IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/fortra/v51y2016i2p180-193.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

India’s Possible Response to the Challenge of the Mega-regionals

Author

Listed:
  • Dan Ciuriak

Abstract

The mega-regional trade agreements, particularly the Trans-Pacific Partnership, the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership, and the Trade in Services Agreement, represent a new phenomenon for the global trading system. As major preferential trade agreements that involve the world’s largest economies (the United States and the European Union), they cover a large share of global trade and, thus, generate large spillover effects on non-parties to the negotiations. Further, the ambitious rule-making agenda shifts the locus of global rule-making and standard-setting from the inclusive World Trade Organization to the small number of participants in these negotiations. These rules and standards will shape markets and, thus, amplify the direct effect of discriminatory preferences. This article discusses the factors driving the mega-regionals, considers the significance of these negotiations for excluded parties, and suggests how India, in particular, might respond.

Suggested Citation

  • Dan Ciuriak, 2016. "India’s Possible Response to the Challenge of the Mega-regionals," Foreign Trade Review, , vol. 51(2), pages 180-193, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:fortra:v:51:y:2016:i:2:p:180-193
    DOI: 10.1177/0015732515625720
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0015732515625720
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/0015732515625720?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. Stefan Ambec & Mark A. Cohen & Stewart Elgie & Paul Lanoie, 2013. "The Porter Hypothesis at 20: Can Environmental Regulation Enhance Innovation and Competitiveness?," Review of Environmental Economics and Policy, Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 7(1), pages 2-22, January.
    2. Méjean, Isabelle & Schwellnus, Cyrille, 2009. "Price convergence in the European Union: Within firms or composition of firms?," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 78(1), pages 1-10, June.
    3. Dani Rodrik & Mark Rosenzweig (ed.), 2010. "Handbook of Development Economics," Handbook of Development Economics, Elsevier, edition 1, volume 5, number 6.
    4. Fabienne Ilzkovitz & Adriaan Dierx & Viktoria Kovacs & Nuno Sousa, 2007. "Steps towards a deeper economic integration: the internal market in the 21st century," European Economy - Economic Papers 2008 - 2015 271, Directorate General Economic and Financial Affairs (DG ECFIN), European Commission.
    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. Marta Paczos, 2018. "Modelling the Economic Effects of Trade Policies – A Submission to the Treasury and International Trade Committees inquiry into implications of the UK's approach to international trade," National Institute of Economic and Social Research (NIESR) Policy Papers 07, National Institute of Economic and Social Research.
    2. Swati Dhingra & Hanwei Huang & Gianmarco Ottaviano & João Paulo Pessoa & Thomas Sampson & John Van Reenen, 2017. "The costs and benefits of leaving the EU: trade effects," Economic Policy, CEPR, CESifo, Sciences Po;CES;MSH, vol. 32(92), pages 651-705.
    3. Ottaviano, Gianmarco & Pessoa, João Paulo & Sampson, Thomas & Van Reenen, John, 2014. "The costs and benefits of leaving the EU," CFS Working Paper Series 472, Center for Financial Studies (CFS).
    4. Vitaliy Roud & Thomas Wolfgang Thurner, 2018. "The Influence of State‐Ownership on Eco‐Innovations in Russian Manufacturing Firms," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 22(5), pages 1213-1227, October.
    5. Fang, Mingyue & Nie, Huihua & Shen, Xinyi, 2023. "Can enterprise digitization improve ESG performance?," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 118(C).
    6. Zhangsheng Liu & Liuqingqing Yang & Liqin Fan, 2021. "Induced Effect of Environmental Regulation on Green Innovation: Evidence from the Increasing-Block Pricing Scheme," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(5), pages 1-15, March.
    7. Nimonka Bayale, 2018. "Aide et Croissance dans les pays de l’Union Economique et Monétaire Ouest Africaine (UEMOA) : retour sur une relation controversée," Working Papers hal-01765313, HAL.
    8. Li, Weiping & Chen, Xiaoqi & Huang, Jiashun & Gong, Xu & Wu, Wei, 2022. "Do environmental regulations affect firm's cash holdings? Evidence from a quasi-natural experiment," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 112(C).
    9. Stijn Claessens & M. Ayhan Kose, 2013. "Financial Crises: Explanations, Types and Implications," CAMA Working Papers 2013-06, Centre for Applied Macroeconomic Analysis, Crawford School of Public Policy, The Australian National University.
    10. Orsatti, Gianluca & Pezzoni, Michele & Quatraro, Francesco, 2017. "Where Do Green Technologies Come From? Inventor Teams’ Recombinant Capabilities and the Creation of New Knowledge," Department of Economics and Statistics Cognetti de Martiis. Working Papers 201711, University of Turin.
    11. Jae Yun Jeong & Inje Kang & Ki Seok Choi & Byeong-Hee Lee, 2018. "Network Analysis on Green Technology in National Research and Development Projects in Korea," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(4), pages 1-12, April.
    12. Roberta De Santis, 2012. "Impact of Environmental Regulations on Trade in the Main EU Countries: Conflict or Synergy?," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 35(7), pages 799-815, July.
    13. Dominique Bianco & Evens Salies, 2017. "The Strong Porter Hypothesis in an Endogenous Growth Model with Satisficing Managers," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 37(4), pages 2641-2654.
    14. Durán-Romero, Gemma & López, Ana M. & Beliaeva, Tatiana & Ferasso, Marcos & Garonne, Christophe & Jones, Paul, 2020. "Bridging the gap between circular economy and climate change mitigation policies through eco-innovations and Quintuple Helix Model," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 160(C).
    15. Löschel, Andreas & Lutz, Benjamin Johannes & Managi, Shunsuke, 2019. "The impacts of the EU ETS on efficiency and economic performance – An empirical analyses for German manufacturing firms," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 56(C), pages 71-95.
    16. Ren, Shenggang & Hu, Yucai & Zheng, Jingjing & Wang, Yangjie, 2020. "Emissions trading and firm innovation: Evidence from a natural experiment in China," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 155(C).
    17. Jintao Zhang & Zhen Yang & Li Meng & Lu Han, 2022. "Environmental regulations and enterprises innovation performance: the role of R&D investments and political connections," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 24(3), pages 4088-4109, March.
    18. Michael Peneder & Spyros Arvanitis & Christian Rammer & Tobias Stucki & Martin Wörter, 2022. "Policy instruments and self-reported impacts of the adoption of energy saving technologies in the DACH region," Empirica, Springer;Austrian Institute for Economic Research;Austrian Economic Association, vol. 49(2), pages 369-404, May.
    19. Flavio M. Menezes & Jorge Pereira, 2023. "Imperfect competition, emissions tax and the Porter hypothesis," Australian Institute for Business and Economics DP022023, School of Economics, University of Queensland, Australia.
    20. Jonathan Temple & Huikang Ying & Patrick Carter, 2014. "Transfers and Transformations: Remittances, Foreign Aid, and Growth," Bristol Economics Discussion Papers 14/649, School of Economics, University of Bristol, UK, revised 02 Dec 2014.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    India; mega-regional trade agreements; trade rules; non-tariff measures; standards; spillovers; TPP; TTIP; TISA; RCEP;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • F15 - International Economics - - Trade - - - Economic Integration
    • L52 - Industrial Organization - - Regulation and Industrial Policy - - - Industrial Policy; Sectoral Planning Methods
    • O25 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Development Planning and Policy - - - Industrial Policy

    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:sae:fortra:v:51:y:2016:i:2:p:180-193. 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: SAGE Publications (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.