Mega FTA as a Signal Against Trade Protectionism Focused on the EU and Japan FTA

• Authors: Sang-Chul Park

Title variants

PL

Mega-regionalna umowa o wolnym handlu jako sprzeciw wobec protekcjonizmu handlowemu na przykładzie umowy o wolnym handlu między UE i Japonią

• Languages of publication: EN

Abstracts

EN

The research questions of the paper are whether the EU Japan FTA can be a win-win approach or win-lose approach? Moreover what are reasons for the two parties to complete the FTA and which industrial sectors can be mostly profited in both parties? Last, but not least how to estimate impacts on the global economy? The hypotheses are FTA can reduce trade protectionism, and the former can generate more economic benefits to the participating countries than latter in the long term based on the trade dynamic group. The research methodology is to use cross sectional analysis based on statistic data and information collection as well as trade policy analysis. Additionally, critical analysis of literature and inference analysis are employed. The conclusion of the research is that the EU Japan FTA can generate about 0.76 percent GDP growth to the EU and about 0.29 percent GDP growth to Japan additionally per year next ten years long. Furthermore, it also creates new employment in both parties. Although the EU Japan FTA can create some looser particularly in East Asian economies such as South Korea, China, and Taiwan, their total amount is estimated as very low. In the global economy, the EU Japan FTA can generate much larger gains than lost. As a result, it is not only a win-win approach for the EU and Japan, but also for the whole global economy if it enters into force.

PL

Pytania badawcze omawiane w tym artykule dotyczą tego, czy umowa o wolnym handlu UE z Japonią może być rozwiązaniem korzystnym dla obu stron, czy też wygrana jednej strony oznacza przegraną drugiej, a także analizuje powody, dla których obie strony zawierają umowę o wolnym handlu i które gałęzie przemysłu w obu krajach mogą na niej najwięcej skorzystać. Ostatnią kwestią jest to, jak oszacować wpływ tego porozumienia na globalną gospodarkę. Teza artykułu głosi, że umowa o wolnym handlu może zmniejszyć protekcjonizm handlowy i w długoterminowej perspektywie przynieść stronom dynamicznej grupy handlowej większe korzyści gospodarcze niż protekcjonizm. Metodologia badań polega na wykorzystaniu analizy przekrojowej w oparciu o dane statystyczne i zebrane informacje, a także analizę polityki handlowej. Dodatkowo zastosowano krytyczną analizę literatury i analizę wnioskowania. W wyniku badań stwierdzono, że umowa o wolnym handlu pomiędzy UE i Japonią może generować dodatkowy wzrost PKB na poziomie około 0,76 procent w UE i około 0,29 w Japonii rocznie przez następne dziesięć lat. Ponadto tworzy nowe miejsca pracy dla obu stron. Chociaż umowa o wolnym handlu UE z Japonią może spowodować pewne straty, szczególnie w gospodarkach Azji Wschodniej, takich jak Korea Południowa, Chiny i Tajwan, ich łączna kwota jest szacowana na bardzo niskim poziomie. W globalnej gospodarce umowa o wolnym handlu UE z Japonią może generować znacznie większe zyski niż straty. Oznacza to, że jeśli umowa ta wejdzie w życie będzie korzystna nie tylko dla jej sygnatariuszy – UE i Japonii – ale także dla całej gospodarki światowej.

Keywords

EN

Mega FTA; trade barriers; global trade rule; free trade; protectionism; Mega FTA; trade barriers; global trade rule; free trade; protectionism

PL

mega-regionalna umowa o wolnym handlu; bariery handlowe; reguły handlu światowego; wolny handel; protekcjonizm

• Publisher: Uniwersytet im. Adama Mickiewicza w Poznaniu
• Journal: Przegląd Strategiczny
• Year: 2019
• Issue: 12
• Pages: 249-270

Dates

published

2019-12-31

Contributors

author

Sang-Chul Park

References

• Acemoglu D. (2009), Modern Economic Growth, Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ.
• Akhtar S. I., Williams B. R. (2017), The Proposed EU Japan FTA and Implications for U.S. Trade Policy, July 14, (IN 10738) CRS Insight, https://fas.org/sgp/crs/row/IN10738.pdf (10.05.2018).
• Baldwin R. (2007), Managing the Noodle Bowl: The Fragility of East Asian Regionalism, ADB Working Paper Series on Regional Economic Integration, No. 7, pp. 1–31.
• Baldwin R. (2011), Sequencing Regionalism: Theory, European Practice, and Lesson for Asia, ADB Working Paper Series on Regional Economic Integration, No. 80, pp. 1–71.
• Bank of Japan (BOJ) (2016), Japan’s Balance of Payments Statistics and International Investment Position for 2016, https://www.boj.or.jp/en/statistics/br/bop_06/bop2016a.pdf (10 May 2018).
• Bhagwati Jagdish (2009), Does the U.S Need a New Trade Policy?, “Journal of Policy Modeling”, Vol. 31, No. 4, pp. 509–514.
• Bradford S., Greico P., Hufbauer G. C. (2006), The Payoff to America from Globalisation, “The World Economy”, Vol. 29, No. 7, pp. 893–917.
• Broda C., Weinstein D. E. (2006), Globalization and the Gains from Variety, “The Quarterly Journal of Economics”, Vol. 121, No. 2, pp. 541–585.
• Business Europe and Keidanren (2016), Joint Statement for EU-Japan Regulatory Cooperation, 13 Dec. https://www.businesseurope.eu/sites/buseur/files/media/position_papers/rex/2016-12-13_be-keidanren_statement_on_eu-jap_regulatory_cooperation.pdf (11.05.2018).
• Chicago Council on Global Affairs (2010a), Global Views 2010, CCFR, Chicago, IL.
• Chicago Council on Global Affairs (2010b), Global Views 2010: Detailed Findings, CCFR, Chicago, IL.
• Deloitte (2018), The New EU Japan EPA: How Can your Company Leverage Improved Trade Cooperation and Market Access?, Belgium: Delotte.
• De Prado C. (2014), Prospects for the EU-Japan Strategic Partnership: A Global Multilevel and SWOT Analysis, European University Institute, Florence–Tokyo.
• Dyrsdale P., Armstrong S. (2014), Japan’s Foreign Economic Policy Strategies and Economic Performance, Working Paper Series, No. 340, Center on Japanese Economy and Business, Columbia University, www.gsb.columbia.edu/cjeb/research (06.05.2018).
• European Commission (2016), Trade Sustainability Impact Assessment of the Free Trade Agreement between the European Union and Japan: Final Report, http://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/docs/2016/may/tradoc_154522.pdf (12.05.2018).
• European Commission (2017), Report on the Implementation of the Trade Policy Strategy Trade for All: Delivering a Progressive Trade Policy to Harness Globalisation, COM (2017) 491 final, EC, Brussels.
• European Commission (2018), European Union, Trade in Goods with Japan, http://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/docs/2006/september/tradoc_113403.pdf (08.05.2018).
• European Political Strategy Centre (EPSC) (2017), EU-Japan: Advanced Economies Shaping the Next Stage of Inclusive Globalisation, EPSC Brief, July 06, European Commission, Brussels.
• Feenstra R. C., Mandel B. R., Reinsdorf M. B., Slaughter M. (2009), Effects of Terms of Trade Gains and Tariff Changes on the Measurement of U.S. Productivity Growth, NBER Working Paper No. 15592.
• Felbermayr G., Kimura F., Okubo T., Steininger M., Yalcin E. (2017), On the Economics of an EU-Japan Free Trade Agreement, ifo Forschungsberichte 86, ifo Institute, Berlin.
• Gomory R., Baumol W. (2009), Globalization: Country and Company Interests in Conflict, “Journal of Policy Modeling”, Vol. 31, No. 4, pp. 540–555.
• Gstöhl S. (2016), Trade for All – All for Trade? The EU’s New Strategy, College of Europe Policy Brief, Jan. http://aei.pitt.edu/93101/1/gstohl_cepob_3-16.pdf (3.05.2018).
• Hillebrand E. E., Lewer J. J., Zagardo J. T. (2010), Backtracking from Globalization, “Global Economy Journal”, Vol. 10, No. 4, pp. 1–17.
• Hilpert H. G. (2017), The Japan-EU Economic Partnership Agreement, SWP Comments 49, Nov., German Institute for International and Security Affairs, Berlin.
• International Monetary Fund (IMF) (2017), World Economic Outlook Database, Nov. 21, IMF, Washington D.C.
• International Monetary Fund (IMF) (2018), World Economic Outlook Update, July, 16, IMF, Washington D.C.
• Krugman P. R. (1979), Increasing Returns, Monopolistic Competition, and International Trade, “Journal of International Economics”, Vol. 9, No. 4, pp. 469–479.
• Krugman P. R., Obstfeld M. (2009), International Economics, Pearson, Addison-Wesley, Boston, MA.
• Lewer J. J., Van den Berg H. (2007), International Trade and Economic Growth, M.E. Sharpe, Armonk, NY.
• Ministry of Finance (MOFI) (2017), Trade Statistics of Japan, http://www.customs.go.jp/toukei/info/tsdl_e.htm (09.05.2018).
• Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MOFA) (2017) Japan EU EPA, http://www.mofa.go.jp/files/000013835.pdf (09.05.2018).
• Mitsuyo A., Fukunari K. (2008), Japanese FTA/EPA Strategies and Agricultural Protection, “Kei Business Review”, Vol. 44, pp. 1–25.
• Ocampo J. A. (2004), Latin America’s Growth and Equity Frustration During Structural Reforms, “Journal of Economic Perspectives”, Vol. 18, No. 2, pp. 67–88.
• O’Rourke K. H., Williamson J. G. (2001), Globalization and History: The Evolution of Nineteenth Century Atlantic Economy, The MIT Press, MA, Cambridge.
• Park S.-C. (2017), Can Trade Help Overcome Economic Crisis? Implications for Northeast Asia Creating Regional FTA between Korea, China, and Japan and Mega FTAs such as RCEP and TPP, “International Organizations Research Journal”, Vol. 12, No. 2, pp. 104–128.
• Park S.-C., Pasierbiak P. (2018), Japan’s Role in East Asian Economic Regionalism, “Institutions and Economies”, Vol. 10, No. 2, pp. 121–145.
• Rosen H. (2008), Strengthening Trade Adjustment Assistance, Peterson Institute for International Economics Policy Brief, PD 09-2, January, Washington D.C.
• Samuelson P. (2004), Where Richardo and Mill Rebut and Confirm Arguments of Mainstream Economists Supporting Globalization, “Journal of Economic Perspectives”, Vol. 18, No. 3, pp. 135–146.
• Sugawara J. (2017), Significance of the Japan-EU EPA: The Agreement in Principle, Restart of Japan’s Trade Strategy, July 12, https://www.mizuho-ri.co.jp/publication/research/pdf/eo/MEA170814.pdf (11.05.2018).
• Sutton M. (2005), Japanese Trade Policy and Economic Partnership Agreements: A New Conventional Wisdom, “Ritsumeikan Annual Review of International Studies”, Vol. 4, pp. 113–135.
• Tatsushi O. (2002), An Approach towards Japan’s FTA Policy, Working Paper Series 01/02, No. 4, IDE APEC Study Center, Tokyo.
• Tyszkiewicz R. (2013), Towards New Political and Economic Agreements with Japan: Bringing New Dynamism into the Strategic Partnership between the EU and Japan, Polish Institute of International Affairs, Policy Paper, No. 9 (57) April, pp. 1–7, Warsaw.
• Yamamoto Y., Kikuchi T. (1998), Japan’s Approach to APEC and Regime Creation in the Asia Pacific, in: Asia Pacific Crossroads: Regime Creation and the Future of APEC, (eds.) V. K. Aggarwal, C. E. Morrison, St Martins Press, New York.
• World Bank (2017), World Development Indicators, Nov. 21, Washington D.C.
• World Trade Organization (WTO) (2018), Annual Report 2018, Geneva.

Identifiers

DOI

10.14746/ps.2019.1.16