Search

Begin New Search Topic Trade Publication Year within 10 Years

51. Scaling up Private Investment in Low-Carbon Energy Systems through Regional Cooperation: Market-Based Trade Policy Measures

Author:
Kaliappa Kalirajan, Huong Thi Thu Tran, and Yochang Liu
Publication Date:
01-2020
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Economic Research Institute for ASEAN and East Asia (ERIA)
Abstract:
This study aims to analyse the possibility and challenges of encouraging private sector investment in low-carbon energy systems in Asia, particularly across the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP) member countries, and to suggest an effective policy framework that governments could apply to improve the development and dissemination of low-carbon energy goods and technologies. The research questions examined in this study are: What type of policy measures affect trade in low-carbon energy systems transition, particularly the renewable energy transition? How can investment signals and incentives be reframed to scale up private finance in renewable energy through regional cooperation? The objective is to investigate and provide several market-based feasible trade policy and investment policy tools for both national and regional markets that governments could adopt to accelerate the speed of private financing of the low-carbon energy industry, particularly the renewable energy industry.
Topic:
Energy Policy, Markets, Trade, and Renewable Energy
Political Geography:
South Asia, East Asia, Asia, and Southeast Asia

52. Greek-American relations: what next?

Author:
George Tzogopoulos
Publication Date:
01-2020
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Hellenic Foundation for European and Foreign Policy (ELIAMEP)
Abstract:
With President Donald Trump and Prime Minister Kyriakos Mitsotakis scheduled to meet early this January, Dr. George Tzogopoulos, Research Fellow at ELIAMEP, outlines the course of Greek-American relations from 2015 onwards. Dr. Tzogopoulos argues that Athens and Washington DC have entered a period of strong cooperation that can be further consolidated in 2020. Defense, energy and trade are the main focal points. The agenda includes the need to create a new security environment in the Mediterranean – with Greece playing a key role. The excellent status of Greek-American relations creates new opportunities for closer bilateral cooperation on defense, energy and trade. The region of Northern Greece becomes of gradually higher significance for the US. US foreign policy towards Greece reflects its interest in restraining Russian influence. While anti-Americanism in Greece is declining, there is widespread concern in the domestic public sphere on whether the US will support Greece in the case of a crisis with Turkey in the Eastern Mediterranean. US support to the trilateral cooperation of Greece-Israel-Cyprus will be reinforced through the Eastern Mediterranean Security and Energy Partnership Act. The US-Greece Strategic Dialogue and NATO Mediterranean Dialogue are useful instruments for strengthening Greece’s role in the South, contributing towards a new security landscape.
Topic:
Security, Energy Policy, Bilateral Relations, and Trade
Political Geography:
Europe, Greece, North America, and United States of America

53. Mexico and the United States: a new beginning | México y Estados Unidos: un nuevo comienzo

Author:
Agustín Barrios Gómez, Henry Cuellar, Juan Carlos Baker, and Kenneth Smith
Publication Date:
02-2020
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Mexican Council on Foreign Relations (COMEXI)
Abstract:
North America started 2020 as a bloc of three democratic countries with shared values that trade freely in the context of regional peace and cooperation. We are nearly 500 million North American citizens who came together to sign the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) of 1994 and its successor, the United StatesMexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA) of 2018, providing a legal framework for commercial freedom on our continent. The world often conducts its affairs with a zero-sum game mentality, meaning that one country’s gain is another’s loss. This is why agreements like NAFTA, in 1994, and the USMCA, today, are particularly valuable. It is also the reason that we must not take them for granted. The effort invested in creating the USMCA was born precisely from the understanding of a fundamental idea: restricting the liberty of our people to trade freely is a mistake. It was not an easy case to make. The current U.S. president based his political campaign on animosity towards Mexico, in particular, and against exchange with the world, in general. However, he was led to a position of saving free trade in North America by the millions of his fellow citizens who saw their economic livelihood threatened by protectionism and the possibility of severing close economic ties with their neighbors. At the same time, a sector of Mexican society that has always been antagonistic to two pillars of trade in our continent: integration with the United States, and economic freedom, came to power in Mexico. This raised the specter of a challenge to free trade from Mexican socialists. However, the overwhelmingly positive results and obvious benefits of NAFTA for Mexico were of such magnitude, that protectionism was not an issue in the return to power of the nationalist Left. It now looks like a given, but both in the case of the U.S. and in the case of Mexico, the survival of the framework of openness born on January 1, 1994, is a testament to enormous political and economic success. In a world that increasingly favors the Pyrrhic victories of political symbolism, the triumph of reason over nativist fervor is well worth highlighting. For each of the three countries, the USMCA was the way to protect these gains, but each country placed its own emphasis on their priorities. Canada, currently the most politically stable country of the three, clearly sought to uphold a system that provides the country with access to its main market, as well as to another market (Mexico) in which it has fewer interests, but which is still important. The United States, the former architect of the world order that promoted economic freedoms for 71 years (1945-2016), was set to become its spoiler. Fortunately for the general interest, despite the rhetoric, with the USMCA it was possible to find a compromise that safeguarded the gains made from economic integration since 1994. Sectors of society, such as farmers and border communities which had never organized to defend their markets, got together to successfully make their case directly to the Administration. Mexico’s interests were clearer: manufactured exports are the most dynamic and competitive part of its economy. They not only provide a major source of hard currency, but in conjunction with the imports made possible by income from exports, they support the internal market, as well. For Mexico, even more than for Canada, protecting free trade of North America was imperative. The result was an Agreement that protected the benefits of North American commercial freedom, at the same time as it brought certain aspects up to date. It also addressed a number of the concerns that had been raised by blue collar workers in the United States, particularly pertaining to the automotive sector. This document helps us understand these changes and provides perspective from three authors who were directly involved in making the USMCA a reality.
Topic:
Treaties and Agreements, Bilateral Relations, Economy, NAFTA, Free Trade, Trade, and USMCA
Political Geography:
North America, Mexico, and United States of America

54. Fisheries and Brexit

Author:
Anand Menon, Catherine Barnard, John Connolly, and Arno Van Der Zwet
Publication Date:
06-2020
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
UK in a Changing Europe, King's College London
Abstract:
Brexit has been a steep learning curve for all of us. It has forced us to wrap our heads around a number of issues – Article 50, statutory instruments, rules of origin, business motions in the House of Commons and the rest – with which we were, at best, only vaguely familiar. Fish and fisheries is another such issue. Absurd though it may seem, as the formal Brexit process reaches its endgame, fisheries might yet be the issue that determines whether the negotiations succeed or fail. Consequently, we at the UK in a Changing Europe have put together this short report to try to explain the basics about a sector that is frequently referred to yet rarely properly understood. The aim of what follows is to explain, as clearly and accessibly as possible, what is at stake in the negotiations over fisheries, what is being negotiated and what the implications of these talks might be for the sector.
Topic:
European Union, Brexit, Trade, and Fishing
Political Geography:
United Kingdom and Europe

55. What would no deal mean?

Author:
Anand Menon, David Bailey, Tim Bale, Catherine Barnard, Matthew Bevington, Meredith Crowley, Sarah Hall, Katy Hayward, Martin Heneghan, Carmen Hubbard, Lisa James, Hussein Kassim, Ben Kienzle, Nicola McEwen, Jonathan Portes, Ivan Rajic, Meg Russell, Jill Rutter, Thomas Sampson, Maddy Thimont-Jack, Alan Wager, and Dan Wincott
Publication Date:
09-2020
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
UK in a Changing Europe, King's College London
Abstract:
We now have a Withdrawal Agreement, which means ‘no deal’ means ‘no trade deal’. Yet a no deal outcome would still have profound implications for the UK. As we analyse in this report, from trade to connectivity to foreign policy to cooperation in policing, a failure to strike an agreement with the EU will impact on us in numerous ways.
Topic:
International Relations, Politics, European Union, Constitution, Economy, Trade, and Society
Political Geography:
United Kingdom and Europe

56. Revisited: What would ‘trading on WTO terms’ mean?

Author:
Catherine Barnard and Anand Menon
Publication Date:
05-2020
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
UK in a Changing Europe, King's College London
Abstract:
Whether it is because of fishing rights, financial services, the EU’s insistence that the UK adhere to its level playing field, governance demands, or simply running out of time, it is far from clear that a trade deal will be successfully negotiated and approved by the end of 2020. As a consequence, the notion of the UK trading with the EU ‘on WTO terms’ has resurfaced. We have produced this report to explain what the WTO is and what trading on WTO terms actually means legally and practically. It updates an earlier version published in 2018.
Topic:
European Union, Constitution, Economy, Brexit, Trade, and WTO
Political Geography:
United Kingdom and Europe

57. Beer and Brexit with Sir David Lidington

Author:
David Lidington and Anand Menon
Publication Date:
02-2020
Content Type:
Video
Institution:
UK in a Changing Europe, King's College London
Abstract:
On 30 January 2020, Professor Anand Menon was joined by former cabinet minister and Conservative MP Sir David Lidington for our first Beer and Brexit of 2020.
Topic:
European Union, Business, Brexit, and Trade
Political Geography:
United Kingdom and Europe

58. How Washington Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the UAE

Author:
Albadr AbuBaker Alshateri
Publication Date:
02-2020
Content Type:
Commentary and Analysis
Institution:
American Diplomacy
Abstract:
When Dubai World Ports (DWP), a Dubai Government-owned entity, sought to purchase the British company Peninsular and Oriental Steam Navigation (P&O) in 2006, it faced huge opposition from the US Congress, local authority, and national security experts, despite the Bush Administration’s approval of the deal. The acquisition of P&O would have given the Dubai company the concession to run six major ports in the USA.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Diplomacy, Exports, Trade, and Imports
Political Geography:
North America, United Arab Emirates, United States of America, and Gulf Nations

59. The evolution of Belarusian public sector: From command economy to state capitalism?

Author:
Aliaksandr Papko
Publication Date:
04-2020
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Center for Social and Economic Research - CASE
Abstract:
Belarus was among the few post-communist countries to resign from comprehensive market reforms and attempt to improve the efficiency of the economy through administrative means, leaving market mechanisms only an auxiliary role. Since its inception, the ‘Belarusian economic model’ has undergone several revisions of a de-statisation and de-regulation kind, but still the Belarusian economy remains dominated by the state. This paper analyses the characteristic features of the Belarusian economic system – especially those related to the public sector – as well as its evolution over time during the period following its independence. The paper concludes that during the post-Soviet period, the Belarusian economy evolved from a quasi-Soviet system based on state property, state planning, support to inefficient enterprises and the massive redistribution of funds to a more flexible hybrid model where the public sector still remains the core of the economy. The case of Belarus shows that presently there is no appropriate theoretical perspective which, in an unmodified form, could be applied to study this type of economic system. Therefore, a new perspective based on an already existing but updated approach or a multidisciplinary approach that incorporates the duality of the Belarusian economy is required.
Topic:
Reform, Economy, Economic growth, Public Sector, Trade, and State Capitalism
Political Geography:
Eurasia and Belarus

60. 30 Years of Economic Transformation in CEE: Key Five Lessons For Belarus

Author:
Aleś Alachnovič, Andrzej Raczko, Izabela Styczynska, Jarosław Neneman, Kateryna Karunska, Krzysztof Głowacki, Pawel Swianiewicz, and Sierž Naŭrodski
Publication Date:
04-2020
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Center for Social and Economic Research - CASE
Abstract:
Belarusian economy has been stagnating in 2011-2015 after 15 years of a high annual average growth rate. In 2015, after four years of stagnation, the Belarusian economy slid into a recession, its first since 1996, and experienced both cyclical and structural recessions. Since 2015, the Belarusian government and the National Bank of Belarus have been giving economic reforms a good chance thanks to gradual but consistent actions aimed at maintaining macroeconomic stability and economic liberalization. It seems that the economic authorities have sustained more transformation efforts during 2015-2018 than in the previous 24 years since 1991. As the relative welfare level in Belarus is currently 64% compared to the Central and Eastern Europe (CEE) countries average, Belarus needs to build stronger fundaments of sustainable growth by continuing and accelerating the implementation of institutional transformation, primarily by fostering elimination of existing administrative mechanisms of inefficient resource allocation. Based on the experience of the CEE countries’ economic transformation, we highlight five lessons for the purpose of the economic reforms that Belarus still faces today: keeping macroeconomic stability, restructuring and improving the governance of state-owned enterprises, developing the financial market, increasing taxation efficiency, and deepening fiscal decentralization.
Topic:
Economics, Governance, Economic growth, and Trade
Political Geography:
Eurasia and Belarus