Globalization is resulting in complex decisions by businesses as to where and what to produce, while free trade is resulting in a greater menu of choices for consumers, often with the blending of products and goods from various cultures, called 'glocalization.' This paper reviews the theories and practices behind these current happenings, which are each economic, politicaleconomic, institutional, and sociological, first by looking at the supply side of why certain countries produce the goods that they do, and then at the demand side, why consumers have particular, cultural tastes and preferences for goods. It also proffers theories to explain firm location and that of intra-industry trade. This occus when countries trade similar products rather than differentiating, as economic theory would suggest. After reviewing the literature, through numerous examples of political-economy and culture, it argues somewhat normatively that differences in culture and goods are a strength to the world community, and that globalization in the end will not likely result in a singular global culture with a uniformity of exactly identical economic goods anytime in the near future.

No abstract

No abstract

This brief review discussion raises additional regulatory ideas to those offered by 2017 Nobel Prize winning economist Richard Thaler, and philosophically and pragmatically argues that his winning of the award was more political than economic, especially in terms of the legislation offered that followed. The article then uses work from other economists, such as Coase, and Friedman, and Arrow, to theorize that in total there are at least four different categories of regulation currently identified. And, humans have yet to invent or recognize all possible avenues for using “libertarian paternalism,” Thaler’s neologism for social regulation. The article offers a number of real world, contemporary examples falling under such a philosophical umbrella, while discussing their possible benefits and short-comings. The paper overall argues that human society on the whole has been slow to create more solutions for unwanted or incentivized economic behavior, in the application of such philosophical theories to policies by regulators.