# An Alternative Globalization Barometer for Investigating the Trend of Globalization
## 1 Introduction  
Globalization is an impactful force for countries and regions all over the world. The trend of globalization influences multiple stakeholders, not least of which include actors in the economic, social, and even political fields. Most stakeholders need to base and readjust their strategies on how globalization will proceed. Despite its importance, there is no consensus on assessing the trend of globalization in the existing literature. Some scholars believe that globalization is irreversible and it will continue to move forward. They argue that the globalization variables are more resilient than most people expected [1]. The increasing mobility of people, information, and technology worldwide has reduced the possibility of deglobalization [2]. Among them, positive globalization trends are especially reflected in increasing global exchanges of services and data [3]. Moreover, based on the fact that the world remains highly collaborative during the coronavirus outbreak, globalization will not end as a result of the pandemic [4]. Some foresee a slowdown in globalization in the near and long-term future, characterized by the concept of \"slowbalization\" [5]. These ideas predate the COVID-19 outbreak, such as the likely deceleration of globalization suggested by [PERSON] [6]. However, slowbalization is not a uniform trend. It includes a recession in economic globalization and a boom in information globalization [7]. Others hold the view that globalization is suffering a downturn. The current deglobalization is partially triggered by the pandemic exposing the underlying fragility in globalization [8; 9]. This crisis has spurred the pre-pandemicglobalization skeptics [10], with economic and social factors further accelerating this skepticism worldwide [11]. Scholars conclude that, due to various anti-globalization factors, including inter-country inequalities, populism, protectionism, and unilateralism, a greater globalization process is difficult to achieve in the current world economy [12]. Populism, in particular, is heavily impactful. It threatens not only economic but also social and political globalization [13, 14]. This rise of populism is fueled by the backlash against neoliberal constitutionalism [15]. Some scholars have refrained from defining a fixed standpoint, as it remains uncertain whether the crisis triggered by the COVID-19 pandemic marks the end of globalization [16]. However, they have pointed out crucial factors that may influence future trends. Digitalization, for instance, projects both centrifugal and centripetal forces on globalization [17], while the pandemic has transformative effects that paint a new image of a post-Covid era global market [18]. While recent studies have made important progress in evaluating and projecting how connections in the world will develop moving forward, they are mainly qualitative studies and therefore by nature, are prone to subjective judgements. Another related strand of literature is the study of globalization indices. Traditionally, sociologists, economists, and others worked on different dimensions of globalization [19]. However, globalization by definition is a multifaceted concept that includes economic, social, and political aspects [20]. Therefore, to measure globalization in a more comprehensive way, most of the existing globalization indices have adopted an interdisciplinary approach, i.e., a composite index of globalization. The A.T. Kearney/Foreign Policy Globalization Index [21] was the first systematic measure of globalization, which measured and ranked 62 countries worldwide on four dimensions: Economic integration, personal contact, technological connectivity, and political engagement. Noteworthy indices include: The KOF Globalization Index [22] uses 43 indicators in the economic, social, and political dimensions and covers data pooled from 203 economies between 1970 and 2018.