbados 91 46,68 62,17 53,82 13,62 0 – – – – – – 17,297 – –
Cote
d’Ivoire 92 45,73 50,23 32,11 59,96 19 3,38 2,451 5,16 3 2,1 44,6 1,648 0,283 –
Senegal 93 45,72 35,16 36,43 74,98 11 5,37 2,011 5,19 2 3,6 41,3 1,792 0,315 0,533
Algeria 94 45,56 45,43 24,37 77,9 16 3,17 2,378 7,6 2,5 3 35,3 7,062 0,364 0,612
Kenya 95 45,36 37,78 32,63 75,54 13 5,08 2,429 3,61 2 2,1 42,5 1,24 0,268 0,558
Malawi 96 43,6 48,16 39,28 43,6 14 4,97 2,024 6,3 1 2,7 39 667 – –
Bot-
swana 97 43,06 67,39 37,16 17,11 5 7,6 1,792 5,83 1 5,4 60,5 12,387 0,389 0,62
Albania 98 42,82 52,17 33,04 44,24 4 5,91 2,044 6,51 2 2,9 31,1 5,316 0,534 0,675
Tanzania 99 42,59 42,92 29,34 62,22 13 5,18 1,919 5,52 2 3,2 34,6 744 0,292 0,521
Togo 100 41,56 50,51 28,03 49,25 14 1,75 – – – – – 1,506 – –
Uganda 101 41 46,76 28,29 52,02 17 5,14 2,391 5,42 3 2,8 45,7 1,454 – 0,526
Mali 102 40,15 53,96 18,5 53,17 14 5,99 2,238 5,07 3 2,7 40,1 1,033 – 0,436
Benin 103 40,06 38,47 30,78 56,42 0 6,16 – – – – 36,5 1,141 0,28 0,491
Chad 104 38,94 49,82 26,67 41,94 20 1,65 3,007 3,09 3 1,8 – 1,427 – 0,405
Came-
roon 105 38,51 38,38 25,25 58,84 16 3,27 2,182 4,59 2 2,4 44,6 2,299 0,256 0,518
Syria 106 38,46 – 26,07 37,51 0 2,36 2,027 8,21 2 2,4 – 3,808 – 0,574
Bangla-
desh 107 38,31 33,74 20,61 71,73 13 6,11 2,118 5,17 3 2 33,4 2,053 0,313 0,497
Congo
Rep. 108 37,88 – 27,97 20,71 0 3,19 2,417 3,1 2 2,1 – 1,262 – –
Papua
New
Guinea
109 36,93 56,2 31,27 17,87 12 6,54 2,224 3,27 2 2 50,9 2,563 – –
Nepal 110 36,26 34,47 23,46 58,26 17 3,42 – – – – 47,2 1,55 0,367 0,559
Sierra
Leone 111 35,34 46,41 23,77 37,03 21 3,57 – – – – 62,9 806 – –
Iran 112 34,23 27,5 20,9 64,13 13 2,93 2,341 8,08 2 2,5 43 7,968 0,406 –
Mada-
gascar 113 33,93 35,84 25,08 44,62 13 5,82 1,77 6,49 1 3,2 47,5 923 – 0,518
Congo
Dem.
Rep.
114 33,2 – 20,85 53,26 23 2,76 2,707 1,21 3 1,9 – 714 – –
Guinea-
Bissau 115 33,11 52,68 – 15,42 17 2 – – – – 47 827 – –
Niger 116 30,68 27,03 19,48 52,91 17 3,54 – – – – 50,5 781 – –
Haiti 117 20,78 42,66 24,04 20,02 15 4,19 2,362 2,63 2 1,6 59,2 1,663 0,228 –
Central
African
Rep,
118 29,5 33,7 21,08 36,25 16 1,61 2,857 2,5 3 2 61,3 1,224 – –
Rwanda 119 29,32 31,76 25,91 31,01 18 3,89 2,03 7,74 2 2,8 46,8 1,206 – –
Myan-
mar 120 27,4 – 11,29 18,02 20 1,77 2,59 8,56 3 1,4 – 1,027 – –
Burundi 121 22,41 27,43 24,19 12,5 19 4,51 – – – – 42,4 699 – 0,446
Saudi
Arabia 122 – – 68,18 48,1 8 1,92 2,357 7,62 3 3,4 – 15,711 – 0,632
A. Zgurovsky
ISSN 1681–6048 System Research & Information Technologies, 2009, № 2 128
THE RESEARCH OF GLOBALIZATION DEPENDENCE ON THE FACTORS
OF SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT AND GLOBAL SECURITY OF WORLD
COUNTRIES
Analysis of globalization during the pre-crisis period (early 1980s – first half
of 2008)
While analyzing Table 2 for the pre-crisis period, it is evident that the first twenty
socially globalized states are: Denmark, Slovenia, Sweden, Norway, Finland,
Singapore, Canada, the Netherlands, Austria, Japan, New Zealand, Iceland,
United Kingdom, Switzerland, United States, Germany, Australia, France, Lux-
embourg, Ireland, and Estonia. Ukraine and Russia are 46th and 59th respectively.
The first twenty politically globalized states are: Iceland, Sweden, Norway,
Malta, Ireland, Switzerland, Japan, Denmark, Finland, Canada, Slovenia, New
Zealand, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Austria, Uruguay, Costa-Rica, Germany,
Hungary and Cyprus. Ukraine, United States and Russia are 48th, 56th, and 87th
respectively.
The first twenty states by economic globalization (GDP per capita (PPP))
are: Luxembourg, United States, Norway, Ireland, Iceland, Switzerland,
Denmark, Austria, Canada, United Kingdom, the Netherlands, Sweden, Finland,
Australia, Japan, France, Singapore, Germany, Italy and Spain. Russia and
Ukraine are on the 51st and 69th places respectively.
Finally, 14 states top the rankings of three indicators simultaneously: Den-
mark, Sweden, Norway, Finland, Canada, Netherlands, Austria, Japan, Iceland,
Switzerland, United States, Germany, Luxembourg, and Ireland respectively. Ten
of them are among twenty most globalized countries by KOF index (Table 2).
The exceptions from this list are Japan, Iceland, United States, and Luxembourg.
The abovementioned ten top countries (according to both systems) are
characterized by very significant levels of global peace, democracy index, global
security, crime control, at the same time by low levels of corruption and inequal-
ity among population. This group is mainly composed of non-members of G8,
except for Germany and Canada. Such states could be described by shabby
economies and absence of attempts on imposing their will on other states world-
wide.
Interestingly, according to KOF globalization index the United States (22nd
place) and Japan (51st place) demonstrate very strong positions in political global-
ization, meanwhile, being behind twentieth places in economic and social global-
ization. Luxembourg (27th place according to KOF), on the other hand, while be-
ing the first in economic globalization, is mediocre in terms of social and very
low in terms of political globalization. Thus, the 22nd place of the United States
according to KOF rating is fully substantiated. This country indicates substan-
tially low values of peace (0.492) and global security (0.546) indices, high poten-
tial for terrorist acts (0.435) and significant level of population inequality (0.688).
At the same time, the 51st place for Japan and the 27th place for Luxembourg
according to KOF do not respond to their substantial values of practically all SDS
indicators.
Research of globalization’s interrupted character in context of social development …
Системні дослідження та інформаційні технології, 2009, № 2 129
A significant group of rapidly progressing states is composed of the so-
called BRIC countries (Brazil, Russia, India, and China). During the pre-crisis
period, these countries manifested huge economic growth amounting to 8–12%
annually.
It happened both due to the increase in innovational and hi-tech constituent
of these countries' development and with the help of intensive exploitation of
one's own natural and environmental resources, involvement of cheap labor and
enormous consumption of organic fuels (oil, gas, and coal).
Despite rapid economic growth, these countries are on 33rd through the 81st
places by KOF index (Brazil – the 52nd, Russia - the 33rd, India - the 81st, China -
the 43rd). This fact is explained by low level of sustainability in their develop-
ment. Having taken the way of economic development prioritization, current
states haven’t yet managed to provide high environmental and social indicators.
For instance, if these countries are analyzed using SDS method, it is evident that
they demonstrate high levels of corruption and population inequality; low values
of democracy and global security indices. Meanwhile, Russia and India have very
low levels of global peace and high potential for terrorist acts.
Ten least globalized countries of the world according to KOF are mostly
African countries, such as: Madagascar, Congo, Guinea-Bissau, Niger, Haiti,
Central African Republic, Rwanda, Myanmar, Burundi and one country of South-
eastern Asia - Saudi Arabia (which has been placed into this group by the devel-
opers of KOF index in a purely formal way, due to a lack of economic globaliza-
tion data). If we analyze these states using SDS method, we will see that, with the
exception of Saudi Arabia, which shouldn’t be taken into account during further
analysis, these are the poorest world countries where GDP per capita amounts to
much less than $ 2,000. These countries indicate the highest levels of corruption,
tremendous population inequality, high level of state instability, low levels of
peace, democracy, crime control, and global security. These circumstances greatly
complicate the integration of abovementioned countries into the world’s economy
and culture.
In general, while comparing the ten least globalized African states to twenty
most globalized states we can assert, that the gap between these two groups con-
sistently expanded in both economic welfare (GDP per capita) and practically by
all SDS indicators (state instability, democratization, peacefulness, crime control,
global safety, corruption, and population inequality levels) during the period of
2007-2008 and the previous years. This disturbing tendency arose from the in-
creasing tension throughout the world, spread of global diseases, intensification of
regional conflicts, and increase in levels of crime rate, corruption, and terrorism.
By analyzing Ukraine alone, we will specify its peculiarities in the context
of globalization. The country accounts for powerful human capital s- 46-million
highly educated population (according to the UN data, education index in Ukraine
amounts to 0.94). Its geographic location and resource potential provide great op-
portunities for economic and cultural cooperation both with Russia and the Cen-
tral and Western European states. These states are located on the Black and Azov
Sea shores, have fertile soils and powerful gas transportation network. In perspec-
A. Zgurovsky
ISSN 1681–6048 System Research & Information Technologies, 2009, № 2 130
tive of a transit zone, this area is a modern “Silk Way” for energy, cultural and
goods exchange between the East and the West. It is strategically important for
Ukraine to maintain the stability of this corridor. Its destabilization in the begin-
ning of 2009, due to the interruption of gas transit, led to almost 40% drop in
Ukrainian economy and multibillion losses for the economies of Russia and
Western European states.
According to KOF index, during the pre-crisis period Ukraine was on the
42nd place in globalization rating. When analyzing Ukraine using the SDS
method, we can witness a tremendous corruption level, low crime control, grow-
ing inequality between the poorest and the richest and high state instability, which
complicates its further integration into global economy and culture.
Analyzing the dependence of globalization on the social development and
global security of a particular state in the range of 10 SDS indicators simultane-
ously is a complicated task. Therefore, we will apply the method of Principal
Compound Analysis (PCA), an important element of RapidMiner system [10], for
more convenient and demonstrative analysis. This method allows reducing vari-
ables with multiple properties to several implicit factors determining these proper-
ties. Therefore, the dependence of state’s globalization level on the noted indica-
tors can be simplified and presented by several most essential indicators instead
of ten.
Fig. 1 provides the values of dependence of KOF globalization index on ten
indicators in PCA plane where the extension of these ten indicators has been pro-
jected. In other words, PCA plane is the least distant plane from the whole group
of indicator values among in the ten-dimension area of these indicators.
The provided PCA analysis (fig. 1) demonstrates the indicators that in the
most essential way influence the level of globalization are the index of state sus-
tainability and the potential for terrorist acts. It is evident that Norway, Sweden,
Denmark, Switzerland, Japan, Austria, Canada and other countries are located
close to each other in the right half-plane of PCA intersection and are the most
globalized countries according to SDS method. On the other hand, Zimbabwe,
Guatemala, Pakistan, Venezuela, Cameroon, Kenia and others are located in the
lower left quarter of PCA intersection and are respectively the least globalized
states according to both KOF and SDS methods.
CONCLUSIONS
1. A new method is introduced to estimate the level of globalization for
world countries in the scope of main social development and global security indi-
cators, referred to as SDS method.
2. Using the well-known KOF method and the newly proposed SDS
method, we have conducted a comparative analysis of globalization level for
various world countries relying on the most important indicators of their social
development and security, such as state and political stability, global and regional
security, democracy level, crime control, inequality among people and
states, corruption level, state’s peace level and the potential for terrorist acts on
their territories.
Research of globalization’s interrupted character in context of social development …
Системні дослідження та інформаційні технології, 2009, № 2 131
Fi
g.
1
. K
O
F
in
de
x
of
g
lo
ba
liz
at
io
n,
re
pr
es
en
te
d
by
P
C
A
-m
et
ho
d
in
a
gg
re
ga
te
d
sc
op
e
of
S
D
S-
in
di
ca
to
rs
Б
е
л
ь
гі
я
А
вс
тр
ія
Ш
ве
ц
іяШ
ве
й
ц
а
р
ія
Д
а
н
ія
Н
ід
е
р
л
а
н
д
и
С
п
о
л
уч
е
н
е
К
о
р
о
л
ів
ст
во
Ч
е
сь
ка
Р
е
сп
уб
л
ік
а
Ф
р
а
н
ц
ія
Ф
ін
л
я
н
д
іяН
ім
е
чч
и
н
а
Іс
п
а
н
ія
У
го
р
щ
и
н
а
П
о
р
ту
га
л
ія
К
а
н
а
д
а
Ір
л
а
н
д
ія
Н
о
р
ве
гі
я
Іт
а
л
іяП
о
л
ь
щ
а
С
ін
га
п
ур
А
вс
тр
а
л
ія
С
п
о
л
уч
е
н
і ш
та
ти
С
л
о
ва
чч
и
н
а
М
а
л
а
й
зі
я
Г
р
е
ц
ія
Н
о
ва
З
е
л
а
н
д
ія
Л
ю
кс
е
м
б
ур
г
Е
ст
о
н
ія
Із
р
а
їл
С
л
о
ве
н
ія
Х
о
р
ва
ті
я
Т
ур
е
чч
и
н
а
Р
о
сі
я
Ч
и
л
і
О
б
'є
д
н
а
н
і А
р
а
б
сь
кі
Е
м
ір
а
ти
Іс
л
а
н
д
ія
М
а
л
ь
та
Й
о
р
д
а
н
ія
К
іп
р
К
ув
е
й
т
Р
ум
ун
ія
У
кр
а
їн
а
К
и
та
й
Б
о
л
га
р
ія
Л
и
тв
а
П
ів
д
е
н
н
а
К
о
р
е
я
Л
а
тв
ія
П
ів
д
е
н
н
а
А
ф
р
и
ка
А
р
ге
н
ти
н
а
У
р
уг
ва
й
Я
п
о
н
ія
Б
р
а
зи
л
ія
Е
л
ь
С
а
л
ь
ва
д
о
р
Б
а
хр
е
й
н
П
е
р
Я
м
а
й
ка
Ф
іл
іп
п
ін
и
Т
а
їл
а
н
д
П
а
н
а
м
а
М
е
кс
и
ка
М
а
р
о
кк
о
Н
іг
е
р
ія
К
о
ст
а
-Р
ік
а
Є
ги
п
е
т
Е
кв
а
д
о
р
Ін
д
о
н
е
зі
я
Г
о
н
д
ур
а
В
е
н
е
су
е
л
а
О
м
а
н Т
ун
і
Н
а
м
іб
ія
Г
а
н
а
К
о
л
ум
б
ія
М
а
вр
и
кі
й
П
а
ки
ст
а
н
П
а
р
а
гв
а
й
Г
а
й
а
н
а
Д
о
м
ін
ік
а
н
сь
ка
Р
е
сп
уб
л
ік
а
Г
ва
те
м
а
л
а
Б
о
л
ів
ія
Ін
д
ія
Г
а
б
о
н
Т
р
и
н
ід
а
д
і
Т
о
б
а
го
З
а
м
б
ія
Ф
ід
ж
і Ш
р
і-
Л
а
н
ка
Б
а
га
м
и
З
ім
б
а
б
в
Н
ік
а
р
а
гу
а
Б
е
л
і
Б
а
р
б
а
д
о
К
о
т
Д
ів
уа
р
С
е
н
е
га
л
А
л
ж
и
р
К
е
н
ія
М
а
л
а
ві
Б
о
тс
ва
н
а
А
л
б
а
н
ія
Т
а
н
за
н
ія
T
o
гo
У
га
н
д
а
М
а
л
і
Б
е
н
ін
Ч
а
д
К
а
м
е
р
ун
С
и
р
ія
Б
а
н
гл
а
д
е
ш
К
о
н
го
л
е
зь
ка
Р
е
сп
уб
л
ік
а
П
а
п
уа
Н
о
ва
Г
ві
н
е
я
Н
е
п
а
л
С
ь
єр
р
а
-Л
е
о
н
Ір
а
н
М
а
д
а
га
ск
а
р
К
о
н
го
,
Г
ві
н
е
я
Б
іс
а
Н
іг
е
р
Г
а
їт
і
Ц
е
н
тр
а
л
ь
н
а
А
ф
р
и
ка
н
сь
ка
Р
е
сп
уб
л
ік
а
Р
уа
н
д
а
М
’я
н
м
а
Б
ур
ун
д
і
-6
-4
-2
0
2
4
6
-4-3-2-10123
A. Zgurovsky
ISSN 1681–6048 System Research & Information Technologies, 2009, № 2 132
3. Using the Principal Compound Analysis, variables with multiple proper-
ties have been reduced to several implicit factors, which define these properties in
the most significant way. These properties are the index of state instability and the
potential for terrorist acts. This method allows presenting a simplified way to de-
termine the dependence globalization level of any state not on two most essential
SDS indicators, instead of all ten.
REFERENCES
1. Dreher, Axel. KOF Index of Globalization 2008. — http://globalization.kof.ethz.ch/.
2. Dreher, Axel (2006): Does Globalization Affect Growth? Evidence from a new In-
dex of Globalization, Applied Economics 38, 10: 1091–1110. Updated in Dreher,
Axel, Noel Gaston and Pim Martens (2008).
3. Monty G. Marshall and Jack Goldstone. Global Report on Conflict, Governance and
State Fragility 2007, Foreign Policy Bulletin (2007), 17: 3–21 Cambridge Uni-
versity Press.
4. The Economist Intelligence Unit’s Index of Democracy 2008, http://a330.g.akamai.
net/7/330/25828/20081021185552/graphics.eiu.com/PDF.
5. Global Peace Index, http://www.visionofhumanity.org/gpi/results/rankings/2008/.
6. Human Development Report 2007/2008, http://hdr.undp.org/en/media/hdr_
20072008_en_complete.pdf.
7. World Economic Outlook Database-April 2008. International Monetary Fund.
8. Згуровський М.З., Гвішіані О.Д. Глобальне моделювання процесів сталого роз-
витку в контексті якості і безпеки життя людей. — Київ: Політехніка, 2008.
— 331с.
9. The 2007 Transparency International Corruption Perceptions Index. — http: //www.
infoplease.com/world/statistics/2007-transparency-international-corruption-
perceptions.html.
10. Predictive Analysis and Business Intelligence solutions of Rapid-1. — http://rapid-
i.com/content/view/119/68/lang,en.
Received 13.02.2009
From the Editorial Board: the article corresponds completely to submitted
manuscript.
|
| id | nasplib_isofts_kiev_ua-123456789-12409 |
| institution | Digital Library of Periodicals of National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine |
| issn | 1681–6048 |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2025-12-07T17:02:42Z |
| publishDate | 2009 |
| publisher | Навчально-науковий комплекс "Інститут прикладного системного аналізу" НТУУ "КПІ" МОН та НАН України |
| record_format | dspace |
| spelling | Zgurovsky, A. 2010-10-07T19:52:55Z 2010-10-07T19:52:55Z 2009 Research of globalization’s interrupted character in context of social development and global security. Part 1. Analysis of pre-crisis period (up to second half of 2008)/ A. Zgurovsky // Систем. дослідж. та інформ. технології. — 2009. — № 2. — С. 121-132. — Бібліогр.: 10 назв. — англ. 1681–6048 https://nasplib.isofts.kiev.ua/handle/123456789/12409 504.052 In given research we introduce the new valuating method of globalization in scope of basic social development and global security indicators, further named as SDS. By implementing the well-known KOF and newly introduced SDS methods the comparative analysis of globalization level among different states is carried out. With the help of Principal Compound Analysis there is a reduction in the number of variables that determine characteristics of globalization to particular factors and their simplified representation of dependence on globalization level. Запропоновано методику оцінки рівня глобалізації країн світу в просторі головних вимірів (індикаторів) їх соціального розвитку та безпеки, названу методикою МСРБ. Із використанням відомої методики КОF та запропонованої МСРБ проведено порівняльний аналіз рівня глобалізації різних країн світу. За допомогою методу Principal Compound Analysis виконано редукцію кількості змінних, які визначають властивості глобалізації щодо деяких характерних чинників, та здійснено спрощене представлення залежності рівня глобалізації від виявлених найсуттєвіших чинників. Предложена методика оценки уровня глобализации стран мира в пространстве главных измерений (индикаторов) их социального развития и безопасности, назван ная методикой МСРБ. С использованием известной методики КОF и предложенной МСРБ проведен сравнительный анализ уровня глобализации разных стран мира. С помощью метода Principal Compound Analysis произведена редукция количества переменных, которые определяют свойства глобализации по отношению к некоторым характерным факторам, и осуществлено упрощенное представление зависимости уровня глобализации от выявленных самых существенных факторов. en Навчально-науковий комплекс "Інститут прикладного системного аналізу" НТУУ "КПІ" МОН та НАН України Нові методи в системному аналізі, інформатиці та теорії прийняття рішень Research of globalization’s interrupted character in context of social development and global security. Part 1. Analysis of pre-crisis period (up to second half of 2008) Дослідження переривистого характеру глобалізації в контексті соціального розвитку та безпеки країн світу. Частина 1. Аналіз докризового періоду (до другої половини 2008 р.) Исследование прерывистого характера глобализации в контексте социального развития и безопасности стран мира. Часть 1. Анализ докризисного периода (до второй половины 2008 р.) Article published earlier |
| spellingShingle | Research of globalization’s interrupted character in context of social development and global security. Part 1. Analysis of pre-crisis period (up to second half of 2008) Zgurovsky, A. Нові методи в системному аналізі, інформатиці та теорії прийняття рішень |
| title | Research of globalization’s interrupted character in context of social development and global security. Part 1. Analysis of pre-crisis period (up to second half of 2008) |
| title_alt | Дослідження переривистого характеру глобалізації в контексті соціального розвитку та безпеки країн світу. Частина 1. Аналіз докризового періоду (до другої половини 2008 р.) Исследование прерывистого характера глобализации в контексте социального развития и безопасности стран мира. Часть 1. Анализ докризисного периода (до второй половины 2008 р.) |
| title_full | Research of globalization’s interrupted character in context of social development and global security. Part 1. Analysis of pre-crisis period (up to second half of 2008) |
| title_fullStr | Research of globalization’s interrupted character in context of social development and global security. Part 1. Analysis of pre-crisis period (up to second half of 2008) |
| title_full_unstemmed | Research of globalization’s interrupted character in context of social development and global security. Part 1. Analysis of pre-crisis period (up to second half of 2008) |
| title_short | Research of globalization’s interrupted character in context of social development and global security. Part 1. Analysis of pre-crisis period (up to second half of 2008) |
| title_sort | research of globalization’s interrupted character in context of social development and global security. part 1. analysis of pre-crisis period (up to second half of 2008) |
| topic | Нові методи в системному аналізі, інформатиці та теорії прийняття рішень |
| topic_facet | Нові методи в системному аналізі, інформатиці та теорії прийняття рішень |
| url | https://nasplib.isofts.kiev.ua/handle/123456789/12409 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT zgurovskya researchofglobalizationsinterruptedcharacterincontextofsocialdevelopmentandglobalsecuritypart1analysisofprecrisisperioduptosecondhalfof2008 AT zgurovskya doslídžennâpererivistogoharakteruglobalízacíívkontekstísocíalʹnogorozvitkutabezpekikraínsvítučastina1analízdokrizovogoperíodudodrugoípolovini2008r AT zgurovskya issledovaniepreryvistogoharakteraglobalizaciivkontekstesocialʹnogorazvitiâibezopasnostistranmiračastʹ1analizdokrizisnogoperiodadovtoroipoloviny2008r |