IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ccs/journl/y2017id38.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Metamorphosis of Regionalization: from Regional Trade Agreements to Megaregional Projects

Author

Listed:
  • Andrey N. Spartak

Abstract

The article reviews history and contemporary state of such an economic and trade policy phenomenon as regionalism. Three consecutive stages of regionalization are identified. First stage – prehistory of regionalism – lasted from the middle of the XIX century till 1940-s and was characterized by the formation of bilateral customs unions in Europe with strong political motivation. Second stage – classic regionalism – covers the second part of the XX century and is mostly determined by integration processes in the European region, creation of the EEC and then the EU, organization of a big number of alliances among developing countries mainly in the form of customs union following the EU example and some trade blocs between developed economies beyond the EU (i.a. NAFTA). In this period special disciplines for RTA’s were elaborated under the framework of GATT/WTO. Third stage – globalizing networking regionalism – gained momentum at the start of 2000-s and continues, with certain reservations, till nowadays. Contemporary regionalism has qualitative distinctions from regionalism of the past century. Besides fast and universal, covering all regions and subregions of the world, growth of RTA’s number, their agenda is widening and deepening significantly going far beyond WTO. We could also witness increasing frequency of interregional and transcontinental RTA’s, as well as RTA’s with participation of trade blocks, including interbloc RTA’s. Peculiarity of the current decade is the appearance of a considerable number of RTA’s parties to which represent large and largest world economies, and that was not the case before. But the principal shift is related to the formation of megaregional trade agreements with ambitious, prointegration agenda. New generation RTA’s, containing wide regulatory garmonization agenda and suggesting increasing institutional homogenity of participating economies, de facto promote alternative vis-à -vis classic approach model for the creation of common economic space, though without supranational elements. Nowaday regionalism is definitely drifting towards megaregionalism – the higher stage of regionalization process. Politics of the new American administration and Brexit, which stimulated deglobalization and isolationist tendencies in part of Western world, in practice have only led to some regrouping and deceleration of certain megaregional projects followed by enhancing China’s position on the track of megaregionalism (RCEP, Belt and Road, megaproject with accompanying RTA’s, latest BRICS+ and BRICS++ initiative). Megaregionalism, under any scenario, will exert deep influence on the world trading system and the WTO. In certain conditions megaregional agreements could serve as the foundation for the emergence of new and by large universal system of global management in the sphere of international trade and economic cooperation either as a WTO plus arrangement or in some other form. But this needs long-lasting preparatory interaction for the convergence and finding common denominators between quite different megaprojects as regards their scope and depth.

Suggested Citation

  • Andrey N. Spartak, 2017. "Metamorphosis of Regionalization: from Regional Trade Agreements to Megaregional Projects," Outlines of global transformations: politics, economics, law, Center for Crisis Society Studies, vol. 10(4).
  • Handle: RePEc:ccs:journl:y:2017:id:38
    DOI: 10.23932/2542-0240-2017-10-4-13-37
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.ogt-journal.com/jour/article/viewFile/38/37
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.23932/2542-0240-2017-10-4-13-37?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Richard E. Baldwin, 1997. "The Causes of Regionalism," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 20(7), pages 865-888, November.
    2. Grossman, Gene M & Helpman, Elhanan, 1995. "The Politics of Free-Trade Agreements," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 85(4), pages 667-690, September.
    3. Richard E. Baldwin, 2011. "Multilateralising Regionalism: Spaghetti Bowls as Building Blocks on the Path to Global Free Trade," Chapters, in: Miroslav N. Jovanović (ed.), International Handbook on the Economics of Integration, Volume I, chapter 2, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    4. repec:tpr:asiaec:v:12:y:2013:i:2:p:1-37 is not listed on IDEAS
    5. Richard E. Baldwin, 2006. "Multilateralising Regionalism: Spaghetti Bowls as Building Blocs on the Path to Global Free Trade," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 29(11), pages 1451-1518, November.
    6. Mattli,Walter, 1999. "The Logic of Regional Integration," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521635363, Enero.
    7. Edward D. Mansfield, 1998. "The Proliferation of Preferential Trading Arrangements," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 42(5), pages 523-543, October.
    8. Mattli,Walter, 1999. "The Logic of Regional Integration," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521632270, Enero.
    9. Siow Yue Chia, 2013. "The Emerging Regional Economic Integration Architecture in East Asia," Asian Economic Papers, MIT Press, vol. 12(1), pages 1-37, Winter/Sp.
    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. Leonardo Baccini, 2010. "Explaining formation and design of EU trade agreements: The role of transparency and flexibility," European Union Politics, , vol. 11(2), pages 195-217, June.
    2. Edward D. Mansfield & Helen V. Milner & Jon C. Pevehouse, 2008. "Democracy, Veto Players and the Depth of Regional Integration," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 31(1), pages 67-96, January.
    3. Baccini, Leonardo, 2010. "Explaining formation and design of EU trade agreements: the role of transparency and flexibility," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 45565, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    4. Baccini, Leonardo, 2012. "Democratization and trade policy: an empirical analysis of developing countries," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 44924, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    5. Sebastian Krapohl & Katharina L. Meissner & Johannes Muntschick, 2014. "Regional Powers as Leaders or Rambos? The Ambivalent Behaviour of Brazil and South Africa in Regional Economic Integration," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 52(4), pages 879-895, July.
    6. Julián Tole Martínez, 2014. "Solución de controversias en los TLC. Aportes del Derecho de la OMC," Books, Universidad Externado de Colombia, Facultad de Derecho, edition 1, volume 1, number 702, May.
    7. Antoni Estevadeordal & Kati Suominen, 2008. "Sequencing Regional Trade Integration and Cooperation Agreements," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 31(1), pages 112-140, January.
    8. Nathalie Jorzik & Frank Mueller‐Langer, 2020. "Multilateral stability and efficiency of trade agreements: A network formation approach," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 43(2), pages 355-370, February.
    9. Sauvé, Pierre & Shingal, Anirudh, 2014. "Why do Countries enter into Preferential Agreements on Trade in Services? Assessing the Potential for Negotiated Regulatory Convergence in Asian Services Markets," Working Papers on Regional Economic Integration 129, Asian Development Bank.
    10. Mrázová, Monika & Vines, David & Zissimos, Ben, 2013. "Is the GATT/WTO's Article XXIV bad?," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 89(1), pages 216-232.
    11. Eckhardt, Jappe & Serrano, Omar, 2014. "Economic Integration and Rivalry in Asia: Comparing Regional Trade Strategies of China and India," Papers 762, World Trade Institute.
    12. Peter A. Petri, 2010. "Beyond the Golden Era: Asia Pacific Cooperation after the Global Financial Crisis," Working Papers 11, Brandeis University, Department of Economics and International Business School.
    13. Hefeker, Carsten, 2003. "Handels- und Finanzarchitektur im Umbruch: Globale Integration und die institutionelle Arbeitsteilung von IWF, Weltbank und WTO," HWWA Discussion Papers 225, Hamburg Institute of International Economics (HWWA).
    14. Holmes, Peter & Lopez-Gonzalez, Javier, 2011. "The Nature and Evolution of Vertical Specialisation: What is the Role of Preferential Trade Agreements?," Papers 222, World Trade Institute.
    15. Masahiro Kawai & Ganeshan Wignaraja, 2014. "Policy challenges posed by Asian free trade agreements: a review of the evidence," Chapters, in: Richard Baldwin & Masahiro Kawai & Ganeshan Wignaraja (ed.), A World Trade Organization for the 21st Century, chapter 8, pages 182-238, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    16. Krzysztof Beck & Karen Jackson, 2024. "International trade fluctuations: Global versus regional factors," Canadian Journal of Economics/Revue canadienne d'économique, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 57(1), pages 331-358, February.
    17. Pedro Esteban Moncarz & Manuel Flores & Sebastian Villano & Marcel Vaillant, 2021. "Evolución de la integración económica de América Latina: una perspectiva comparada de las dos últimas décadas," Asociación Argentina de Economía Política: Working Papers 4493, Asociación Argentina de Economía Política.
    18. Olivier CADOT & Lili Yan ING, 2014. "How Restrictive Are ASEAN's RoO?," Working Papers DP-2014-18, Economic Research Institute for ASEAN and East Asia (ERIA).
    19. NAGEL Daniel, 2017. "The Fate of 21st Century Multilateralism," European Journal of Interdisciplinary Studies, Bucharest Economic Academy, issue 02, June.
    20. Tanja A. Börzel, 2011. "Comparative Regionalism - A New Research Agenda," KFG Working Papers p0028, Free University Berlin.

    More about this item

    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:ccs:journl:y:2017:id:38. 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: Кривопалов Ð Ð»ÐµÐºÑ ÐµÐ¹ Ð Ð»ÐµÐºÑ ÐµÐµÐ²Ð¸Ñ‡ (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    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.