Search

Begin New Search Topic Economic Cooperation Publication Year within 5 Years

31. Korea’s Regional Cooperation and ODA Policy in Asia: Performance and Challenges

Author:
Aila Yoo and Yul Kwon
Publication Date:
08-2022
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Korea Institute for International Economic Policy (KIEP)
Abstract:
The COVID-19 pandemic and ongoing geopolitical conflicts have deteriorated socio-economic conditions all around the world. As developing countries in Asia have made enormous progress in economic and social development based on the stable ground for growth, the development gap within the region has also been expanded. In addition, the region’s socio-economic conditions have become worse after the pandemic. Along with the pandemic crisis, there are several issues that have negatively influenced the region’s sustainable growth, such as climate change and climate-related natural disasters, and conflicts. These multiple crises change the development needs in the region, and cannot be solved through the efforts of any sole country but must be tackled through regional cooperation. While Korea strengthens its strategic approach for regional economic cooperation to expand its partnership with emerging countries and its Official Development Assistance (ODA) volume is highly concentrated in Asia region, Korea still focuses on cooperation with each country based on priority countries’ Country Partnership Strategy (CPS) without any integrated regional cooperation strategy. Strengthening inclusive partnerships would be a key to reduce the development gap in the region, by supporting regional programs such as the ASEAN Connectivity and Mekong Subregion development projects. To improve policy coherence and tackle the region-wide problems, Korea should adopt an integrated regional cooperation approach by reflecting the characteristics of Asia. This study analyzes changes in the socio-economic conditions and development environment in the Asia region and provides policy implications for preparing regional cooperation strategy for Asia.
Topic:
Economics, Regional Cooperation, Partnerships, Economic Cooperation, and COVID-19
Political Geography:
Asia and South Korea

32. U.S. Strategy and Economic Statecraft: Understanding the Tradeoffs

Author:
Christopher S. Chivvis and Ethan Kapstein
Publication Date:
04-2022
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
Abstract:
Few would dispute that U.S. economic policy has enormous consequences for America’s national security and role in the world. But economic policy is too often made without a clear picture of the strategic tradeoffs it entails. The purpose of this paper is to help clarify some of these tradeoffs by considering three alternative models of U.S. economic statecraft. The first model examined here, America First, has several national security and economic disadvantages. It would not only antagonize some of Washington’s key military allies but probably also undermine U.S. international competitiveness. It might even induce countries to turn their economic attention toward China, reducing the United States’ global influence accordingly. A better approach would be a blend of two other models, namely alliance economics and globalization 2.0. Together these approaches could help orient the United States for the geopolitical challenges of the next decade. By emphasizing commercial relations with U.S. military allies, such a blend would recall Article 2 of the North Atlantic Treaty, which calls for international economic cooperation among NATO member states. And by leading a reformed multilateral system, the United States would again put itself at the center of the rules-based global economic order that brought prosperity to millions.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, NATO, Geopolitics, Economy, Economic Cooperation, and Strategy
Political Geography:
North America and United States of America

33. Foreign Firms Investment in Inter-Korean Economic Cooperation

Author:
Jang Ho Choi, Jung Kyun Rhee, Yoojeong Choi, and Dae-Eun Lee
Publication Date:
04-2022
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Korea Institute for International Economic Policy (KIEP)
Abstract:
This paper examines various channels and issues for foreign firms to invest in inter-Korean economic cooperation with the as-sumption that inter-Korean economic cooper-ation can be resumed after sanctions against North Korea have been lifted, and the same treatment is applied to foreign firms. Foreign firms' investment in inter-Korean economic cooperation will provide a new op-portunity for foreign firms to earn stable profits, while also playing a role in further solidifying the establishment of peace on the Korean Peninsula. Now, inter-Korean rela-tions have fallen into difficulties due to sanc-tions against North Korea and the coronavirus pandemic, making it difficult to resume inter-Korean economic cooperation or to expect foreign firms to invest in inter-Korean eco-nomic cooperation. However, if inter-Korean economic cooperation is resumed, foreign firms' investment in inter-Korean economic cooperation will be prioritized.
Topic:
Foreign Direct Investment, Sanctions, Economy, and Economic Cooperation
Political Geography:
Asia, South Korea, and North Korea

34. The Indo-Pacific Economic Framework and Digital Trade in Southeast Asia

Author:
Andreyka Natalegawa and Gregory B. Poling
Publication Date:
05-2022
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS)
Abstract:
In October 2021, the Biden administration announced the development of an Indo-Pacific Economic Framework (IPEF) with partner nations to “define our shared objectives around trade facilitation, standards for the digital economy and technology, supply chain resiliency, decarbonization and clean energy, infrastructure, worker standards, and other areas of shared interest.” Details on the framework are still being worked out, but it now seems that those six areas of focus have been distilled into four negotiating “pillars.” Deputy U.S. Trade Representative Sarah Bianchi said in early February that these would include “fair and resilient trade, supply chain resilience, infrastructure and decarbonization, and tax and anticorruption.” The Office of the U.S. Trade Representative (USTR) will likely lead negotiations on the first, while it appears that the Commerce Department will take the lead on the other three. The details of each pillar will be worked out in the months ahead, but the Biden administration is certain to face challenges and trade-offs across each, given the diversity of economies and political constraints across the region. USTR has said the trade pillar will be “high-ambition” and include binding commitments. But this will be complicated by the fact that the administration plans to roll out the IPEF through executive action rather than as a traditional trade deal requiring congressional approval. This pathway will help the framework sidestep political obstacles that agreements like the Trans-Pacific Partnership faced before Congress, but it also means that the administration cannot offer increased market access or any other concessions that would require changes to U.S. law. Moreover, moving forward with the IPEF through executive action has led to concerns among partners that the framework could be vulnerable to U.S. domestic politics or that a future administration may well roll back or abandon the framework. Given these self-imposed constraints, the administration will face headwinds trying to convince countries to sign on to high-standard provisions on digital trade, labor, and environmental standards that might run counter to their perceived short-term political or economic interests. One possible solution would have been to make the involvement in the other three pillars, where there are likely to be more tangible benefits for other countries, contingent on an agreement in the trade pillar. But that would run counter to the desire to get as many countries on board as possible. So, the administration has instead indicated that countries will be invited to engage in each pillar a la carte. And while like-mindedness in and of itself does not immediately guarantee their support for the IPEF, the likely result is that only Japan, Australia, New Zealand, Singapore, and perhaps South Korea—the most developed economies which already share U.S. standards on digital trade, environment, and labor—will engage with USTR on the trade pillar. But a wider array of economies will likely join the talks with the Commerce Department on the other three.
Topic:
Economics, International Trade and Finance, Digital Economy, and Economic Cooperation
Political Geography:
Asia, Southeast Asia, and Indo-Pacific

35. A Gateway to Africa? Economic Opportunities in Israel-Morocco Relations

Author:
Morr Link
Publication Date:
05-2022
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Institute for National Security Studies (INSS)
Abstract:
Since renewing diplomatic relations between Jerusalem and Rabat, the scope of trade indeed has grown between the two countries, but the full potential still has not been realized. How can the economic cooperation be improved, which also entails many policy opportunities for both Israel and Morocco?
Topic:
Economics, International Cooperation, International Trade and Finance, Bilateral Relations, and Economic Cooperation
Political Geography:
Africa, Middle East, Israel, and Morocco

36. Proportionality and Karlsruhe’s Ultra Vires Verdict: Ways Out of Constitutional Pluralism?

Author:
Martin Hopner
Publication Date:
01-2021
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Max Planck Institute for the Study of Societies
Abstract:
In May 2020, for the first time in its history, the Federal Constitutional Court (FCC) of Germany declared Union acts as being ultra vires. According to the FCC, the European Central Bank (ECB) and the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) had acted beyond their mandates because they did not apply strong proportionality standards to the ECB’s Public Sector Purchase Programme (PSPP). The resulting stalemate within constitutional pluralism has revived the discussion about the possible introduction of an Appeal Court with the “final say” over constitutional conflict. As the analysis of the PSPP conflict shows, such a judicial authority would reach its limits the more we move from the surface to the core of the struggles between European and national constitutional law. The different readings of proportionality are difficult to bridge, and the mutually exclusive claims about the nature of the supremacy of European law are not accessible to compromise at all. We should therefore not expect too much from an Appeal Court, if it were introduced.
Topic:
Regional Cooperation, Law, European Union, Economic Cooperation, European Monetary Union, and Banking
Political Geography:
Europe

37. Covid-19 and the Danger of Self-sufficiency: How Europe’s Pandemic Resilience was Helped by an Open Economy

Author:
Johan Norberg
Publication Date:
03-2021
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
European Centre for International Political Economy (ECIPE)
Abstract:
During the Covid-19 pandemic, Europe has benefitted strongly from being an open economy that can access goods and services from other parts of the world. Paradoxically, some politicians in Europe think that dependence on foreign supplies reduced the resilience of our economy – and argue that Europe now should wean itself off its dependence on other economies. In this Policy Brief, it is argued that self-sufficiency or less economic openness is a dangerous direction of policy. It would make Europe less resilient and less capable of responding to the next emergency. It is key that people, firms and governments can get supplies from other parts of the world. It is diversification, not concentration of production, that will make Europe more resilient when the next emergency hit. We don’t know where the next crisis will come from. Nature will throw nasty surprises at us, and we will make stupid mistakes, some of which will have devastating consequences. What we do know, though, is that we stand a better chance to fight the next emergency if we get richer and improve our technology. The best policy for resilience is one that encourages specialisation and innovation – and, when the emergency hit, allow for people to improvise in search for solutions. For that to happen, we need openness to goods, services and technology from abroad.
Topic:
Health, International Political Economy, Innovation, Economic Cooperation, Pandemic, and COVID-19
Political Geography:
Europe and Global Focus

38. Decoupling Europe

Author:
Gabriel Felbermayr, Steffen Gans, Hendrik Mahlkow, and Alexander Sandkamp
Publication Date:
07-2021
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Kiel Institute for the World Economy (IfW)
Abstract:
The COVID-19 pandemic revealed the vulnerability of international value chains in the face of global shocks. This has triggered a political discussion regarding a possible reshoring of vulnerable supply chains back home. The aim is to reduce dependencies on foreign suppliers and thus improve crisis resilience of the domestic economy. The debate is also rooted in the growing dependence on Asian suppliers and the colliding political and ideological systems between China and the West. Unilateral decoupling of the EU from China (a doubling of trade costs) would reduce real income in the EU on average by 0.8 percent. In terms of GDP in 2019, this equals a permanent loss in real income of 131.4 bn EUR. Should China retaliate, real income would fall by 1.0 percent (170.3 bn EUR). With its extremely interconnected economy, real income in Germany would even decline by 1.4 percent (48.4 bn EUR). China would also lose from such a trade war, with real income declining by 1.3 percent. Should the EU increase its trade barriers against all its non-European trading partners, real income in the Union would fall by 3.5 percent or 584.3 bn EUR in case of a unilateral increase and by 5.3 percent or 873.1 bn EUR in case the rest of the world responds by also raising trade barriers.
Topic:
Economics, Regional Cooperation, European Union, Economic Cooperation, Pandemic, and COVID-19
Political Geography:
China and Europe

39. EU-China Investment Agreement: the EU’s Balancing Act between Values and Economic Interests

Author:
Saila Turtiainen
Publication Date:
03-2021
Content Type:
Commentary and Analysis
Institution:
Finnish Institute of International Affairs (FIIA)
Abstract:
The ratification process for the EU’s new investment agreement with China is expected to be very difficult. Although the aim is to improve EU-China relations, the process of getting the agreement approved in the EU will end up causing further tensions with China as the EU tries to strike a balance between promoting its values and economic interests.
Topic:
International Cooperation, International Trade and Finance, European Union, Conflict, and Economic Cooperation
Political Geography:
China, Europe, and Asia

40. China’s Foreign Policy at the Centennial of the Communist Party: Prestige Above All

Author:
Jyrki Kallio
Publication Date:
09-2021
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Finnish Institute of International Affairs (FIIA)
Abstract:
Chinese external and internal politics have manifested increased ideologization in recent years, presumably laying the groundwork for the Communist Party’s 100th anniversary this year. The trend is likely to continue at least until the completion of the 20th Party Congress in 2022. In China’s foreign policy, this ideologization has taken the form of increased emphasis on the realization of China’s “Grand Rejuvenation” and heightened sensitivity to anything that might stand in its way. This is in line with the Party’s historical narrative emphasizing the “century of humiliation” and the ensuing efforts to curb China’s rise. The resulting prestige-driven foreign policy has proved harmful to China’s external image. An easing of Chinese politics may thus be conceivable once the Party has left the current sensitive times behind to its satisfaction. Countries with vital economic ties to China, and which depend at the same time on continued US support in security policies, have little choice but to continue tightroping for a few more years at least.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Diplomacy, International Cooperation, Hegemony, Conflict, and Economic Cooperation
Political Geography:
China and Asia