Benefits Of Economic Integration Research Articles

EURASIAN ECONOMIC UNION DURING THE PANDEMIC: INTEGRATION PROBLEMS AND PROSPECTS

The article aims to assess the results of the development of the Eurasian Economic Union, including in the context of the Covid-19 pandemic. The theoretical and methodological foundation of the study of integration is based on studying the activity of various regional associations from the viewpoint of the integration levels and ultimate goals. Depending on the set goals, it is possible to predict and strategically calculate the consequences and possible benefits of economic integration. Using statistical analysis tools, the authors analyzed the key economic indicators affecting the development of the EAEU. Official data of international structures (World Bank, U.N., EAEU), government agencies, various reports and reviews were also used in the work. The studied indicators are presented in the article in tables and graphs, created by the authors for the purpose of visualizing the relevant processes. Logical reasoning is used to describe the results obtained. The article assesses the consequences of the pandemic for global trade and analyzes further ways of developing the world political process. Today, many countries face similar problems due to the pandemic, and take unprecedented measures in order to address them. Most countries have restricted the export of essential goods, such as medical supplies and food. Global economic ties aimed at liberalizing trade have been called into question, since each state is forced to ensure its own national security in the face of the pandemic. In this respect, the question of strength and stability of the globalization processes are in a changing world? Certain event scenarios are considered in the conclusion of the article, one of which is a transition to a policy of protectionism and import substitution.

The “New” Crisis of the Liberal Order: Populism, Socioeconomic Imbalances, and the Response of Contemporary Ordoliberalism

In the face of the “new” crisis of liberalism, our paper follows the spirit of Walter Lippmann’s The Good Society and argues for a renewal of (ordo)‌liberal thinking. Similar to Lippmann, we argue that our current liberal economic order is unfit to deal with fundamental social asymmetries. The benefits of economic integration are distributed unevenly with urban economic and political elites as main beneficiaries and supporters of the current order, while neglecting less-skilled, rural workers. In this paper, we argue for a contemporary ordoliberalism that takes up this distributional challenge. In spite of recurrent criticism of its value-laden nature, we argue that the normativity of ordoliberalism is actually an asset in the current debate on populism.

Towards an Inclusive Model of African Regional Integration: How Effective has the Linear Model been so Far?

Abstract: The proponents of African regional integration hoped to create large economic spaces that allow economies of scale, increased efficiency, competitiveness and faster growth of Africa states. Whereas the linear model of regional integration seemed to have worked for the European Union, many have questioned its applicability in the African context. The applicability of the Linear model at the stages of Regional Economic Communities (RECs) like the EAC has met with significant stagnation primarily because of some bottlenecks such as poor infrastructure that limits the connectivity with the continent and lack of political will out of fear for the loss of sovereignty. The question thus lies in how the dream for a regionally united Africa will arise when its people cannot move and interact freely within the continent? By utilizing a secondary research design, this paper, therefore, sought to not only examine the effectiveness of the linear model of regional integration for Africa but also explore the possibility of incorporating the functionalist and federalist approach into an inclusive model for African regional integration. In examining the economic dynamics of regional integration, the paper identifies the benefits of economic integration, such as larger markets as a result of free movement of people and goods that could be harnessed by trading communities within Africa. Thus, the central argument in this paper does not discard the benefits and successes of the linear model of regional integration but concludes that its effectiveness can be enhanced by incorporating functionalist and at later stages federalist approaches to regional integration in Africa. The principal argument is that political and elitist integration agreements are futile when the continent is not connected physically and trade wise.

The Size of Symmetric Free-Trade Blocs and World Welfare

In a symmetric model of free-trade blocs, the seemingly innocuous normalization rule by setting the world price of a given good as the numeraire will cause asymmetry in the Nash equilibrium. This paper presents a new symmetric tariff game approach and a new price normalization rule that are logically required and consistent in order to examine the effects of changes in the size of free-trade blocs on world welfare. In a symmetric model, a trading bloc does not act on the actions of the rest of the world as a whole but to individual external blocs in a one-to-one fashion. The relative bargaining power between any two blocs is always evenly matched. We show that the optimal tariff schedule is monotonically decreasing in relative bloc size, and the world welfare unambiguously increases if the trading world becomes more integrated. As a result, the pessimal (lowest world welfare) bloc number is much larger than the ones obtained in the Krugman and Bond-Syropoulos models. Our results support Ohyama-Kemp-Wan-Shimomura's findings and strengthen the case for regionalism as a stepping stone (building block) toward a complete world economic integration. The paper thus provides a theoretical foundation for the benefits of economic integration.

BarroR and LeeJ‐W. 2010. Costs and Benefits of Economic Integration in Asia. (Manila: ADB)

BarroR and LeeJ‐W. 2010. Costs and Benefits of Economic Integration in Asia. (Manila: ADB)

Costs and Benefits of Economic Integration in Asia – Edited by Robert J. Barro and Jong‐Wha Lee

Costs and Benefits of Economic Integration in Asia – Edited by Robert J. Barro and Jong‐Wha Lee

Costs and Benefits of Economic Integration in Asia - Edited by Robert J. Barro and Jong-Wha Lee

Costs and Benefits of Economic Integration in Asia - Edited by Robert J. Barro and Jong-Wha Lee

Who Benefits And Who Loses From The Regionalization Of World Trade?

As regional blocs evolve, developing countries within blocs are prime beneficiaries. Trade between developed countries in different blocs falls relative to theoretical predictions. Many developing countries outside major blocs are the losers. The primary factor driving evolving trade patterns is the lowering of barriers to trade (however defined). As economic integration progresses, a trade zone may evolve into a common market, economic union, or monetary union, facilitating the lowering of trade and growth-inhibiting frictions. Furthermore, barriers to trade will continue to decline within a trade zone faster than between trade zones, but the benefits of economic integration will not be equally shared across all nations in a zone. Policy implications and directions for future research are then discussed.

The Costs and Benefits of Economic Integration

The Costs and Benefits of Economic Integration

A new approach towards the enhancement of northeast Asian economic cooperation

This study proposes the formation of the Northeast Asian Economic Cooperation Council (NAECC) to discuss comprehensive economic cooperation and major economic issues between Korea, Japan and China. In order to meet the challenge of risign regionalism and to prevent another Asian economic crisis, it is imperative for the central governments of the region to involve themselves more actively in Northeast Asian Economic Cooperation. Given the diversity of Northeast Asian countries, it seems to be more realistic to vegin with the central governments of the three major countries in terms of economic size. However, even amongst these three countries, the prospects for reaching a regional trade agreement such as the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), let alone a more advanced economic integration type like the EU, are quite dim in the foreseeable future. Thus, Korea, Japan and China must try to get as many benefits of economic integration as possible through a non-traditional approach.

The distributive consequences of nationalism: The case of former Yugoslavia

IN RECENT YEARS the wheel of history apparently turned back in some parts of Europe, as several previously unified multinational countries broke up, following peaceful or bloody disintegration processes. If one is convinced that-in economic terms-integration is better than disintegration, because the latter reduces the market and increases transaction costs, and therefore diminishes the scope for the division of labour and economies of scale, one should conclude that there is no economic rationality in nationalism that leads to disintegration. And indeed, the traditional economic case for nationalism is one of a force that leads to the building and integration of nations, not the opposite. In this context the case of former Yugoslavia is certainly relevant for a variety of reasons. Observers have had a hard time finding rational processes behind the Yugoslav scenario; in fact, the explanation is usually based on collective irrationality, justified or at least strengthened by historical factors, which led entire peoples to actively fight for a future which outsiders consider to be inferior-in terms of consumers' welfare, social peace, economic expansion-to the previously existing one.1 Since the classical contributions by Viner and Meade, economic analysis has proved the benefits of economic integration under certain conditions, and has also considered the case of non-optimal trade and monetary areas,2 which can partly contribute to the explanation of the poor economic performance and ultimately the break-up of Yugoslavia. However, disintegration of previously economically unified states entails greater transaction costs, renunciation of the benefits of a larger market, and consequently of a greater division of labour and economies of scale. Under these circumstances, it is difficult to see a rational economic motive for nationalism and economic disintegration. Moreover, one should bear in mind that the disintegration of a previously unitary, although supposedly inefficient, system is usually followed by a rapid break down in the economic relations among its previous, now independent components, which is not easily off-set by closer links with other economies. This point is amply illustrated not only by Yugoslavia but also by the former members of the CMEA and the republics of the ex-Soviet Union. In all these cases, the relations among these countries have rapidly declined in both relative and absolute terms, and they have been replaced only in part by relations with other countries. Finally, disintegration is no guarantee of more effective and rapid systemic change, a point

The Future of NAFTA in the Post-National Era

The formation of the North American trade bloc represents a dramatically different variant of trade liberalization from its Cold War predecessor. The latter reconciled the need to promote greater openness with Keynesian kinds of social welfare measures. By contrast, global free trade-for-all wants every sector and every aspect of society to be open to competition. For Canada and Mexico with their weak industries, NAFTA has no mechanism to neutralize the asymmetry of power between the partners. It does not have a way to redistribute the benefits of economic integration. Nor does it have the resources to address the magnitude of adjustment that is occurring. Finally, as the NAFTA text demonstrates, access is not qualitatively enhanced either for Canadian or Mexican industries. For these reasons, the future of NAFTA is in serious doubt. It will have to be transformed and, if this is not possible, this integration initiative will likely collapse

Dynamic gains from North American free trade in an equilibrium model of the current account

The benefits of economic integration in North America are explored by quantifying the gains that the two small open economies of the region can obtain from free trade in financial assets as a vehicle to smooth consumption. Numerical simulations of a stochastic intertemporal equilibrium model are used to estimate the effects of free financial asset trading on economic activity and welfare. The results suggest that in Mexico, where business cycles have been larger and access to world markets has been more limited, free asset trading would produce more benefits that in Canada, where the risk of business cycles is smaller.

Intraregional Trade of the Least-Developed-Members of Latin American Integration Systems

Differences in the degree of economic development and diversification among members of economic integration systems could easily create obstacles to economic integration, as they tend to have an impact on the distribution of costs and benefits of economic integration processes.There are several reasons why the Least Developed Members (LDMs) within integration movements in Latin America are likely to be losers in the integration processes taking place within the region. First, the economies of these countries are less diversified than those of the more advanced countries. The LDMs have manufacturing sectors which are not well developed and which are concentrated in productive branches which process natural resources. When these countries join an integration movement with countries with more advanced and diversified manufacturing sectors, they would tend to import manufactured goods which are more protected than the natural-resource-based goods which they are likely to export.