While the West is struggling to find a way out of recession, emerging markets present myriad opportunities for growth. This paper offers a new perspective on how global economic triangulation facilitates trade between regions. Triangulation occurs where barriers exist to trade and investment between two countries and a third party (e.g., a country) acts as a facilitator or bridge. The “bridge model,” as we call it, shifts the focus away from national policy as a facilitator of international trade and emphasizes the role of companies. Corporate bridge-building is essentially a form of economic triangulation, and we use the terms “bridge” and “triangulation” interchangeably. Various examples are cited to show how Spanish multinational companies have served as a bridge connecting Asia and Latin America, and in so doing have expanded their own business. Thanks to their links with both regions they create business relationships that might otherwise be impeded by cultural or language barriers, facilitating the flow of products, knowledge and financial resources. In this way firms in otherwise stagnating economies have an opportunity to grow by facilitating trade and investment between emerging markets via the bridge model.

The economic success of state-led forms of capitalism in Russia, China and some other autocracies is one of the most challenging developments for existing typologies of comparative political economy research. For the OECD-World complex theories and models assess the interrelation of polity and economy (e.g., Hall/Soskice), while well defined and systematic approaches for autocracies are seldomly found. Most of the existing work are rather idiosyncratic case studies. We argue that by climbing up the ladder of abstraction (Sartori), we gain analytical leverage and comparability between cases and regions. That's why we've developped an idealtype called “incorporated capitalism.” By looking at state-capitalist developments in China, Singapore, Saudi-Arabia or Russia, there is strong empirical evidence for a variety of “incorporated capitalism”: bureaucratic market economies and patrimonial market economies. Why are those types of capitalism so successful? In order to answer this question correctly, we have to consider other questions first: 1) Which are the specific patterns of interaction between polity and economy? 2) What are the unique governance mechanisms in those incorporated capitalisms? Using mainly qualitative methods we will empirically proof our theoretical findings in order to decode the special complementarities of the bureaucratic and patrimonial market economy in those four real types mentioned above.

Scholars and policymakers tend to see economic sanctions as an important tool of coercive diplomacy, even if the effectiveness of sanctions in changing the policies of target states remains highly contested. Though much of the research on sanctions focuses on their effects at the state level, this article argues that analyzing their effectiveness must begin with the industrial sectors they are meant to affect. Through analysis of restrictive measures currently in place against Iran, this article explores the impact of sanctions at the working level within the insurance industry, drawing on qualitative data gathered as part of a recent workshop funded by the UK Economic and Social Research Council (ESRC) and industry partners.

Over time and across countries, researchers have noted frequent and mostly unexplained gender differences in the levels of support for policies of free or freer trade: according to aggregate results from many surveys, women tend to be less favorable toward policies of liberalizing trade than men. Positing an economic security explanation based largely on a mobile factors approach, we ask if it is women generally who are more negative toward trade or rather women who are more economically vulnerable – i.e., women from the scarce labor factor. We utilize data from two recent surveys on individuals’ attitudes toward different facets of trade and its effects to examine this hypothesis empirically. Rejecting a monolithic definition of “women,” we find that disaggregating by education level illuminates to some extent what underlying characteristics might be helping to drive some of these findings. Lower-skilled women in the US are much less likely to support free trade compared to higher-skilled women and this may largely explain previous negative findings. The low versus high-skill dynamic is, however, much less clear in the findings using survey data from a small sample of developing countries.