Connect with us
//pagead2.googlesyndication.com/pagead/js/adsbygoogle.js (adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});

Trade

Asia will fall with the multilateral system unless it now springs to its defence

Published

on

A police officer wears a mask as he walks in front of the Oriental Pearl Tower in Lujiazui financial district in Pudong, Shanghai, China, 5 February 2020 (Photo: REUTERS/Aly Song).

Authors: Alex Rouse and Adam Triggs, ANU

The COVID-19 pandemic is a test for the multilateral system — one that could not have come at a worse time. The multilateral system is vital to keep supply chains open, allow medical supplies to flow freely, resist trade protectionism, deal with the international economic and financial repercussions and coordinate financial assistance to countries in need.

But the multilateral system has never been weaker. Reviving multilateralism to address these challenges will require a new source of strong leadership. Which countries have the greatest incentive to provide that leadership? Which countries benefit the most from the multilateral system? And which would suffer the most from its decline? These are the questions we explored in a recent study.

The 2010s were a bruising decade for the multilateral system. The United States withdrew from the Paris Climate Accord, trade and technology wars weakened the global economy and the World Trade Organization’s (WTO) dispute settlement body was shutdown. The backlash against globalisation intensified sharply. Less than half of survey respondents in the United States, Britain and France believed that the effects of globalisation were positive.

Critical multilateral forums ended the decade facing deep challenges: progress on European integration remains slow and the International Monetary Fund (IMF) remains dangerously under-resourced to deal with economic and financial shocks. The governance structures of many institutions are out of step with global realities and the value of NATO and other long-term military alliances are being called into question.

All countries benefit from the multilateral system but some do more than others. The G20 is a useful case in point. Declared the preeminent forum for international economic cooperation, the G20 has been broadly successful in implementing its commitments. Its commitments provide significant economic benefits and political backbone that led countries to do things they otherwise would not have done.

We can measure how the economic benefits of G20 commitments are distributed between countries. And we can use results from in-depth interviews with leaders, ministers, central bank governors and officials from all G20 countries to guage how the political benefits of G20 commitments are distributed between countries.

The results are stark. Asian countries are overwhelmingly and consistently the largest beneficiaries of the G20’s commitments, both economically and politically. It follows that they have a disproportionately large incentive to show leadership in protecting and promoting the G20 and the multilateral system more broadly.

The modelling shows that the main beneficiaries of coordinated fiscal stimulus are G20 economies in Asia, particularly South Korea, Australia, Indonesia and India. For most, the first-year GDP impacts are more than twice as large thanks to G20 coordination. South Korea is more than four-times better off. India and Indonesia are almost two and a half times better off working together than acting alone.

Structural reform will be necessary for reconstructing the global economy post-pandemic. The modelling shows that, when coordinated, structural reform disproportionately benefits Asian G20 countries. If a country reforms alone, it sees a significant increase in domestic production, some of which spills over into other countries through increased demand for their exports. But with coordinated reform, that country experiences the benefits from its increased domestic production and enjoys positive spill-overs from increased production in other G20 economies through increased demand for exports.

The benefits to G20 economies from coordinated structural reform are large. Calculated as a weighted average, G20 GDP is estimated to be permanently 2.5 per cent larger as a result of coordinated structural reform.

Countries also enjoy important political benefits from G20 commitments. The G20 provides policymakers with the political cover they need to sell important reforms domestically. It also helps build networks and relationships across countries and between policymakers and generates a global dialogue on critical issues to shape consensus on how best to address them. It helps defeat concerns that other countries might be free-riding and boosts the credibility of policies. The G20 plays a critical role in setting higher standards and developing better norms.

These political benefits also disproportionately flow to Asian economies. When asked whether there were domestic…

Source link

Continue Reading

Trade

Fixing fragmentation in the settlement of international trade disputes

Published

on

Fragmentation in global trade due to the lack of development in multilateral trade rules at the WTO has led to an increase in FTAs. The Appellate Body impasse has further exacerbated fragmentation, requiring a multilateral approach for reform.

Fragmentation in Global Trade

Fragmentation in global trade is not new. With the slow development of multilateral trade rules at the World Trade Organization (WTO), governments have turned to free trade agreements (FTAs). As of 2023, almost 600 bilateral and regional trade agreements have been notified to the WTO, leading to growing fragmentation in trade rules, business activities, and international relations. But until recently, trade dispute settlements have predominantly remained within the WTO.

Challenges with WTO Dispute Settlement

The demise of the Appellate Body increased fragmentation in both the interpretation and enforcement of trade law. A small number of WTO Members created the Multi-Party Interim Appeal Arbitration Arrangement (MPIA) as a temporary solution, but in its current form, it cannot properly address fragmentation. Since its creation in 2020, the MPIA has only attracted 26 parties, and its rulings have not been consistent with previous decisions made by the Appellate Body, rendering WTO case law increasingly fragmented.

The Path Forward for Global Trade

Maintaining the integrity and predictability of the global trading system while reducing fragmentation requires restoring the WTO’s authority. At the 12th WTO Ministerial Conference in 2022, governments agreed to re-establish a functional dispute settlement system by 2024. Reaching a consensus will be difficult, and negotiations will take time. A critical mass-based, open plurilateral approach provides a viable alternative way to reform the appellate mechanism, as WTO Members are committed to reforming the dispute settlement system.

Source : Fixing fragmentation in the settlement of international trade disputes

Continue Reading

Trade

WTO ministerial trading in low expectations and high stakes

Published

on

The WTO’s 13th Ministerial Conference is set to focus on e-commerce transparency, investment facilitation, and admitting new members. However, progress may be hindered by disputes, especially regarding fisheries subsidies.

The World Trade Organisation’s 13th Ministerial Conference

The World Trade Organisation’s (WTO) 13th Ministerial Conference is set to take place in Abu Dhabi on 26–29 February, with expectations of deals on electronic commerce transparency, investment facilitation for development, and the admission of Timor Leste and the Comoros as WTO members. Despite these positive developments, the expectations are relatively modest compared to promises made at the 12th Ministerial Conference, which included addressing fisheries subsidies and restoring a fully functioning dispute settlement mechanism by 2024.

Challenges in Dispute Settlement and Agricultural Trade Reform

However, challenges remain, especially in the deadlock of dispute settlement since December 2019 due to a US veto on the appointment of Appellate Body judges. Progress in restoring the dispute settlement mechanism has stalled, and discord continues regarding India’s grain stockholding policy as a potential illegal subsidy. Restoring a fully functioning dispute settlement mechanism hinges on addressing US concerns about perceived bias against trade remedies in relation to China’s state subsidies.

Geopolitical Tensions and the Future of Trade Relations

The likelihood of reaching agreements amid geopolitical tensions between Western democracies and China appears slim, with issues surrounding subsidies and global supply chains causing rifts in trade relations. As nations focus on self-reliance within the global value chain, opportunities for trading face obstacles. Advocacy for open markets and addressing protectionist sentiments remains crucial for fostering resilience to external shocks and promoting economic growth.

Source : WTO ministerial trading in low expectations and high stakes

Continue Reading

Trade

Getting Vietnam’s economic growth back on track

Published

on

Vietnam’s economy grew 8% in 2022 but slowed in 2023 due to falling exports and delays in public investments. The economy’s future depends on structural reforms and reducing dependency on foreign investment.

Vietnam’s Economic Roller Coaster

After emerging from COVID-19 with an 8 per cent annual growth rate, Vietnam’s economy took a downturn in the first half of 2023. The drop was attributed to falling exports due to monetary tightening in developed countries and a slow post-pandemic recovery in China.

Trade Performance and Monetary Policy

Exports were down 12 per cent on-year, with the industrial production index showing negative growth early in 2023 but ended with an increase of approximately 1 per cent for the year. Monetary policy was loosened throughout the year, with bank credit growing by 13.5 per cent overall and 1.7 per cent in the last 20 days of 2023.

Challenges and Prospects

Vietnam’s economy suffered from delayed public investments, electricity shortages, and a declining domestic private sector in the last two years. Looking ahead to 2024, economic growth is expected to be in the range of 5.5–6 per cent, but the country faces uncertainties due to geopolitical tensions and global economic conditions.

Source : Getting Vietnam’s economic growth back on track

Continue Reading