Australia's trade policy dilemmas

Capling, Ann

doi:10.1080/10357710802060576

Cited by 10 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 5 publications

(3 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…To put it simply, ASEAN-China FTA rarely resolves or deals with the 'WTO Plus' problemsinvestment, intellectual property, and technical limitation in trade (Capling & Ravenhill, 2011). Consequently, bilateral FTA in Asia-Pacific fails to fulfill its promise to actualize trade liberalization (Capling, 2008). Second, the bilateral FTA condition has created 'noodle bowl' syndrome due to the lack of coherence between the overlapping FTA.…”

Section: Results and Analysismentioning

confidence: 99%

Looking at ASEAN Centrality in the Amidst of TPP & RCEP Mega-Regional Competition

Rivai¹,

Bastari²

2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper attempts to understand the progressivity of economic regionalism in Southeast Asia. Unlike previous researches, this paper will explain how the complexity of Southeast Asia region affecting liberalism in ASEAN. This can be seen from how the mega-regional competition between TPP and RCEP hinders ASEAN centrality, signified by the fact that Vietnam, Singapore, Malaysia, and Brunei chose to participate in both cooperation, despite knowing that RCEP should be part of ASEAN centrality agenda. This paper will pay attention on two types of condition: (1) understanding the transformation into mega-regional partnership in Asia-Pacific; (2) understanding the decision of four ASEAN countries who choose to participate in both mega-regional models. The theory which will be used in this paper will be the ‘new trade strategy’ developed by Aggarwal and Lee (2011). In the end, this paper finds that there is a renewal in perception, interest, and domestic institution in the creation of RCEP and TPP. Meanwhile, the decision of Vietnam, Malaysia, Singapore, and Brunei to participate in both RCEP and TPP is the result of rational calculation in terms of economic advantage, political economy, domestic structure improvement, and security. These four calculations can be seen in all country, especially those who utilize greater economic liberalization.

show abstract

Section: Results and Analysismentioning

confidence: 99%

Looking at ASEAN Centrality in the Amidst of TPP & RCEP Mega-Regional Competition

Rivai¹,

Bastari²

2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Agreements involving China and ASEAN members also rarely address any of the WTO Plus issues -such as investment, intellectual property and technical barriers to trade -in a substantive way that improves upon or extends existing WTO rules (Capling and Ravenhill 2011). As a result, many analysts have argued that FTAs in the Asia-Pacific have failed to live up to their promise of advancing either trade liberalisation, or broader forms of regional economic cooperation, in a meaningful way (Capling 2008a;Dent 2010;Ravenhill 2008;Wilson 2012).…”

Section: The Rise Of Free Trade Agreements In the Asia-pacificmentioning

confidence: 92%

Mega-Regional Trade Deals in the Asia-Pacific: Choosing Between the TPP and RCEP?

Wilson

2014

Journal of Contemporary Asia

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The emergence of "mega-regional" trade agreements has recently become the most significant trade policy issue in the Asia-Pacific. Since 2010, governments in the region have launched negotiations for two new trade agreements: the United States-led Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) and the ASEAN-led Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP). Differentiated by their membership, scope and level of ambition, the TPP and RCEP embody competing visions for how the Asia-Pacific trade system should evolve, and regional governments must now make choices over which initiative better serves their economic and political interests. This article explores the trade policy choice posed by these mega-regional trade negotiations, reviewing the evolution of the Asia-Pacific trade system, the recent emergence of the TPP and RCEP, and the competitive dynamics inherent in the development of the two proposals. It argues that four key considerations (trade policy ambition, the role of ASEAN, US-China geopolitical rivalry and defensive concerns) will be of key importance in informing regional governments' decisions as the TPP and RCEP move towards completion in 2015.

show abstract

“…(1) Labor has a preference for regionalism leading towards multilateralism, perhaps reflecting its traditional trade union consensus-based decision model; whereas (2) the Coalition has a preference for strengthening traditional, cultural ties through bilateral agreements where other policy objectives, such as strategic and security alliances, can be reinforced, and the benefits of these agreements can be realised faster than through multilateral arrangements (Capling 2008). These preferences stem from long-term governments and were not implemented consistently during periods of shorter-term governments.…”

Section: Trade Policy: Preferences Lock-in and International Pressurementioning

confidence: 99%

Models of government–business relations: Industry policy preferences versus pragmatism

Percy¹

2021

Politics, Policy and Public Administration in Theory and Practice

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Australia's trade policy dilemmas

Cited by 10 publications

References 5 publications

Looking at ASEAN Centrality in the Amidst of TPP & RCEP Mega-Regional Competition

Looking at ASEAN Centrality in the Amidst of TPP & RCEP Mega-Regional Competition

Mega-Regional Trade Deals in the Asia-Pacific: Choosing Between the TPP and RCEP?

Models of government–business relations: Industry policy preferences versus pragmatism

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About