State Space Models

All state space models are written and estimated in the R programming language. The models are available here with instructions and R procedures for manipulating the models here here.
Showing posts with label Globalization. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Globalization. Show all posts

Thursday, October 9, 2025

World-System (1970-2150) Six Futures for Colombian Growth

 


The Trump II Administration's Gunboat Diplomacy in the Caribbean  has brought Colombia into the supposed War on Narco-trafficers. The BBC Reports (here) that

Colombian President Gustavo Petro has said that a boat recently bombed by the US was "Colombian with Colombian citizens inside", an allegation the White House called "baseless".

To provide some background to Trump's legally questionable military actions in International Waters, it would seem useful to understand the Economy of Colombia and how it might be affected by possible US military action. Google AI provides the following overview:


Colombia also has an historical reputation as a Cocaine Trafficker, but the Cocaine trade has recently been disrupted as a result of domestic and global forces that are reshaping the drug industry.

My first question, in this post, is what Geopolitical Alliances would be best for Colombia and how might Trump's Drug War affect the alliances. The graphic at the beginning of this post shows six "reasonable" future alignments for Colombia (some "unreasonable" futures are discussed below). Alignment with the US is cyclical and unstable, as is alignment with Russia (RU) and just continuing Business as Usual (BAU). Focusing on Globalization (KOF) provides the most stable future and is the best model from the standpoint of the AIC (see the Notes below, [23.47 < AIC = 51.86 < 81.82). Linkage with the World System (W) generates collapse starting around 2025.


There are a number of the collapse scenarios for Colombian Geopolitical Alignment (graphic above): Emphasis on Technical Efficiency (TECHE) and linkage with China (CN), the differences being when the collapse is forecast to start.






Notes




Google AI on the Economy of Columbia:


ChatGPT on Columbia Globalization:

 AIC Statistics:




Wednesday, September 10, 2025

World-System (1975-2150) Breaking Cycles of Austerity in France

 



The background graphic above was from a protest in Aug 2012 (you can see the small peak in AUST1--see the Operational Definitions in the Notes below--in the overlay time series plot). Emmanuel Macron took office in 2017, right after AUST1 hit bottom. His government has been riding the AUST1 Recovery wave since then. From my Business-As-Usual (BAU) model of French Austerity (here), AUST1 can be expected to peak in the next few years and decline after that. However, the decreasing Cycles of AUST1 will continue well past 2150. 



The BAU model, however, is not the best model for French Austerity. In the long-run, AUST is better seen as being driven by the EUL20 model (which is also steady state). In future posts, I will look at Austerity in the European Union (EU). In the short run, the best model is a Random Walk (RW)--validated by the Macron Administration's inability to form a government and retain a Prime Minister. The attractor path for the RW model is presented above (dashed red line). The RW attractor path suggests that AUST1 should be kept at a low level aside from random movements.

Austerity is a difficult component of Neoliberal Theory (see below). Especially, the dominant controller, AUST1, depends on external forces such as US Military support and the Russian-Ukrainian War which is forcing military expenditure up and creating the budgetary crisis with Health, Education and Welfare.

For an understanding of why Austerity has become such an issue in France, keep in mind that the Economy of France is becoming a Steady State Economy (see the FRL20 Model). One interesting hypothesis is that cyclical processes such as Austerity become more important as the system reaches a steady state and the dream of unending exponential growth (Techno-Optimism) is over. Promises can no longer be made that growth will solve Social Inequality problems. The New Axis of Evil can be used to motivate increased military expenditure but, to avoid reducing Social Expenditure, Debt will have to be used to drive the economy, creating another focus for Protest and wide-spread civil unrest.

You can experiment with the FR_AUST model here. For more information about how the models are constructed see the Boiler Plate.

Notes

More reading:



Austerity, as a theoretical concept, is part of Neoliberalism (see the graphic above and Shefner, 2015 here and here). I will explore the other aspects of French Neoliberalism in future posts.





The data for the AUST index is taken from the World Development Indicators (WDI). The indicators and definitions are listed in the table above. NOTE: AUST is entirely measured by budgetary categories as percentages; the cyclical nature of the index is a result of percentages hitting up against limits [0%,100%].




The AUST index contains three components that explain 94% of the variation in the indicators. 

AUST1 = (0.433 GED + 0.4571 MIL - 0.4477 G - 0.393 GE - 0.4701 GH)  
AUST2 = (0.822 GHE - 0.357 GED - 0.377 GE) 
AUST3 = (Overall Growth) 

AUST1 and AUST2 are historical feedback controllers for the budgetary categories defining Austerity. AUST1 focuses on controlling Education, Military expenditure, Overall Government Expenditure and Health Expenditure. AUST2 focuses on controlling Health and Education Expenditure.




In the Economy of France, Austerity, Debt and Globalization (KOF) are closely related. The relationship can be seen from the Measurement Matrix above when DEBT and WorldGlobal (KOF) are added to the model. In future posts, I will investigate all the indicators of Neoliberalism in France.



The state space of the French Economy is dominated by three components explaining 98% of the variation in the underlying indicators: 

FR1=(Overall Growth)
FR2= (CO2+EF-KOF)
FR3=(LU-L-N

FR2 and FR3 are Historical Feedback Controllers regulating Environmental Impacts of Globalization and Unemployment, respectively. EF is the Ecological Footprint and KOF is the Index of Globalization.

You can run the FRL20 Model with code available in Google Sites.




Wednesday, July 9, 2025

World-System (1950-2000+) Iranian Globalization and Unemployment

 




The IR2 component (Unemployment and Globalization) is the second most important state variable in the IR_LM model and explains about 12% of the variation in the indicators. Unlike the IR3 (Environmental-Globalization feedback controller), IR2 is not a feedback controller but rather a historical componentThe White Revolution and the  Foreign Policy of the Kennedy Administration put a high premium on Modernization and Globalization which rapidly brought population into the cities without immediate job availability (see the video on The Iranian Revolution).




The result was very high levels of Unemployment (a peak of almost 15% in the mid-1980s--see the graphic above). Notice that Globalization peaked in the mid-1970s (first graphic above) while Unemployment peaked about a decade later. 

The two graphics above show the attractor path (dashed red line) for both  Globalization and Unemployment and show that each was above sustainable levels until the early 1990's. The IR2 historical component shows why Islamic Fundamentalism organized wide-spread discontent in Iranian cities before the Iranian Revolution.


Notes

The IR_LM Measurement Model is:


The first state variable (row of the Measurement Matrix, IR1) describes overall growth in the Iranian Economy. The second state variable, IR2, describes  Unemployment and Globalization, (IR2 = 0.9091 SL.UEM.TOTL.ZS + 0.335 KOF) and the third state variable, IR3, is an environmental-globalization feedback controller, (IR3 = 0.827 KOF - 0.3878 SL.UEM.TOTL.ZS - 0.258 EF - 0.217 EG.USE.COM.KT.OE)for unemployment, ecological footprint and energy use.

Further reading:

Blog Roll:

Saturday, February 1, 2025

World-System (1990-2060) Globalization and Trump II Tariffs

 

The Trump II Administration announced today (here) that it is imposing stiff tariffs on goods from Mexico, Canada and China because "...they haven't treated us fairly on trade...". The Wall Street Journal (here) is calling the move "...the dumbest trade war in history...". Other than the Trump II administration breaking decisively with Neoliberalism (free trade and Globalization were key elements of Neoliberal orthodoxy), what is going on here?

Let's first look at the state of Globalization among the trading partners (US, CN, CA, and MX) using the KOF Index of Globalization. The dominant state variable attractor path for the trading system is displayed above as being driven by the USL20 model. From 1990 to 2000, the system had its ups and downs but did stay pretty much within the 98% prediction intervals for the attractor path. In 2010, the system was right on the attractor path. After that, the US-dominated system is predicted to peak somewhere around 2040. Trump is throwing a tariff-wrench in the system and, as with prior swings in Globalization, the policy may have little impact and we can expect a return to the attractor path after Trump II is gone.

But, does Trump understand that the Globalization system is reaching a peak and might well collapse in the future? Is Trump attempting to pull globalized US industries back on-shore before system collapse? Trump claims to act intuitively and his ample gut might tell him that the global World-System is collapsing. At this point, my goal is to get a stake in the ground to understand what has happened after the Trump II Administration is over.


Notes


The Measurement Matrix for this KOF Index of Globalization system is presented above. KOF1=overall growth, KOF2 is dominated by the US and KOF3 is dominated by Canada. All look at KOF2 and KOF3 in future posts.