Search

Begin New Search Topic Bilateral Relations Content Type Policy Brief Publishing Institution Peterson Institute for International Economics Publication Year within 25 Years

1. What US strategy gets wrong about China in Africa

Author:
Cullen S. Hendrix
Publication Date:
03-2020
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Peterson Institute for International Economics
Abstract:
The Trump administration’s Africa strategy is rooted in three misconceptions about China’s African footprint—and a fourth about US-Africa economic relations—that are either factually incorrect or overstated in terms of the broader strategic challenges they pose to US interests: (1) Chinese engagement in Africa crowds out opportunities for trade and investment with and from the United States; (2) Chinese engagement in Africa is resource-seeking—to the detriment of US interests; (3) Chinese engagement in Africa is designed to foster debt-based coercive diplomacy; and (4) US-Africa economic linkages are all one-way and concessionary (i.e., aid-based). Hendrix finds little evidence to suggest Chinese trade and investment ties crowd out US trade and investment opportunities. China’s resource-seeking bent is evident in investment patterns, but it is more a function of Africa’s having comparatively large, undercapitalized resource endowments than China’s attempt to corner commodity markets. Chinese infrastructural development—particularly large projects associated with the Belt and Road Initiative—may result in increased African indebtedness to the Chinese, but there is little reason to think debt per se will vastly expand Chinese military capacity in the region. And finally, US-Africa economic relations are much less one-sided and concessionary (i.e., aid-based) than conventional wisdom suggests.
Topic:
Bilateral Relations, Infrastructure, Economy, Trade, and Donald Trump
Political Geography:
Africa, China, North America, and United States of America

2. China, Like the US, Faces Challenges in Achieving Inclusive Growth Through Manufacturing

Author:
Robert Z. Lawrence
Publication Date:
08-2019
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Peterson Institute for International Economics
Abstract:
For more than three decades the goal of becoming “the factory of the world” has been at the core of China’s development strategy. This strategy, in combination with high rates of domestic investment and low rates of consumption, made Chinese production the most manufacturing intensive in the world. But as its wages have risen, China’s competitiveness in the most labor-intensive manufacturing industries has eroded. Its ability to assemble products remains a major source of its exports, but it has also tried to shift toward more sophisticated value-added production domestically. Chinese domestic spending has shifted away from investment toward more consumption as citizens’ incomes have grown. Like Americans, Chinese people are also spending more on services than on manufactured goods. All these changes are fundamentally altering the structure of China’s production, reducing the role of manufacturing, and increasing the skill levels of workers in manufacturing. This Policy Brief reviews the challenges posed by these developments for China’s long-term goal of achieving more inclusive growth. It presents evidence that commonly held perceptions that Chinese manufacturing employment growth is robust are wrong. In fact, such growth has peaked and China is now following the pattern of structural change that is typical of a more mature emerging economy, in which the share of employment in manufacturing declines as workers are increasingly employed in services.
Topic:
Bilateral Relations, Economic Growth, and Manufacturing
Political Geography:
China, Asia, North America, and United States of America

3. An Assessment of the Korea-China Free Trade Agreement

Author:
Jeffrey Schott, Eujiin Jung, and Cathleen Cimino-Isaacs
Publication Date:
12-2015
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Peterson Institute for International Economics
Abstract:
Of all the free trade agreements (FTAs) concluded by Korea with its major trading partners since the turn of the century, the Korea-China FTA may be the largest in trade terms. It is, however, far from the best in terms of the depth of liberalization and the scope of obligations on trade and investment policies. Korea and China agreed to liberalize a large share of bilateral trade within 20 years, but both sides incorporated extensive exceptions to basic tariff reforms and deferred important market access negotiations on services and investment for several years. Political interests trumped economic objectives, and the negotiated outcome cut too many corners to achieve such a comprehensive result. The limited outcome in the Korea-China talks has two clear implications for economic integration among the northeast Asian countries. First, prospects for the ongoing China-Japan-Korea talks will be limited and unlikely to exceed the Korea-China outcome. Second, Korea and Japan need to strengthen their bilateral leg of the northeast Asian trilateral and the best way is by negotiating a deal in the context of the Trans-Pacific Partnership.
Topic:
Economics, International Trade and Finance, Politics, and Bilateral Relations
Political Geography:
United States, China, Asia, and Korea

4. An Assessment of the Korea-China Free Trade Agreement

Author:
Jeffrey Schott, Euijin Jung, and Cathleen Cimino-Isaacs
Publication Date:
12-2015
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Peterson Institute for International Economics
Abstract:
Of all the free trade agreements (FTAs) concluded by Korea with its major trading partners since the turn of the century, the Korea-China FTA may be the largest in trade terms. It is, however, far from the best in terms of the depth of liberalization and the scope of obligations on trade and investment policies. Korea and China agreed to liberalize a large share of bilateral trade within 20 years, but both sides incorporated extensive exceptions to basic tariff reforms and deferred important market access negotiations on services and investment for several years. Political interests trumped economic objectives, and the negotiated outcome cut too many corners to achieve such a comprehensive result. The limited outcome in the Korea-China talks has two clear implications for economic integration among the northeast Asian countries. First, prospects for the ongoing China-Japan-Korea talks will be limited and unlikely to exceed the Korea-China outcome. Second, Korea and Japan need to strengthen their bilateral leg of the northeast Asian trilateral and the best way is by negotiating a deal in the context of the Trans-Pacific Partnership.
Topic:
Economics, International Trade and Finance, Markets, Treaties and Agreements, and Bilateral Relations
Political Geography:
Korea

5. Should Korea Join the Trans-Pacific Partnership?

Author:
Jeffrey J. Schott and Cathleen Cimino
Publication Date:
09-2014
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Peterson Institute for International Economics
Abstract:
The negotiation of the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), a megaregional agreement to lower barriers to trade and investment and promote economic integration in the Asia-Pacific region, has been a dynamic process with a number of countries joining the talks in midstream. Since negotiations began in March 2010, participation in the TPP talks has expanded several times to include Malaysia (October 2010), Vietnam (December 2010), Canada and Mexico (October 2012), and Japan (July 2013). In November 2013, Korea announced its interest in participating in the TPP and began consulting with the countries involved. The TPP now has 12 participants. Korea is still considering whether to become lucky 13.
Topic:
Economics, International Trade and Finance, and Bilateral Relations
Political Geography:
Malaysia, Canada, Asia, Vietnam, Korea, and Mexico

6. Going Beyond Economic Engagement: Why South Korea Should Press the North on Labor Standards and Practices

Author:
Marcus Noland
Publication Date:
04-2014
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Peterson Institute for International Economics
Abstract:
In recent years, despite a history of enmity and armed conflict that never really ended after the Korean War more than 60 years ago, South Korea has been a major investor in North Korea, and South Korean firms have employed more than 50,000 North Korean workers. South Korea's stated goal has been to encourage sufficient economic progress by North Korea, emboldening it toward establishing a meaningful basis for reconciliation and, ultimately, national unification. The expectation, or at least the hope, has been to use economic engagement to lessen the North's direct state control over the economy and to encourage the development of a middle class that might demand greater internal opening. The goal, as enunciated by former South Korean President Kim Dae-jung, has also been to foster a rise of interest groups with an enhanced stake in peaceable external relations.
Topic:
Economics, Human Rights, International Trade and Finance, and Bilateral Relations
Political Geography:
Asia, South Korea, and North Korea

7. Ukraine's Choice: European Association Agreement or Eurasian Union?

Author:
Anders Åslund
Publication Date:
09-2013
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Peterson Institute for International Economics
Abstract:
Since gaining independence in December 1991, Ukraine has vacillated between the European Union and Russia for economic and political cooperation. Until recently neither had offered Ukraine much, but in the last few months, things have heated up. Ukraine's intention to sign an Association Agreement for political association and economic integration with the European Union has raised a furor in the Kremlin, which is now trying to block Ukraine from aligning itself with the European Union. Moscow has imposed trade sanctions in clear violation of its obligations in the World Trade Organization (WTO) and is pursuing an intense confrontation.
Topic:
Economics, Treaties and Agreements, World Trade Organization, and Bilateral Relations
Political Geography:
Russia, Europe, Ukraine, Asia, and Moscow

8. Financial Services in the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership

Author:
Simon Johnson and Jeffrey J. Schott
Publication Date:
10-2013
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Peterson Institute for International Economics
Abstract:
In July 2013, the United States and the European Union launched negotiations on a Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP). The talks aim to craft a comprehensive accord matching or exceeding the reforms achieved in their previous trade pacts. Since both sides have included financial services in prior free trade agreements (FTAs), they implicitly recognized that the TTIP accord would also cover this sector. But what will be included in the financial services chapter is still subject to debate.
Topic:
Economics, International Trade and Finance, Treaties and Agreements, and Bilateral Relations
Political Geography:
United States and Europe

9. The United States Should Establish Permanent Normal Trade Relations with Russia

Author:
Gary Clyde Hufbauer and Anders Åslund
Publication Date:
11-2011
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Peterson Institute for International Economics
Abstract:
After 18 years, Russia is finally on the verge of acceding to the World Trade Organization (WTO). No country has struggled for so long to become a member of this important organization. The last impediment was removed on November 9, when Russia and Georgia concluded an agreement on monitoring trade flows across their disputed border. The WTO Working Party, which oversaw the negotiations, then approved Russian accession on November 10, clearing the way for formal membership to be adopted at the WTO ministerial conference to be held December 15–17, 2011 (WTO 2011).
Topic:
Conflict Resolution, Economics, International Trade and Finance, Markets, and Bilateral Relations
Political Geography:
Russia, United States, and Georgia

10. Deepening China-Taiwan Relations through the Economic Cooperation Framework Agreement

Author:
Daniel H. Rosen
Publication Date:
06-2010
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Peterson Institute for International Economics
Abstract:
On Sunday, June 13, 2010 representatives from China and Taiwan held a third round of talks in Beijing on an Economic Cooperation Framework Agreement (ECFA) that would liberalize important aspects of cross-Strait economic relations. Details of what was agreed and what remains under negotiation are still trickling out, and in any case the nature of this framework is that various elements will be agreed upon on an ongoing basis rather than at once. But it is clear from available details that ECFA will be an ambitious accord that fundamentally changes the game between Taiwan and China and hence affects the regional economy and even the transpacific tempo for the United States.
Topic:
Economics, International Cooperation, International Trade and Finance, Treaties and Agreements, and Bilateral Relations
Political Geography:
United States, China, and Taiwan