System Of Global Economic Governance Research Articles

RCEP이 아세안 무역에 미치는 영향

Purpose - This research aims to enhance the understanding of Asia’s economic relationships and international economic governance, with a focus on the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP). Specifically, this paper seeks to provide recommendations for South Korea’s participation and effective utilization in RCEP within the Asian region. Also this study suggests the significance of the Rule of Origin in Free Trade Agreements (FTAs), and highlights the importance of a cumulative certificate of origin, which refers to a document that verifies the cumulative origin of goods in international trade, applicable to 15 RCEP countries, as compared to existing bilateral FTAs.
 Design/Methodology/Approach - This paper reviews previous studies related to ASEAN and RCEP, discussing the findings and key issues addressed in earlier research efforts. News articles and statistics either of political conflicts or economic implications are utilized in this context.
 Findings - Currently, the global economic governance system, centered around the World Trade Organization (WTO), is facing challenges due to economic and trade friction between major powers, exacerbated by the COVID-19 pandemic. Regional economic integration bodies like RCEP are taking on a new central role in international trade rules.
 Research Implications - This research implies that the economic relations in the Asia-Pacific region have been steadily strengthening, and this contributes to maintaining stability through economic interdependence even in the presence of political conflict, and there is a room for South Korea to contribute.

Study on carbon emission reduction effect of institutional openness in China

As the main means to dovetail the domestic system with international rules, institutional openness is the key to deepening participation in the global economic governance system, breaking through energy and carbon emission constraints, and achieving green and sustainable economic development. Taking 284 prefecture-level cities in China from 2006 to 2019 as the research sample, this paper uses the establishment of Pilot Free Trade Zones as a quasi-natural experiment to systematically identify and test the actual impact of institutional openness on urban carbon emissions in China through the asymptotic difference in difference method, instrumental variables method, spatial econometric model, and mediating effects model. Meanwhile, technological progress is used as the entry point to analyze the intrinsic mechanism of action by adopting digital transformation oriented to efficiency improvement and green innovation capability oriented to R&D innovation as the differentiated perspective. It is found that institutional openness significantly suppresses urban CO2 emissions, and there is a certain heterogeneity and spatial spillover effect of this effect. Further study finds that institutional openness achieves carbon emission reduction through technological progress. The study aims to find new institutional innovation and development paths for low carbon development.

HIGH QUALITY DEVELOPMENT OF THE CHINA PAKISTAN ECONOMIC CORRIDOR AND RECONSTRUCTION OF THE GLOBAL GOVERNANCE SYSTEM

In order to cope with the unprecedented changes in a century, the "Belt and Road" Initiative (BRI) co-construction project with the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) as the flagship has become an important carrier for economic growth and reconstruction of the global industrial chain and supply chain, which is leading the reconstruction of the global economic governance system. Anatomy of the internal relationship between the high-quality development of CPEC and global economic governance, analysis of the important value of the corridor to the stable development of regional economic society and its internal driving force for stable and long-term development, and clarification of the internal mechanism of corridor investment operation and the global industrial chain and supply chain reconstruction will help to further promote the co-construction of BRI and provide useful reference for building an open, linked and more inclusive world economy and jointly building Human Community with a Shared Future with political mutual trust, economic integration and cultural tolerance

Retrospect and prospect: development of China’s economics in the past 70 years

Purpose In the past 70 years since the founding of the People’s Republic of China, China’s economic studies have been constantly centered on major issues such as national modernization, social economic development and the establishment, reform and improvement of socialist economic system. The paper aims to discuss this issue. Design/methodology/approach It has experienced a process of transition from the establishment of traditional Soviet’s paradigm of political economics to that of modern economics, during which drastic changes have been observed in various aspects of China’s economics, including research content, scope and methods. Findings Based on that, a discipline system of economics in line with international economics has been initially established. Currently, under the guidance of Marxism, scholars in China’s economics actively draw on the beneficial knowledge system and analytical methods from modern economics, emancipate their minds, seek truth from facts and constantly fortify confidence in the socialist path, theory, system and culture, continuously enhance the discourse power of China’s economics in global economic governance system, so as to push forward to the building of a theoretical system of socialist economics with Chinese Characteristics in the new era. Originality/value Economics is a discipline that studies resource allocation and human’s behavior of making a choice based on rationality. Emerged in the industrial revolution and developed in the exploration of a large-scale socialized mode of production and resource allocation system, this discipline has gradually become a broadly explanatory force in social sciences which profoundly affects the economic decision-making behaviors of the government and various economic entities.

The G20, G7 and BRICS in Global Economic Governance

The G20, established to overcome the 2008 financial and economic crisis, has asserted itself as the premier forum for international economic cooperation, most representative and authoritative mechanism for coordinating positions and forging collective decisions on economic policy issues. Members of the G7 and BRICS, the oldest club of developed industrial economies and the youngest club of the largest emerging economies, coordinate within the G20. It is argued that in the process of consensus-building in the G20, advanced and developing countries form new ad hoc groupings on specific issues, which temporarily supersede the existing alliances, such as the G7/8 and BRICS, and allow them to pursue decisions conforming to their national interests.This article reviews the G7 and BRICS members’ positions and coalition-building in the process of forging decisions on the issues historically central to the G20 agenda: international financial institutions reform, macroeconomic policy and financial regulation. The authors seek to reveal what role the BRICS and G7 alliances played in advancing their members’ priorities in the G20 decisions? Have ad hoc groupings of advanced and developing economies indeed replaced the traditional alliances? Was the BRICS successful in using the cooperation within the G20 to rebalance power and change the rules of the game in the global system? Has the G7 managed to maintain and consolidate its influence in the renewed system of global economic governance? What resources the BRICS possess for compensating the deficit of influence on the G20 decisions to achieve a more democratic and equitable multipolar world order and ensure sustainable, strong, balanced and inclusive growth?The findings show that, despite contradictions within the alliances and common interests between the BRICS and some G7 members on a number of issues, ad hoc groupings of advanced and developing countries do not replace the existing clubs. The G7 members successfully use coordination within their club to resolve internal contradictions, develop a common position and jointly promote it in the G20. The G7 ensured strengthening of the IFI system and its influence in it through cooperation with new centers of power, with a slight increase in the IMF and WB quota and votes shares for the BRICS; minimum reduction of these figures for the G7; and maintaining control over the IFIs governance. Both alliances influenced the G20 decisions to stimulate economic growth while maintaining price stability and ensuring financial sustainability. On managing the exchange rates, the BRICS and G7 acted as partners in the G20; however, the G7 demonstrated leadership in building consensus to address competitive devaluation. The G7 drove the financial regulation agenda. The BRICS established new institutions and rules. These new institutions create public goods for their members and their partners, exert catalytic influence for reform of the existing system, contribute to building a more equitable global economic governance. However, BRICS failed to change the balance of power and the rules of the game in the existing cooperation set up.

Changing modes of global economic governance: from neo-liberalism to neomedievalism

The system of global economic governance, as well as the global economy itself, is in the state of unceasing change. The concept of the architecture of the global economy, which is always identified with the existence of quasi-hierarchical structures of subordination of global economic potentials, shows its failure in modern conditions. It is shown that the modes of global economic governance have evolved substantially since the postwar period, which is equally true for all its spheres (trade, finance, migration, etc.). The analysis of the dynamics of changes in the regimes of global economic governance and the characteristics of the system allowed to draw several conclusions. During crises, institutions or leading states play a bigger role because of the need to achieve faster consensus, the availability of resources to solve problems, and better institutionalization. It is proved that the periods of change in the modes of global economic governance are shrinking in line with the reduction of the periods of global economy development. There is a transition from simple multilateralism on the background of neo-liberalism to hybrid forms attributed to the neo-medievalism. The results of the study show that the cyclicality in the replacement of the leading actor of global economic governance takes the next form: governments, integration regional unions, non-governmental organizations (producers) (intergovernmental organizations, international value networks, mega-regional agreements, respectively), which allows predicting changes in the modes of global economic governance. It is proposed that at the present stage it is worth considering separately the modes of global economic governance in its various spheres due to the lack of unified methods and mechanisms for solving global economic problems. One can observe a shift towards hybrid forms of governance based on negotiations, consensus, etc in all the spheres of global economic governance. The corresponding research can be supplemented by the analysis of cyclical patterns of global economic governance.

China’s Belt and Road Initiative: An Opportunity to Re-energize South-South Cooperation

Since the 2008 global financial crisis, the landscape of South-South cooperation has greatly changed mainly due to the ongoing power shift from the North to the South. Rising economies like China and India are taking the lead in driving forward the institutional development of South-South cooperation despite lingering challenges that call for collective actions and mutual support among developing countries. Based on the principle of achieving shared benefits through consultation and collaboration, China’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) has presented a good opportunity for reinvigorating South-South cooperation and drawing concerted efforts from the international community to reduce the global deficits in peace, development and governance. In the long run, the BRI is expected to facilitate a new round of economic globalization and help shape a more balanced and efficient system of global economic governance, which will serve as the basis for jointly building a “community of shared future for mankind” proposed by the Chinese government.

Reforming the International Investment Regime: Lessons from International Trade Law

International trade law underwent a profound paradigm shift during the 1990’s and into the 21st century as a response to globalization, and to a legitimacy crisis sparked by unresolved structural issues from the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) era and tensions surfacing in GATT case law around ‘trade and’ issues. Investment law today is undergoing a similar legitimacy crisis for similar reasons, particularly with respect to Bilateral Investment Treaties and investor–State arbitration. We argue that investment law is ripe for a similar paradigm shift, away from the dominant view of investment law as a private ordering system to protect capital, with roots in contract law and commercial arbitration, and towards recognition of the fact that investment law today is part of a comprehensive global economic governance system meant to ensure justice and the rule of law in one aspect of international economic relations, the allocation of investment capital. This paradigm shift has normative, structural and doctrinal implications, which we explore, and promises to help restore legitimacy to investment law as it also improves substantive outcomes.

COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF KEY GLOBAL ECONOMIC GOVERNANCE MECHANISMS

The article analyses current transformations in the system of global economic governance. State-led, mixed and private models of global economic governance are examined in the comparative perspective.

Something old, something new: The ILO response to the 2008 financial and economic crisis

In October 2008, rumblings in the financial markets finally erupted in a week of steady and unprecedented losses on the New York Stock Exchange. The ensuing contagion and ultimate descent into a protracted global downturn would expose a failed system of global economic governance. The international institutions, and in particular those longstanding critics of the Washington Consensus of privatization and deregulation, rightly seized on the occasion to rethink exactly how and for whom the global economy should work. As it did for reform of some excesses and lax oversight of the financial sector, so too would the crisis create opportunities to increase spending on job creation and social protection, long shrinking as states sought to lower taxes and create accommodating business environments. By 2009, governments were mobilizing trillions of dollars to lubricate lending markets and shore up failing banks, but also to support public works, extend unemployment and other social protection benefits. For its part, the International Labout Organization (ILO) would cast the episode as a global jobs crisis, naturally, which only coordinated international action could address (ILO, 2009). But in addition to prescriptions for remedying depressed labour demand, it would also undertake an unprecedented push for the expansion of social protection. Immediately following the crisis, the ILO’s work was guided by two objectives. The first was to keep the initial expansionary reaction afloat in many industrialized nations where formal protection systems existed and had been active in providing cover from the fallout. The second was to introduce new coverage for exposed populations, often inside developing countries where social protection systems were too selective, weak or altogether non-existent. For the latter, the ILO’s initial approach appeared to sequence the construction of social security systems, recommending investments in establishing coverage breadth – even if it meant delivering only limited benefits to larger numbers of people – before going on to address concerns about the size of transfers and their ultimate impact on poverty (ILO, 2009a)1. The roll-out of ‘at least basic’ income security and essential health care for all represented the social protection floor, ensuring all of those in need have access to support often coming in the form of non-contributory cash benefits. This sequenced, or progressive, approach had several advantages. First, it seemed to make good sense that the construction of social protection floors would serve to build up the requisite institutions and administrative capacities of governments needed to deliver social protection benefits, whatever their size. Second, by first covering all those in need,

The Role of the Bretton Woods Institutions in Global Economic Governance

The modern, globalized world is developing increasingly complex structures. Globalization has multiple forms, social, political, economic and cultural ones. It cannot be calculated efficiently as a condition and process as it is not a concept which is complete in its content as well as the way it works as a whole. Its key feature is connectivity, followed by expansion, growth, acceleration and intensity of interconnectivity beyond political and geographical boundaries. Proceedings in a region are becoming increasingly important for individuals and societies regardless of their geographical distance. The current form of globalization exhibits dense and multiple weaves of connectivity characterized by an unprecedented institutionalization. A significant role in the process of organizing the global system is being played by international institutions such as the IMF and the WB. Their decisions shape and promote the core principles of globalization, attaching to it legitimacy and ideological orientation. The new models which emerge through the institutions are boosted and disseminated through the dominant position they are holding in the organization system of globalization.Despite the extent and intensity of institutionalization, there is no supreme authority which can take political decisions directly applicable globally. That is, there is no global political governance of the international system. It seems, however, that a global economic governance system is looming in the horizon, which may not be strictly demarcated and consolidated but it is gradually becoming gigantic.This paper will attempt to investigate the limits and the basic features of the emerging global economic governance and the role played by the Bretton Woods institutions in it.

Contradictions of Formation of the Global Economic Governance System

The reasons and the factors of the global economic governance formation became the urgent issues of modern economic theory and practice. Emerging mechanisms of global governance reflect the transitional nature of the present stage of civilization. Under modern conditions, global ownership only begins to form, which inevitably involves the use of the socio-economic shell of previous historical types of economic relations. This particularly reflected in the utilization of the worldwide ownership in private-sector interests and in the application of the mechanisms of global governance to achieve the goals of individual states, corporations, financial-oligarchic clans and other private entities. A contradiction of genesis and evolution of the global ownership and control mechanisms of the world economic system become the essential problem of the international political economy.

Beyond Economic Logic: The Strategic Goals of Chile's and Mexico's FTAs

This article analyzes the goals that drive Chile and Mexico to achieve intra- and extra-regional FTAs. These countries have a predominantly economic motivation to negotiate FTAs. However, there are other elements that are less apparent, but equally important, in Chile's and Mexico's FTA policies. These accords can also be seen as means to power and as mechanisms for establishing a closer system of global economic governance than that available through multilateral forums. Therefore, these two countries' FTAs are an ad hoc system that represents their respective economic contexts and realities. In other words, FTAs as an essential part of Chile's and Mexico's foreign policies have a strategic political-economic logic that synthesizes the notions of power and institutions. However, these two forces do not exclude of the economic logic for FTAs, which focuses on the maximization of consumers' welfare and producers' gains. On the contrary, they have to be taken as complementary factors.

Towards Democratic Globalization: To WTO or not to WTO?

In his paper on ‘Economic globalization and institutions of global governance’, Keith Griffin (2003) adopts a welcome forward-looking focus. Griffin is committed to symmetric and democratic globalization and presents policies towards implementing this; I will comment on his argument and then focus on the WTO. According to Griffin, ‘greater globalization, not less, is desirable’ (2003: 793). Here the question is of course what kind of globalization or on what terms? In welcoming ‘greater liberalization, not less’ (ibid.: 792) Griffin is on a similar track as Paul Krugman, Jagdish Bhagwati, Megnad Desai and others. In basic terms this is an obvious case. Developing countries lose about US$ 100 billion a year due to export subsidies and trade barriers in developed countries. Tariff barriers against manufactured goods from the developing world are, on average, four times higher than those against products from the industrialized world and the poorest nations face higher tariffs than less poor nations (Oxfam, 2002; World Bank, 2002). ‘Trade not aid’ has long been the guiding motto. But obvious as the case may be, the question again is not ‘trade or liberalization, or not’, but ‘trade and liberalization on what terms?’. Griffin objects to trends towards protectionism, in particular restrictions on the movement of unskilled labour and the regime of intellectual property rights, and proposes ‘to create a rule-based system of global economic governance as it applies to international trade’ (ibid.: 797). For the global economy Griffin proposes what others propose, in broad outline, with regard to global politics (Held’s cosmopolitan democracy), international law (Richard Falk) or global culture (Ulrich Beck’s ‘methodological cosmopolitanism’). Griffin advocates terminating the World Bank and strengthening the IMF and WTO. Keith Griffin defending the WTO is like Richard Falk invoking ‘just war’ theory to justify the Afghanistan war. It is high-minded, yet doesn’t it fly in the face of unfolding realities? How does Griffin’s prescriptive, normative account of the WTO meet the reality test of the Cancun ministerial and the FTAA (Free Trade Association of the Americas) meeting in Miami? Both cast doom on trade liberalization — if not the