Search

Begin New Search Topic Economics Political Geography China

31. South Korea's Critical Moment in Digital Currency Policymaking: Between Regulating Cryptocurrencies and Launching a Central Bank Digital Currency (CBDC)

Author:
June Park
Publication Date:
03-2022
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Korea Economic Institute of America (KEI)
Abstract:
Why is South Korea pilot-testing its Central Bank Digital Currency (CBDC), and what made it shift from non-issuance to consideration? This paper investigates the Bank of Korea (BOK)’s CBDC-related developments amid the geopolitical contest between the U.S. and China. It examines the Moon Jae-in administration’s defiance of decentralized finance (DeFi) and the BOK’s sudden shift from non-issuance to potential issuance, which led to expedited research, development, and pilot-testing of CBDCs. As in the case of the digital yuan, the BOK envisions a hybrid architecture for the digital won, wherein central banks and associated partner institutions are CBDC distributors, though they are distinguished by placing the digital won on distributed ledger technology rather than by centrally controlling it. However, South Korea’s previously rash decision to forego DeFi under an undemocratic process has deprived the country of the time and opportunity to develop new innovations as a leading country in the digital frontier. By sticking only to digitalizing centralized finance, the country now aims to be in “standby” mode for its CBDC launch if and when required, so as not to fall behind in digital financial architecture. This paper scrutinizes the South Korean government’s moves on crypto and CBDCs and argues that 1) the Moon administration has shown incapability in addressing DeFi amid the crypto boom and bust, and 2) the BOK’s shift from non-issuance to potential issuance of the digital won is driven by its interest to uphold central bank independence amid swaying geopolitics between the U.S. and China and an unpredictable upcoming presidential election in South Korea.
Topic:
Economics, Elections, Finance, Cryptocurrencies, and Digital Currency
Political Geography:
China, Asia, South Korea, North America, and United States of America

32. Economic Equidistance is Not an Option: Germany and the US-Chinese Geo-Economic Conflict

Author:
Markus Jaeger
Publication Date:
01-2022
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
German Council on Foreign Relations (DGAP)
Abstract:
Intensifying US-Chinese rivalry will increase pressure on Germany to support a more hawkish US geo-economic policy. The new ­German government should give Washington support in as far as US policies seek to create an economic level playing field vis-à-vis China. Given its dependence on international trade and investment, Germany should seek to resist a broader politicization of inter­national economic relations.
Topic:
Economics, International Trade and Finance, Geopolitics, and Rivalry
Political Geography:
China, Germany, and United States of America

33. Japan's "Economic Security" Measures

Author:
Didi Kirsten Tatlow and Afra Herr
Publication Date:
02-2022
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
German Council on Foreign Relations (DGAP)
Abstract:
Japan and Germany face an acute dilemma. China, a key trading partner for both nations, uses political warfare and economic statecraft to advance its interests. Like Germany, Japan has a strong SME economy and auto industry, and has dependencies on China. Yet Japan faces more risk due to its geographical proximity to China and territorial disputes. As global tensions grow, Japan is responding robustly by building economic security. Germany, together with the EU and other like-minded partners, should do the same.
Topic:
Security, Economics, Politics, and Trade
Political Geography:
Japan, China, Asia, and Germany

34. Promoting the Euro – Countering Secondary Sanctions: Germany Should Push to Complete Monetary Union

Author:
Markus Jaeger
Publication Date:
02-2022
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
German Council on Foreign Relations (DGAP)
Abstract:
US-Chinese rivalry will increasingly play out in the geo-economic realm. The use of secondary sanctions – especially secondary dollar sanctions – negatively affects German economic interests. The new German government should therefore intensify efforts to promote the euro as an international currency coequal to the dollar in addition to lending its qualified support to EU anti-coercion policies.
Topic:
Economics, Sanctions, European Union, Rivalry, and Geoeconomics
Political Geography:
China, Asia, and United States of America

35. China’s Dilemmas in Bailing Out Debt-Ridden Sri Lanka

Author:
Ganeshan Wignaraja
Publication Date:
01-2022
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
East-West Center
Abstract:
Ganeshan Wignaraja, a Non-Resident Senior Fellow at the Institute of South Asian Studies (ISAS) of the National University of Singapore and a Senior Research Associate at the Overseas Development Institute (ODI) in London, explains that "Sri Lanka is now stuck in a ‘debt trap’. However, the debt trap is not wholly Chinese."
Topic:
Debt, Development, Diplomacy, and Economics
Political Geography:
China, Asia, and Sri Lanka

36. China’s increased presence in Latin America: Win-win relations or a new dependency? A state of the art

Author:
Daniel Agramont Lechín
Publication Date:
01-2022
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Postgraduate Program on Sustainable Development and Social Inequalities in the Andean Region (trAndeS)
Abstract:
The rise of the Popular Republic of China (PRC) is one of the most significant events in contemporary international relations. However, at the global level, the “reemergence of China as a major global power has led to a considerable debate over the likely consequences for the rest of the world” (Jenkins, 2010: 810). China’s growing power raises questions as to the meaning of its superpower status as a nation, and the impact of its newfound influence in not only the Asia-Pacific region, but also the Global South (Dessein, 2015). In the specific case of Latin America and the Caribbean (LAC), the debate centers on the potential disadvantages that China’s vast supply of financial resources might bring for the region. Accordingly, the current paper is intended to examine the debate that has arisen in recent literature around the impact of China’s increased economic presence on Latin America –with win-win relations on the one hand and new dependency on the other.
Topic:
International Relations, Economics, Investment, and Dependency
Political Geography:
China, Asia, and Latin America

37. Who Lends to Africa and How? Introducing the Africa Debt Database

Author:
David Mihalyi and Christoph Trebesch
Publication Date:
03-2022
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Kiel Institute for the World Economy (IfW)
Abstract:
Africa’s sovereign debt markets are not well understood, partly due to a lack of data. This paper introduces the Africa Debt Database (ADD), the most granular and comprehensive dataset on external borrowing by African governments thus far. Our project moves beyond existing aggregate datasets and instead releases information on individual loans and bonds, in particular on the financial terms of each instrument. Taken together, we cover nearly 7000 loans and bonds between 2000 and 2020, with a total volume of 644 billion USD. Using this data, we study Africa’s record lending boom of the 2010s in detail. The debt boom was mainly driven by large sovereign bond issuances in London and New York, as well as growing lending by Chinese state-owned banks. The micro data also reveal a large variation in lending terms across countries, time, and creditors. Sovereign external bonds have interest rates of 6 percent, on average, Chinese banks charge 2-4 percent, and multilateral organizations just 1 percent. Strikingly, many governments in Africa simultaneously borrow large amounts from both private and official creditors, at vastly different rates. The large differences in debt servicing costs are indicative of a cross-creditor subsidy, as cheap concessional loans can be used to pay the high interest to private or Chinese creditors.
Topic:
Economics, Foreign Aid, Credit, and Influence
Political Geography:
Africa, China, and Asia

38. Correlates of Politics and Economics: How Chinese Investment in Africa Changes Political Influence

Author:
Carla D. Jones, Mengge Li, and Hermann A. Ndofor
Publication Date:
03-2022
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Foreign Policy Research Institute
Abstract:
This study investigates the impact of Chinese economic engagement in Africa (FDI and loans from China to African countries) on African countries’ international political alignment as evidenced by voting patterns in the UN General Assembly. We find three seasons of Chinese policy in Africa. Pre 2008, Chinese economic engagement in Africa was driven primarily by economic considerations, market seeking for FDI and likely resource seeking for loans. During the Great Recession, China came to terms with its rise as an economic power and thus started leveraging its economic power in international relationships. During this season, both Chinese FDI and loans were no longer driven by economic considerations but rather by international relations which led to increased political alignment with recipient African countries. The final season captured the Xi Jinping era beginning 2013. During this season, Chinese FDI had no effect on African countries’ foreign policy alignment with China, but Chinese loans still had a significant positive effect. This likely reflects a movement away from FDI to less transparent bilateral loans as a means of utilizing Chinese economic power to influence foreign policy. During the entire period of the study, Chinese FDI to Africa resulted in reduced political alignment between African countries and the United States.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Economics, Politics, Investment, and Influence
Political Geography:
Africa, China, and Asia

39. China’s Development Path: Government, Business, and Globalization in an Innovating Economy

Author:
Yin Yi and William Lazonick
Publication Date:
08-2022
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Institute for New Economic Thinking (INET)
Abstract:
We employ the “social conditions of innovative enterprise” framework to analyze the key determinants of China’s development path from the economic reforms of 1978 to the present. First, we focus on how government investments in human capabilities and physical infrastructure provided foundational support for the emergence of Chinese enterprises capable of technological learning. Second, we delve into the main modes by which Chinese firms engaged in technological learning from abroad—joint ventures with foreign multinationals, global value chains, and experienced high-tech returnees—that have contributed to industrial development in China. Third, we provide evidence on achievements in indigenous innovation—by which we mean improvements in national productive capabilities that build on learning from abroad and enable the innovating firms to engage in global competition—in the computer, automobile, communication-technology, and semiconductor-fabrication industries. Finally, we sketch out the implications of our approach for current debates on the role of innovation in China’s development path as it continues to unfold.
Topic:
Development, Economics, Globalization, Infrastructure, Hegemony, and Innovation
Political Geography:
China and Asia

40. Immaterial Competition: Rethinking the Roles of Economics and Technology in the US-China Rivalry

Author:
Arthur Tellis
Publication Date:
05-2022
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Hudson Institute
Abstract:
The US-China rivalry is likely to be the fulcrum around which international affairs are structured in the twenty-first century, akin to the Cold War from 1947 to 1991. This rivalry, like its predecessor, emerges from divergent geopolitical interests and imperatives. While the Chinese Communist Party’s aims are many, various, and subject to change, they include its continued control of the Chinese State; economic and technological modernization and leadership; internal order; complete union with Taiwan on Beijing’s terms; certain territorial concessions from its neighbors; and the disestablishment of security arrangements across the Indo-Pacific that it views as threatening and trammeling. The latter three are in direct conflict with US interests and imperatives in the Indo-Pacific: prohibiting China’s unilateral modification of the status quo vis-à-vis Taiwan; preserving the sovereignty and territorial integrity of its allies and partners; and maintaining its military partnerships and presence in the region. These antithetical interests animate a larger struggle for hegemony in the Indo-Pacific and serve as the terms on which this contest will be decided. Explanations of the rivalry as an ideological contest or a competition born from competing economic interests are less compelling by comparison. The United States and China are motivated to an extent by ideological imperatives, but these do not appear to propel or serve as the central stakes for the rivalry as much as they affect each’s disposition toward the other. Long-standing trade, investment, and commercial disputes and competition, meanwhile, are not so substantial that they motivate the rivalry. While these issues are impactful to niche communities and conspicuous to national policymakers, they are not particularly consequential for national prosperity. The logic of competition, trade, and globalization, in fact, suggests that the US-China commercial relationship is mutually beneficial, notwithstanding each’s concerns with the other’s economic statecraft and market-leading firms. In their geopolitical rivalry, there are a few key forces or contests of interest: path dependence, regime continuity, prudent strategy, third-party alignments, and the balance of military forces in the Indo-Pacific. Each affects the United States’ and China’s ability to achieve their ends and shapes their rivalry. Economic and technological statecraft, by contrast, is largely peripheral to these ends as it does not effectively advance political objectives relevant to territory, borders, security architectures, and national defense. That is not to suggest that economic and technological factors are irrelevant, however; they shape, constrain, and advantage the United States and China across their rivalry’s key forces and contests of interests. Particularly noteworthy are economic and technological factors’ impact on the military balance. Tradition and intuition hold that nations with bigger and more advanced economies are better postured to resource, procure, and manufacture military equipment and can therefore generate greater military power. In the case of the US-China military competition, however, total military power is less relevant than the specific military balance in the Indo-Pacific, in which the distribution and strength of forces in the theater, the capability and reliability of key materiel inputs of outsized importance, and the operational concepts and tactics with which each’s military fights are more important. Total military power—and in particular greater military equipment—matters on the margin, of course, if only because the party with the greater mass and quality of materiel will be able to retain more forces in the Indo-Pacific, maintain more of these key materiel inputs, and develop novel operational concepts and tactics tailored to their superior materiel. Neither the United States’ nor China’s total economic production, public balance sheet, high-technology commercial firms, and scientific production are likely to provide a decisive or lasting advantage on this count. Each country’s economy can support substantially greater military spending, limiting the extent to which one can derive an advantage from the other’s more binding constraints. The capacity and maturity of each country’s defense industrial base is of greater relevance, but these are flexible quotients that investment can improve. This elasticity of defense production suggests that microeconomic endowments may be binding in the short run but variable in the longer run, meaning that policy choices—rather than existing economic endowments—constrain military production. Technological endowments, informing each country’s capacity for broad innovation, are of similarly bounded importance because military technology is somewhat narrow and other factors, such as military procurement processes and inflexibility in concepts of operation, limit the extent to which superior technology translates into military advantage. The fundamental result of this argument is that the concerns that propel the emerging US-China economic and technological competition are ultimately not all that relevant to the matters at the core to their rivalry and to the instruments of national power most relevant to these issues. The US should therefore be wary of policies ostensibly demanded by economic and technological competition and may find its interests better served by limiting its rivalry with China to military competition driven by its core geopolitical interests.
Topic:
Economics, Science and Technology, Strategic Competition, and Rivalry
Political Geography:
China, Asia, North America, and United States of America