IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ris/ecoint/0782.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Emerging Mega International Blocs: Limits and Prospects

Author

Listed:
  • Jovanović, Miroslav

    (Sustainable Transport Division, United Nations Economic Commission for Europe)

Abstract

The emergence of new mega-integration blocs is an important current feature of the global economic system. The United States, the European Union and Japan intend to set on their own terms new rules for trade, investment and settlement of disputes for the coming generation. All other players will have to accept these rules (capitulate) or be excluded from their potential benefits. However, this has the potential to backfire as important excluded players such as China may create a parallel system. The whole rules-setting process in the emerging mega blocs is both obscure and held captive by big corporations that tailor rules according their needs. Disenfranchised people in this process are treated not as citizens but as consumers, hence a lot of public resentment towards these emerging mega blocs. The planned arcane, ad hoc and private dispute settlement mechanisms are monumentally controversial. The ratification processes of the new mega deals are expected to have long, rough and uncertain journeys which could well end up running off the rails. Accordi di mega-integrazione emergenti: limiti e prospettive Il nascere di nuovi accordi di mega-integrazione è una caratteristica di rilievo del mercato economico globale. Gli Stati Uniti, l’Unione Europea e il Giappone vogliono stabilire autonomamente nuove regole future inerenti il commercio, gli investimenti e la risoluzione della controversie. Tutti gli altri soggetti dovranno accettare (o meglio subire) queste regole o saranno esclusi dai potenziali benefici. Tutto ciò può potenzialmente ritorcersi contro, in quanto importanti soggetti, come la Cina, potrebbero creare un sistema parallelo. Inoltre, l’intero processo normativo di questi accordi non è trasparente ed è gestito dalle grandi multinazionali che stabiliscono le regole a seconda delle loro necessità. In questo processo le persone non hanno diritti e non sono trattate da cittadini ma da consumatori, il che causa l’avversione delle popolazioni alla nascita di questi accordi. Il sistema di risoluzione delle dispute è controverso perché oscuro e creato ad hoc. Il processo di ratifica di questi nuovi mega accordi sarà lungo ed incerto e potrebbe anche finire fuori controllo.

Suggested Citation

  • Jovanović, Miroslav, 2016. "Emerging Mega International Blocs: Limits and Prospects," Economia Internazionale / International Economics, Camera di Commercio Industria Artigianato Agricoltura di Genova, vol. 69(4), pages 271-316.
    • Handle: RePEc:ris:ecoint:0782
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.iei1946.it/upload/rivista_articoli/allegati/113_jovanovicric100517.pdf
    File Function: Full text
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Eric Neumayer & Peter Nunnenkamp & Martin Roy, 2016. "Are stricter investment rules contagious? Host country competition for foreign direct investment through international agreements," Review of World Economics (Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv), Springer;Institut für Weltwirtschaft (Kiel Institute for the World Economy), vol. 152(1), pages 177-213, February.
    2. Peter A. Petri & Michael G. Plummer, 2016. "The Economic Effects of the Trans-Pacific Partnership: New Estimates," Working Paper Series WP16-2, Peterson Institute for International Economics.
    3. Céline Carrère & Anja Grujovic & Frédéric Robert-Nicoud, 2020. "Trade and Frictional Unemployment in the Global Economy," Journal of the European Economic Association, European Economic Association, vol. 18(6), pages 2869-2921.
    4. Richard Baldwin, 2016. "The World Trade Organization and the Future of Multilateralism," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 30(1), pages 95-116, Winter.
    5. Jeffrey J. Schott & Cathleen Cimino-Isaacs, . "Assessing the Trans-Pacific Partnership, Volume 2: Innovations in Trading Rules," PIIE Briefings, Peterson Institute for International Economics, number PIIEB16-4, October.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Matthias Helble, 2017. "Salvaging the Trans-Pacific Partnership: building blocks for regional and multilateral trade opening?," Asia Europe Journal, Springer, vol. 15(4), pages 399-416, December.
    2. Latorre, María C. & Yonezawa, Hidemichi, 2018. "Stopped TTIP? Its potential impact on the world and the role of neglected FDI," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 71(C), pages 99-120.
    3. Sheldon, Ian M. & Chow, Daniel C.K. & McGuire, William, 2017. "Trade Liberalization and Institutional Constraints on Moves to Protectionism: Multilateralism vs. Regionalism," 2018 Allied Social Sciences Association (ASSA) Annual Meeting, January 5-7, 2018, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 266305, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    4. Ken Itakura & Hiro Lee, 2023. "Should the United States rejoin the Trans-Pacific trade deal?," International Economics and Economic Policy, Springer, vol. 20(2), pages 235-255, May.
    5. Rafael Dix-Carneiro & João Paulo Pessoa & Ricardo Reyes-Heroles & Sharon Traiberman, 2023. "Globalization, Trade Imbalances, and Labor Market Adjustment," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 138(2), pages 1109-1171.
    6. Povilas Lastauskas & Julius Stakėnas, 2020. "Labour market institutions in open economy: Sectoral reallocations, aggregate adjustments, and spillovers," Review of International Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 28(3), pages 814-845, August.
    7. Kose,Ayhan & Ohnsorge,Franziska Lieselotte & Ye,Lei Sandy & Islamaj,Ergys, 2017. "Weakness in investment growth : causes, implications and policy responses," Policy Research Working Paper Series 7990, The World Bank.
    8. Simon Galle & Andrés Rodríguez-Clare & Moises Yi, 2023. "Slicing the Pie: Quantifying the Aggregate and Distributional Effects of Trade," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 90(1), pages 331-375.
    9. Lee, Hiro & Itakura, Ken, 2018. "The welfare and sectoral adjustment effects of mega-regional trade agreements on ASEAN countries," Journal of Asian Economics, Elsevier, vol. 55(C), pages 20-32.
    10. Suma Athreye & Lucia Piscitello & Kenneth C. Shadlen, 2020. "Twenty-five years since TRIPS: Patent policy and international business," Journal of International Business Policy, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 3(4), pages 315-328, December.
    11. José R. Sánchez-Fung, 2016. "Reviewing Trade Policy in China During the Transition to Balanced Economic Growth," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 39(12), pages 1934-1946, December.
    12. A. Baronchelli & T.E. Uberti, 2018. "Exports and FDI: comparing networks in the new millennium," Working Paper CRENoS 201813, Centre for North South Economic Research, University of Cagliari and Sassari, Sardinia.
    13. Josef Schroth, 2016. "Supervising Financial Regulators," Staff Working Papers 16-52, Bank of Canada.
    14. Xiong, Tingting, 2022. "The Effect of Bilateral Investment Treaties (BITs) on the extensive and intensive margins of exports," The Quarterly Review of Economics and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 84(C), pages 68-79.
    15. Aichele Rahel & Felbermayr Gabriel J. & Heiland Inga, 2016. "TTIP and Intra-European Trade: Boon or Bane?," Journal of Economics and Statistics (Jahrbuecher fuer Nationaloekonomie und Statistik), De Gruyter, vol. 236(6), pages 639-664, December.
    16. Claudius Gräbner & Philipp Heimberger & Jakob Kapeller & Florian Springholz, 2021. "Understanding economic openness: a review of existing measures," Review of World Economics (Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv), Springer;Institut für Weltwirtschaft (Kiel Institute for the World Economy), vol. 157(1), pages 87-120, February.
    17. Duy Vu, 2018. "To Settle or to Fight to the End? Case-level Determinants of Early Settlement of Investor-State Disputes," GREDEG Working Papers 2018-36, Groupe de REcherche en Droit, Economie, Gestion (GREDEG CNRS), Université Côte d'Azur, France, revised Feb 2020.
    18. João Amador & Sónia Cabral & Rossana Mastrandrea & Franco Ruzzenenti, 2018. "Who’s Who in Global Value Chains? A Weighted Network Approach," Open Economies Review, Springer, vol. 29(5), pages 1039-1059, November.
    19. Antràs, Pol & de Gortari, Alonso & Itskhoki, Oleg, 2017. "Globalization, inequality and welfare," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 108(C), pages 387-412.
    20. Richard Baldwin & Rebecca Freeman & Angelos Theodorakopoulos, 2024. "Deconstructing Deglobalization: The Future of Trade is in Intermediate Services," Asian Economic Policy Review, Japan Center for Economic Research, vol. 19(1), pages 18-37, January.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    TPP; TTIP; US; EU; China; Corporations; ISDS; Ratification;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • F10 - International Economics - - Trade - - - General
    • F13 - International Economics - - Trade - - - Trade Policy; International Trade Organizations
    • F15 - International Economics - - Trade - - - Economic Integration
    • F50 - International Economics - - International Relations, National Security, and International Political Economy - - - General

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ris:ecoint:0782. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Angela Procopio (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/cacogit.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.