Fragmentation versus Unity of the World Economy
The article deals with fragmentation and unity prospects of the world economy with respect to the role of its main centres (Europe/EU, East Asia, America). From the view point of the process of the running multilateral liberalisation the world economy was formed as relatively unified at first after World War II. However, regionalisation intensified in 1990s and since then stronger fragmentation has become a natural element of the world economy globalization as "new regionalism". Theoretically, the fragmentation process can be explained by Viner's customs union theory as well as later by the regionalism domino theory developed by many authors. Concerning the role of individual centres, despite its present differentiation, Europe (EU), is more unified than the other regions. However, with its deep integration concept and trade diversion stemming from a high intratrade rate, Europe contributes rather to the world fragmentation. East Asia represented by ASEAN keeps still sticking to the shallow integration, co-operating with non-member partners. The group represents best the open regionalism characteristics, currently not strengthening the world economy fragmentation. The American area remains still relatively fragmented despite the U.S. effort to create a wide integration zone similar to NAFTA. The American region appears more open than Europe with respect to the intratrade share, nevertheless, its integration structure is still in progress; and its impact on the solution of the world economy fragmentation-unity dilemma is uncertain.
Volume (Year): 2008 (2008)
Issue (Month): 2 ()
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: nam. W. Churchilla 4, 130 67 Praha 3|
Phone: (02) 24 09 51 11
Fax: (02) 24 22 06 57
Web page: http://www.vse.cz/
More information through EDIRC
|Order Information:|| Postal: Redakce Acta Oeconomica Pragensia, Vysoká škola ekonomická v Praze, nám. W. Churchilla 4, 130 67 Praha 3|
Web: http://www.vse.cz/aop/ Email:
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Burfisher, Mary E. & Robinson, Sherman & Thierfelder, Karen, 2004. "Regionalism," MTID discussion papers 65, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
- Yongzheng Yang & Alvin Hilaire, 2003. "The United States and the New Regionalism/ Bilateralism," IMF Working Papers 03/206, International Monetary Fund.
- Xinshen Diao & Eugenio Díaz-Bonilla & Sherman Robinson, 2003.
"Scenarios for Trade Integration in the Americas,"
CEPII research center, issue 94-95, pages 33-51.
- Diao, Xinshen & Diaz-Bonilla, Eugenio & Robinson, Sherman, 2002. "Scenarios for trade integration in the Americas," TMD discussion papers 90, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
- Richard Baldwin, 1993. "A Domino Theory of Regionalism," NBER Working Papers 4465, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Baldwin, Richard, 1993. "A Domino Theory of Regionalism," CEPR Discussion Papers 857, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
- Sapir, Andre, 2001. "Domino effects in Western European regional trade, 1960-1992," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 17(2), pages 377-388, June. Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:prg:jnlaop:v:2008:y:2008:i:2:id:58:p:70-89. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Frantisek Sokolovsky)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.