Russo-Ukrainian War and the emerging new globalization: a critical review of relevant research

Abstract

The emerging new global socioeconomic system is marked by a complex tapestry of multifaceted challenges, significantly reshaping the past global architecture. In the context of international political economy, the current era might be more accurately described as “new globalization.” This field has recently begun to integrate the effects of the Russo-Ukrainian War, which erupted in February 2022, into its analytical framework. This military showdown exemplifies the complex and interrelated political, economic, and technological challenges inherent in the emerging new globalization. This paper delves into the potential ramifications of the Russo-Ukrainian War on the unfolding trajectory of new globalization, utilizing the analytical approach of the “Evolutionary Structural Triptych” (EST). This critical review of pertinent literature suggests that the war may increase the likelihood of diminished returns during the current phase of the emerging new globalization.

Keywords:

• Energy transition
• evolutionary structural triptych (EST)
• international political economy (IPE)
• new globalization
• Russo-Ukrainian War

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Notes

1 Fordism is a historical model of economic and industrial development, epitomizing a phase characterized by mass production, value-added distribution, and consistent business profitability (Lipietz 1993). Contrastingly, post-fordism marks a paradigm shift, gravitating towards flexibility, decentralization, and specialized production. This transition delineates a deviation from the rigid, standardized frameworks inherent in Fordist principles, ushering in a more adaptable and decentralized economic model (Boyer and Durand 1993).

2 Expanding on the theme of evolving innovation paradigms, Rothwell mapped out the postwar innovation generations, identifying the dominant model operational during each period (Rothwell 1994). He delineated the trajectory of innovation trends, starting from the linear innovation models of the 1950s and 1960s—whether propelled by market demand (market-pull) or technological advancements (market-push), wherein linear aggregation upon organizational activities epitomized the chief innovation avenue. As the narrative progresses to the 1970s, Rothwell identifies a shift towards a merged linear model, where innovation stemmed from the combination of various organizational facets. This trend progressed in the 1980s, characterized by innovative outcomes arising from the seamless integration of internal and external environments. Rothwell’s analytical framework extends into the 1990s and beyond, pinpointing a phase of continuous innovation marked by heightened synergy within internal systems and the growth of expansive networks.

3 Brown, Primmer, and Finney (2022) describe the global economy navigating a complex terrain that could lead to one of four outcomes, highlighting the delicate balance between inflation control and growth management. These scenarios include: a “growth scare” caused by central bank tightening, akin to a low-performance scenario in the EST framework; increasing “stagflation risks” due to rising commodity prices, similar to EST’s medium-low-performance scenario; a potential “soft landing” supported by strong private sector balance sheets, comparable to the medium-high-performance scenario of EST; and a less probable “inflationary boom,” curtailed by policy-driven financial tightening, parallel to the high-performance scenario in EST.