Number of results to display per page
Search Results
62. The Hyperglobalization of Trade and Its Future
- Author:
- Arvind Subramanian and Martin Kessler
- Publication Date:
- 08-2013
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Peterson Institute for International Economics (PIIE)
- Abstract:
- This paper describes seven salient features of trade integration in the 21st century: Trade integration has been more rapid than ever (hyperglobalization); it is dematerialized, with the growing importance of services trade; it is democratic, because openness has been embraced widely; it is criss-crossing because similar goods and investment flows now go from South to North as well as the reverse; it has witnessed the emergence of a mega-trader (China), the first since Imperial Britain; it has involved the proliferation of regional and preferential trade agreements and is on the cusp of mega-regionalism as the world's largest traders pursue such agreements with each other; and it is impeded by the continued existence of high barriers to trade in services. Going forward, the trading system will have to tackle three fundamental challenges: In developed countries, the domestic support for globalization needs to be sustained in the face of economic weakness and the reduced ability to maintain social insurance mechanisms. Second, China has become the world's largest trader and a major beneficiary of the current rules of the game. It will be called upon to shoulder more of the responsibilities of maintaining an open system. The third challenge will be to prevent the rise of mega-regionalism from leading to discrimination and becoming a source of trade conflicts. We suggest a way forward—including new areas of cooperation such as taxes—to maintain the open multilateral trading system and ensure that it benefits all countries.
- Topic:
- Economics, Globalization, International Trade and Finance, Markets, and Treaties and Agreements
- Political Geography:
- China
63. Engaging Indonesia
- Author:
- David Camroux
- Publication Date:
- 09-2013
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- European Union Institute for Security Studies
- Abstract:
- The presence of Indonesian President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono at the G20 Summit in St Petersburg in early September went virtually unnoticed by the European media. That his attendance was overlooked can be explained by immediate factors, namely the overriding importance of the Syrian conflict in the discussions among leaders, and the fact that SBY (as President Yudhoyono is commonly known) is a lame-duck president with less than a year to go before the end of his two-term limit. Lacking BRIC status (for now at least), Indonesia – unlike China, India or even Brazil – barely registers on the radar screen of public awareness in Europe. Symptomatic of this neglect is the fact that, almost four years after its signing in November 2009, two EU member state parliaments (and the European Parliament itself) have yet to ratify the EU-Indonesia Partnership and Cooperation Agreement.
- Topic:
- Foreign Policy, Defense Policy, Economics, International Trade and Finance, Treaties and Agreements, and Bilateral Relations
- Political Geography:
- China, Europe, India, Brazil, Syria, and Southeast Asia
64. Identifying Options for a New International Climate Regime Arising from the Durban Platform for Enhanced Action
- Author:
- Robert N. Stavins, Ottmar Edenhofer, and Christian Flachsland
- Publication Date:
- 10-2013
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs, Harvard University
- Abstract:
- The goal of the Harvard Project on Climate Agreements is to help identify and advance scientifically sound, economically rational, and politically pragmatic public policy options for addressing global climate change. Drawing upon leading thinkers in Argentina, Australia, China, Europe, India, Japan, and the United States, the Project conducts research on policy architecture, key design elements, and institutional dimensions of domestic climate policy and a post-2015 international climate policy regime. The Project is directed by Robert N. Stavins, Albert Pratt Professor of Business and Government, Harvard Kennedy School.
- Topic:
- Climate Change, Economics, Energy Policy, Industrial Policy, International Cooperation, and Treaties and Agreements
- Political Geography:
- United States, Japan, China, Europe, and India
65. Trade and the G20
- Author:
- John Ravenhill, Mark P Thirlwell, Mike Callaghan, Peter W. Gallagher, and Brett Williams
- Publication Date:
- 06-2013
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Lowy Institute for International Policy
- Abstract:
- This issue of the G20 Monitor is devoted to the topic of international trade and the role of the G20. Over the coming months, the Monitor will be covering in detail a number of issues that are, or could be, on the G20 agenda. For example, over the next few months there will be an issue on 'Financial regulation and the G20' and another on 'Development and the G20'. The question we are asking on each issue is 'where can the G20 add value?'
- Topic:
- Economics, International Trade and Finance, Treaties and Agreements, and Infrastructure
- Political Geography:
- United States, China, and Europe
66. Assessing EU Leadership on Climate Change. The Limits of Diffusion in EU Relations with China and India
- Author:
- Diarmuid Torney
- Publication Date:
- 09-2012
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- The Kolleg-Forschergruppe (KFG)
- Abstract:
- The EU has for a long time claimed the title of “leader” in the international politics of climate change. However, existing research has generally failed to specify whether the EU's purported leadership has induced the “followership” of other states. This working paper seeks to shed light on this somewhat neglected topic by examining the attempted diffusion of climate change norms, policies, and institutions by the EU to China and India. The paper makes two principal arguments. First, the development of Chinese and Indian climate change policy should be understood as primarily domestic developments. Nonetheless, there was limited evidence of diffusion from the EU, but there was significant variation between the Chinese and Indian responses to the EU's diffusion attempts. The Chinese response was one increasing accommodation; the Indian response was a more straightforward case of resistance. Second, domestic factors help to explain the variation in the Chinese and Indian responses to EU attempts at diffusion and, related, the observed pattern of diffusion from the EU to China and India. Particularly important is the degree to which new external ideas and concepts resonate with pre-existing domestic ideas and concepts. The paper thus paints a picture of limited EU leadership, but also suggests that the EU attempts to secure “followership” could be enhanced by paying greater attention to the domestic politics and preferences of third countries.
- Topic:
- Climate Change, Environment, and Treaties and Agreements
- Political Geography:
- China and India
67. A China – US bilateral investment treaty: A template for a multilateral framework for investment?
- Author:
- Karl P. Sauvant and Huiping Chen
- Publication Date:
- 12-2012
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Columbia Center on Sustainable Investment
- Abstract:
- China is the largest foreign direct investment (FDI) host and home country among emerging markets, the United States among developed countries. As host countries, both seek to maintain policy space to pursue their own legitimate public policy objectives; as home countries, both seek to protect their investors' outward FDI. The development of their bilateral investment treaties (BITs) over the past decade reflects this: Chinese BITs have become more protective of investors, US ones more respectful of host country interests. If agreement is reached between both, it would provide a template for future investment agreements.
- Topic:
- Economics, Emerging Markets, Treaties and Agreements, and Foreign Direct Investment
- Political Geography:
- United States and China
68. Southeast Asia Nuclear-Weapon-Free Zone and the Nuclear-Weapon States
- Author:
- Peter Crail and Xiaodon Liang
- Publication Date:
- 02-2012
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- East-West Center
- Abstract:
- Following a decade-long impasse, the Southeast Asia Nuclear-Weapon-Free Zone (SEANWFZ) is finally on a path to being endorsed by the world's five recognized nuclear-weapon states—China, France, Russia, the United Kingdom, and the United States. Agreement by these nuclear powers to respect the prohibition of nuclear weapons in Southeast Asia and to provide legal assurances that they will not use such weapons against zone members helps to strengthen the commitment by regional states not to pursue nuclear weapons, and contributes more broadly to global nonproliferation and disarmament efforts,
- Topic:
- Arms Control and Proliferation, Nuclear Weapons, Treaties and Agreements, and Weapons of Mass Destruction
- Political Geography:
- Russia, United States, China, United Kingdom, France, and Southeast Asia
69. The Need to Pursue Mutual Interests in U.S.-PRC Relations
- Author:
- Thomas J. Christensen
- Publication Date:
- 04-2011
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- United States Institute of Peace
- Abstract:
- Sino-U.S. cooperation should be based on the pursuit of mutual interests rather than on a framework of mutual respect for “core interests,” as pledged in the 2009 Joint Statement. There is a perception in Beijing that when China assists the United States with problems on the international stage it is doing the United States a favor, and thus it expects returns in kind. This is inaccurate since almost everything that the United States asks of China is directly in China's own interest. If the Six-Party Talks process fails permanently, many countries, including China and the United States, will suffer costs. The biggest losers will be the North Korean people, but second will be China, not the United States. The Chinese government has been increasingly sensitive to a domestic political environment of heated popular nationalism, expressed in the media and on the blogosphere. China suffers from a stunted version of a free press, in which most criticism of government policy is from a hawkish, nationalist direction. A cooperative U.S.-China relationship should be built around the pursuit of mutual global interests. The two countries have worked together successfully on several projects, including antipiracy operations in the Gulf of Aden, and there is potential for further cooperation on issues such as climate change, nuclear nonproliferation, and counterterrorism, to name a few.
- Topic:
- International Cooperation, Treaties and Agreements, and Bilateral Relations
- Political Geography:
- United States, China, Beijing, and North Korea
70. Gambit or Endgame? The New State of Arms Control
- Author:
- Alexei Arbatov
- Publication Date:
- 03-2011
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
- Abstract:
- The pursuit of nuclear arms control has enjoyed something of a renaissance recently, with the signing of the New Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (New START) in spring 2010 in Prague. Whether that momentum will dissipate after New START or lead to further nuclear arms control agreements depends on several factors: The new U.S. and Russian nuclear doctrines. While there is always some distance between a state's declared policy and that policy's implementation, both documents show that, behind their more ambitious disarmament rhetoric, the United States and Russia maintain conservative nuclear policies that make radical nuclear disarmament unlikely—to say nothing of a nuclear-weapon-free world. The peculiarities of the recently signed and ratified New START agreement. Among these are the modest cuts stipulated by the treaty relative to its predecessors; the acrimonious ratification debates in both the U.S. and Russian legislatures; and the dim prospects for a follow-on agreement (in sharp contrast to the mood prevailing after past START agreements). The dynamics of obsolescence and modernization of U.S. and Russian strategic offensive forces. The United States should have little problem cutting its forces to get below New START's limits. Russia, however, will have problems, not in reducing its numbers, but in raising them to treaty ceilings, due to their removal of obsolete weapons from service and slow deployment of new systems. Either Russia can negotiate a New START follow-on treaty with even lower ceilings or it can accelerate the development and deployment of new systems. While the former is obviously a more attractive alternative, it would require the United States and Russia to resolve many thorny arms control issues, such as ballistic missile defense, conventional strategic weapons, and tactical nuclear weapons. Ballistic missile defense. President Obama's decision to modify the Bush administration's ballistic missile defense plans in Central Europe opened the way for New START and eased Russian concerns, even if they could never have been allayed entirely. Moscow believes that U.S. ballistic missile defense programs are ultimately designed to degrade Russia's nuclear deterrent, and it is far from clear that U.S. proposals to jointly develop such capabilities with Russia would allay those concerns—or that the idea even makes any sense. Russia's perceptions of U.S. conventional strategic weapons. Russian officials are especially concerned about the U.S. Prompt Global Strike concept and do not trust American assurances that such capabilities are only directed at terrorists and rogue states. There has already been some progress made in dealing with these weapons in negotiations, and future progress on this issue will likely depend on legal agreements and confidence-building measures to scale U.S. capabilities in ways that would threaten Russia's (or China's) strategic deterrent. Joint development of ballistic missile defenses with Russia. This issue could seriously complicate Washington's and Moscow's strategic relations with China and India. Officials on both sides would do well to start small and proceed step-by-step, using incremental successes to build the momentum necessary to work through more difficult issues. Non-strategic—that is, tactical—nuclear weapons. During the Cold War, the United States and Europe relied on tactical nuclear weapons to counterbalance Warsaw Pact superiority in conventional forces in Europe; today, the situation is reversed, with Moscow relying on tactical nuclear weapons as a counterbalance not only to NATO conventional superiority but also to U.S. strategic nuclear superiority and long-range precision-guided weapons. No one now knows which weapons systems should be categorized as non-strategic, and how limits across regions could be accounted for and verified. In addition, reviving the moribund Conventional Forces in Europe (CFE) Treaty is essential to dealing with the issue of tactical nuclear weapons.
- Topic:
- Arms Control and Proliferation, Nuclear Weapons, Treaties and Agreements, and Weapons of Mass Destruction
- Political Geography:
- Russia, United States, China, Europe, Washington, and Moscow