The phenomenon of globalization is defined in several ways. Some refer it to as integration and cooperation, progress, stability and development, and others refer to colonialism, destabilization and regression. Variety of viewpoints on globalization is due to the contribution of authors from different disciplines of social sciences, communities and cultures. The multidimensional phenomenon of globalization raises difficulty in defining this term. Despite different challenges, some definitions are narrow and exclusive while others are broad and inclusive. The debate on the definitions of globalization also reflected in its measurement. Therefore, literature reports various indicators and indices to measure globalization. These indices are subject to the alternative approaches in defining the concept of globalization. Globalization has transformed the whole globe into one single entity through socioeconomic and political interdependence among economies. During the past few decades economic, financial, political and cultural relations are more intertwined as a result of liberalization, deregulation and modernization. The process of globalization is fueled by and resulted in, higher cross border flow of international trade, capital, people and information. Technological advancement in transportation and communication has expedited the flow of investment and trade across globe. The modern shape of globalization is driven by various factors. Classical theories of globalization highlight the role of knowledge, transnational capital and technology for the development of world system (Wallerstein, 1974; Castells, 1996 and Robinson, 2004). Generally, there are various economic, financial, political, social and cultural factors that have expected to drive the process of globalization. The modern interdependent economies are not equally sharing the benefits of globalization. Hence, the impact of globalization is not even around the globe. Experiences show great deal of variations in opportunities and risks in both developed and developing countries. Several studies have shown positive impact of globalization in promoting worldwide growth and development while others show weak and negative effect (Dollar, 1992; Rodriguez and Rodrik , 2000; Dreher, 2006; Sapkota, 2011; Dogan 2013; Umaru, 2013 and Lee, 2014) This dissertation entitled ―Measurement, driving forces and socioeconomic interlinkages of globalization‖ has attempted to address three major issues. First, the focus is on the measurement of globalization by introducing a new variable of number of sports event in the dimension of social globalization. Second, it proposes an analytical framework that develops a link of globalization to its drivers. Furthermore, the study also provides an empirical test for the driving factors of globalization for developed and developing countries. Third, the impact of globalization on socioeconomic indicators is also examined. Three types of globalization i.e. economic, political and social globalization are examined in relation to the socioeconomic indicators and indices. Advanced econometrics techniques and statistical methods are applied to address the objectives of the study. The controversies in defining, measuring and risk of globalization are one of the challenging issues in literature. Chapter 2 of this dissertation focuses on the overview of the globalization in terms of its definition, measurement, history and positive and negative flows of globalization. Chapter 2 provides a critical review on the available indices of globalization. Single and composite indices are used to measure globalization. Single indices measure globalization with the help of trade and financial indicators. These are trade openness, average tariff rates, IMF restrictions and FDI. However, these indices are unable to measure the other aspects of globalization i.e. social, cultural and political. Therefore, numbers of project have been initiative to construct composite index of globalization since 2000. In this regard, A.T. Kearney/Foreign Policy Globalization Index was the very first initiative, launched in 2001 and continued its calculations until appeared as comprehensive measure which continues to this day (Dreher, 2002 and Dreher et al. 2008). Another contribution in the construction of composite globalization index is proposed in the Centre for the Study of Globalization and Regionalization, CSGR (Lockwood & Redoano, 2005). The Maastricht Globalization Index (MGI) appeared in 2006 (Martens & Zywietz, 2006), and a New Globalization Index was suggested two years later (Vujakovic, 2010). Further, a globalization index, which is described in Randolph (2001) is more focused on economic dimension. Composite indices cover economic, political, social, cultural and environmental dimensions of globalization. However, sports is another important aspect of globalization, which is ignored by all the existing indices. Modification is proposed in KOF index of globalization by introducing a dimension of sports. Numbers of international sports events are added in the category of social globalization. Hence, ranking of 68 countries on the basics of Modified Social Globalization Index (MSGI) is provided in comparison to the KOF Social Globalization index. Results show that participation in international sports event can influence the globalization ranking of a country. For instance, the United States and Puerto Rico has shown significant improvement in the raking. Among 68 countries, 15 countries showed improvement in the ranking while 17 countries preserved their ranking and 36 countries fell from their position. Overall globalization ranking is also obtained by using the Modified Social Globalization Index and introducing the aspect of environment. Chapter 3 focuses on the driving factors of globalization. Theories of globalization and literature have shown various factors that have contributed to determine the process of globalization. The important contribution in defining the evolution of globalization is the world theory of Wallerstein (1974). It defines world system as the economic and political interdependent of core-periphery societies, which is positioned by technology. Later on, the theories of global capitalism observe trans-nationalization of production and capital ownership to derive the process of globalization (Sklair, 2001; 2002, Robinson; 2003, 2004). Martin (1978), Dijk (1991) and Castells (1996) define network society that links the whole globe through the channel of modern information and communication technology. Classical theories mostly highlight the role of capital and technology to determine the process of globalization. Some other factors including international trade, growth of emerging economics, lower cost, lower trade barriers and government policies are also highlighted in literature as a driving force of globalization. Keeping in view the classical theories and literature that describe the development of globalization, this chapter provides a theoretical and analytical framework to establish a link of globalization to its driving factors. This chapter investigates the factors that affect globalization in both developed and developing countries using 92 sample countries over the period of 1990 to 2015. It provides evidence that globalization in developed countries is influenced by human capital, capital, labour, technology and financial development while globalization in developing countries is affected by capital, labour and financial development. Among the components of efficiency, economic diversification and international competitiveness is significant in influencing the process of globalization in developed and developing counties. The study shows the strong role of financial development index in developed, developing and full panel cases. Therefore, the financial linkages are appeared to strengthen the degree of connectivity among countries. Chapter 4 examines the relationship between different types of globalization and socioeconomic variables. The impact of globalization on socioeconomic indicators is one of the most debatable issues. Income, unemployment, poverty reduction and economic inequality have always been the prime objectives of policy makers. Along with these objectives, Provision of better facilities and good quality of life is also a concern of policy makers. This chapter is an attempt to explain the link between globalization and these socioeconomic indicators. Therefore, the objectives of this chapter are two-fold: First, it investigates the inter-relationship between the three types of globalization; (1) economic, (2) political, (3) and social globalization. Second, it also examines the relationship between these types of globalization and poverty, inequality, unemployment and the human development index for relatively a large panel of 129 countries over the period of 1990 to 2016. Results show that economic, political and social globalization are positively related to each other. Economic globalization is appeared to be strongest in influencing the remaining two types of globalization. It indicates that economic integration among counties brings social and political globalization. There is two-way causality between economic and social globalization and economic and political globalization while one-way causality from social globalization to political globalization. It implies that the countries, which are economically more integrated, tend to become socially and politically closer in order to exploit benefit from the economic integration. Also, a political integration would lead to an economic integration because a more integrated political relationship would lead to economic agreements, therefore, enhances economic integration. The three types of globalization have positive effect on socioeconomic indicators and HDI. Additionally, these types are also reducing poverty. However, some types of globalization increase income inequality and unemployment. As a whole, results of this chapter indicate positive and beneficial effect of globalization on socioeconomic indicators of the countries." xml:lang="en_US