DHL Global Connectedness Index 2014

40 2. How Globalized are Individual Countries and Regions
The Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership
(TTIP) and Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), if they come
to fruition, could help boost North America’s trade and
capital flows. TTIP would bring the United States into a free
trade agreement with the EU, following on trade agreements
that Mexico and Canada have already signed with
the EU. The TPP negotiations involve all three NAFTA
members, and could strengthen North America’s connectedness
to key economies in both East Asia and South
America.
East Asia & Pacific averaged the third highest level of
overall global connectedness, with balanced strength across
both depth and breadth. This region is strongest on the
trade and information pillars (on which it is the second
ranked region). Countries in East Asia & Pacific also average
the second highest intra-regional share of their international
flows. This result is somewhat surprising given the
relatively limited institutional infrastructure for regional
integration in East Asia & Pacific. However, countries in
this region have in the large part pursued export oriented
economic development strategies, complemented by private
sector-led development of integrated multi-country supply
chains across the region.
Middle East & North Africa ranked fourth in overall connectedness,
placing in the middle of the pack on both depth
and breadth and across the pillars. However, from 2011 to
2013, this was the only region where the average country
suffered a significant drop in its overall global connectedness.
This region’s decline in global connectedness was driven
by both the depth dimension and the breadth dimension
and focused on the trade pillar. Declining connectedness on
the trade pillar was offset partially by rising connectedness
on the other three pillars—most significantly on the capital
and information pillars. Another aspect of the Middle East
& North Africa’s results that raises concern is its very low
intra-regional integration across all four pillars.
South & Central America & the Caribbean ranks third to
last overall and on depth, and second to last on breadth.
This region’s combination of low breadth scores and low
intra-regional integration reflects a pattern where countries
in the region have narrow ties to specific countries outside
of the region, the United States being the most prominent
example. In terms of pillar scores, Central & South America
& the Caribbean ranks last on trade and capital, next-tolast
on people, and holds the middle position on information.
South & Central America & the Caribbean achieved,
however, the highest gains in terms of its overall level of
connectedness from 2011 to 2013. Its gains were driven by
the trade pillar, on which it was the only region where the
average country increased its score. This region’s gains were
also stronger on breadth than on depth.
South & Central Asia lags across nearly all aspects of global
connectedness. This region ranks last on depth and third
from last on breadth. Furthermore, its relatively higher
breadth than depth is a reflection of the poor levels of
integration within the region, depressed in particular by
the animosity between South Asia’s two largest economies,
India and Pakistan.
Finally, Sub-Saharan Africa ranks last, with scores that
reflect its limited connectedness across the board, but did
average the third largest increases in connectedness from
2011 to 2013 among all regions. Sub-Saharan Africa’s rising
connectedness was driven by the information and people
pillars. Sub-Saharan Africa’s gains on the information pillar
are particularly noteworthy in light of the fact that this
is the pillar on which it lags farthest behind other regions.