scholarly journals Analysis of The Potential Impact of Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership on the ASEAN Member Countries

2017 ◽  
Vol 8 (2) ◽  
pp. 28-37
Author(s):  
Makmun Syadullah ◽  
Miftahudin ◽  
Benny Gunawan Ardiansyah
Keyword(s):  
Free Trade ◽  
Working Group ◽  
Market Access ◽  
Free Trade Agreements ◽  
Market Expansion ◽  
Asean Member ◽  
Potential Impact ◽  
Economic Partnership ◽  
Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership ◽  
The Impact

This paper aims to analyze the potential impacts of the RCEP concept developed in the working group and the potential impact on market expansion. Based on the results achieved in the working group dis-cussions, we used a qualitative approach. We put together a simulation of how the impact on trade and mar-ket development has been the goal of the establishment of RCEP. We concluded that the unification of the 16 countries in the RCEP expected to reduce the spaghetti bowl effect caused by a number of free trade agree-ments followed by a country. However, because RCEP does not eliminate regional free trade agreements that exist, RCEP tend to add to the chain's new spaghetti bowl. In addition, the opening of market access among partner countries in the ASEAN-expected results in increased trade intra-ASEAN partner countries so that the impact on economic growth in the region in general and ASEAN in particular.

ASEAN at the Crossroads: Trap and Track between CPTPP and RCEP

2019 ◽  
Vol 23 (1) ◽  
pp. 97-117
Author(s):  
Chien-Huei Wu
Keyword(s):  
Free Trade ◽  
Market Access ◽  
East Asian ◽  
Free Trade Agreements ◽  
Trade Agreements ◽  
Individual Member ◽  
Asian Regionalism ◽  
Economic Partnership ◽  
Asian Pacific ◽  
Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership

Abstract In the wake of the mega-free trade agreements, all of the 10 member countries of the Association of South East Asian Nations are determined to participate in the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership and to maintain the centrality of the Association of South East Asian Nations whereas Brunei, Malaysia, Singapore, and Vietnam have also opted for the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership. In view of divergent positions of member countries of the Association of South East Asian Nations, this paper asks two questions: empirically, what drives individual member countries of the Association of South East Asian Nations toward the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership or Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership; normatively, do the different positions embraced by member countries of the Association of South East Asian Nations weaken the coherence of external relations of the Association of South East Asian Nations and undermine its centrality in Asian regionalism. I argued that Singapore’s participation in the Trans-Pacific Partnership is mainly motivated by its wish to set the rules of free trade agreements in the Asian Pacific. Brunel aims to diversify its domestic economy and to undergo economic reform through international commitments. Vietnam and Malaysia joined the Trans-Pacific Partnership with a view to accessing American market, but Vietnam’s Trans-Pacific Partnership participation should also be understood in the context of its aggressive free trade agreements strategy. This paper argues that solidarity within member countries of the Association of South East Asian Nations does not prevent economically advanced member countries from participating in the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership for market access; nonetheless, the need of Cambodia, Laos, and Myanmar should be taken into account through special and differential treatment in Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership negotiations.

scholarly journals Saving Potential of Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP): Implication for China and Japan

2019 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
pp. 34-42
Author(s):  
Ranti Yulia Wardani ◽  
Nawalage S. Cooray
Keyword(s):  
Free Trade ◽  
Trade Agreement ◽  
Trade Agreements ◽  
The Other ◽  
Economic Interdependence ◽  
Asean Member ◽  
China And Japan ◽  
Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Japan And China

ASEAN community and six ASEAN FTA partners' leaders have engaged in strengthening economic development within the region by establishing RCEP. ASEAN had signed trade agreements with all the other six FTA partners. The other six ASEAN trading partners within RCEP have no free trade agreements yet among them. Therefore, the RCEP is involved in tough negotiation among the six non-ASEAN member countries. RCEP commitment is established through ASEAN as a catalyst. This study will examine the total saving potential of free trade agreement by using ex-ante FTA analysis and the political implication of RCEP for non-ASEAN member countries, especially Japan and China. The impact of RCEP will be insignificant without China and Japan existence. These two countries are essential to be maintained in the RCEP initiatives. The six non-ASEAN members in RCEP are finding ways to exploit the balance benefit among them. China-Japan relations will be embedded in the RCEP association if RCEP is concluded. From an economic perspective, Japan and China seem to have strong economic interdependence. From a political perspective, both countries have long history relations, distrust, and mistrust. Therefore, economic interdependence could be the way forward for both countries to have a harmonious relationship. Japan and China need ASEAN and other RCEP members to tighten the economic and political relations among them.

India’s Economic Integration in Services with ASEAN: From Bilateral FTAs to RCEP

2019 ◽  
Vol 1 (2) ◽  
pp. 207-223
Author(s):  
Pralok Gupta
Keyword(s):  
Free Trade ◽  
Economic Integration ◽  
Free Trade Agreements ◽  
Trade Agreement ◽  
Services Trade ◽  
Jel Codes ◽  
Opt Out ◽  
Economic Partnership ◽  
Partnership Agreement ◽  
Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership

Given the growing importance of services in Indian economy as well as in international trade, India has offensive interests in services and these are becoming an important part of India’s effort to economically integrate with global economies including Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN). This article analyses India’s economic integration with the ASEAN region in services trade and discusses how India’s services trade interests are taken into consideration by ASEAN members in their free trade agreements with India. It also discusses services-related aspects in the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership agreement, a proposed free trade agreement among ASEAN and its six FTA partners including India, from which India has decided to opt-out recently. JEL Codes: F13, F14, F15

scholarly journals Defending Foreign Policy at Home: Indonesia and the ASEAN-Based Free Trade Agreements

2020 ◽  
Vol 39 (3) ◽  
pp. 405-427
Author(s):  
Rakhmat Syarip
Keyword(s):  
Foreign Policy ◽  
Free Trade ◽  
Free Trade Agreements ◽  
Free Trade Area ◽  
Trade Agreement ◽  
Trade Area ◽  
International Pressure ◽  
Economic Partnership ◽  
Asean Economic Community ◽  
Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership

Scholars have devoted little attention to foreign policy motive of Indonesia’s free trade agreement (FTA) policy. This article finds that, under competitive international pressure, Indonesia has instrumentalised some FTAs to serve its “Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN)-first” foreign policy, specifically to ensure the geopolitical and geoeconomic relevance of ASEAN. Three FTAs display this motive: the ASEAN Free Trade Area, later extended to the ASEAN Economic Community, the ASEAN–China FTA, and the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership. Domestically, the pro-ASEAN group has supported this motive against other influential domestic actors, especially the nationalist and the pro-liberalisation groups. However, diffused political authority has led to an inconsistent FTA policy across various trade policymaking phases. The “pro-ASEAN” FTA policy has been relatively stronger in both the negotiation and ratification, but substantially weaker in the implementation phases.

scholarly journals The rcep and Its Investment Rules: Learning from Past Chinese ftas

2017 ◽  
Vol 3 (2) ◽  
pp. 160-181
Author(s):  
Heng Wang
Keyword(s):  
Free Trade ◽  
Dispute Settlement ◽  
Free Trade Agreements ◽  
Trade Agreements ◽  
Medium Term ◽  
Investment Protection ◽  
Investment Liberalization ◽  
Economic Partnership ◽  
Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership ◽  
Early Harvest

Abstract China’s free trade agreements (ftas) reveal malleability as the most striking feature. The paper analyzes the following questions: what is the trend of China’s fta approach to investment concerning malleability? Is China a rule follower, shaker or maker? How may China approach the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (rcep) regarding investment? It argues first that the malleability will probably expand from investment protection to investment liberalization. China converges with deep ftas regarding investment protection and may incrementally move to investment liberalization. Second, increased malleability of China’s ftas exists in regulatory autonomy and investor-state dispute settlement. Third, China is likely to be a rule shaker in the short to medium term, and become a rule maker later if challenges are addressed. Its approach may evolve from selective adaption to selective innovation. Finally, the rcep may adopt low-level investment rules and an early harvest approach due to, inter alia, existing agreements and the nature of mega fta.

scholarly journals What Do Trade Agreements Really Do?

2018 ◽  
Vol 32 (2) ◽  
pp. 73-90 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dani Rodrik
Keyword(s):  
Free Trade ◽  
Multinational Firms ◽  
Dispute Settlement ◽  
Market Access ◽  
Health And Safety ◽  
Free Trade Agreements ◽  
Trade Agreements ◽  
Pharmaceutical Companies ◽  
Nontariff Barriers ◽  
International Banks

Economists have a tendency to associate “free trade agreements” all too closely with “free trade.” They may be unaware of some of the new (and often problematic) beyond-the-boarder features of current trade agreements. As trade agreements have evolved and gone beyond import tariffs and quotas into regulatory rules and harmonization— intellectual property, health and safety rules, labor standards, investment measures, investor–state dispute settlement procedures, and others—they have become harder to fit into received economic theory. It is possible that rather than neutralizing the protectionists, trade agreements may empower a different set of rent-seeking interests and politically well-connected firms—international banks, pharmaceutical companies, and multinational firms. Trade agreements could still result in freer, mutually beneficial trade, through exchange of market access. They could result in the global upgrading of regulations and standards, for labor, say, or the environment. But they could also produce purely redistributive outcomes under the guise of “freer trade.” As trade agreements become less about tariffs and nontariff barriers at the border and more about domestic rules and regulations, economists might do well to worry more about the latter possibility.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document