La polémica de los lateralismos: una comparación entre los TLC de China y los Estados Unidos
No. 107 (2021-07-01)Autor/a(es/as)
-
Ana Luiza BeckUniversity of Glasgow (United Kingdom)
-
Mayara T. MullerFederal University of Santa Catarina (Brazil)
-
Fernando SeabraFederal University of Santa Catarina (Brazil)
Resumen
Objetivo/contexto: en este estudio, nuestro objetivo es evaluar la expansión del bilateralismo. De hecho, la dicotomía multilateralismo-regionalismo no explica con precisión las formas de integración comercial que se han producido en las últimas décadas. Metodología: para evaluar el auge del bilateralismo, optamos, metodológicamente, por examinar el papel protagonista de China y Estados Unidos en el contexto de la integración internacional. Conclusiones: empíricamente, nuestros resultados muestran que China y Estados Unidos tienen aproximadamente el mismo número de TLC vigentes. Nuestros resultados destacan, sin embargo, tres grandes discrepancias que se constituyen en diferenciadoras de las estrategias nacionales en relación con los acuerdos comerciales. Primero, con respecto a la política de perfiles, mostramos —confirmando estudios teóricos previos— que los Estados Unidos siguen una estrategia comercial estándar, mientras que China favorece una postura idiosincrática en el alcance de sus acuerdos comerciales. Segundo, descubrimos que China muestra una clara preferencia por realizar acuerdos comerciales con los países vecinos, lo que ratifica su estrategia para consolidar su hegemonía regional en Asia. En tercer lugar, nuestra hipótesis de proximidad política demuestra ser más influyente en las iniciativas de las autoridades comerciales chinas. Originalidad: nuestra principal contribución radica en la comparación entre estas dos visiones de multilateralismo/regionalismo y bilateralismo, en cuanto al alcance de los bienes y servicios, el contenido geopolítico y el grado de flexibilidad de las políticas. En teoría, el regionalismo y el bilateralismo benefician a sus partes con la negociación de beneficios y costos y pérdidas en acuerdos comerciales; esto último permite un acuerdo aún mejor adaptado a través de medidas discrecionales pertinentes a las necesidades de cada país.
Referencias
Allee, Todd, and ClintPeinhardt. 2014. “Evaluating Three Explanations for the Design of Bilateral Investment Treaties.” World Politics 66 (1): 47–87. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0043887113000324
Ba, Alice D. 2003. “China and Asean: Renavigating Relations for a 21st-Century Asia.” Asian Survey 43 (4): 622–47. https://doi.org/10.1525/as.2003.43.4.622
Baldwin, Richard. 1993. “A Domino Theory of Regionalism.” National Bureau of Economic Research Working Paper Series (Cambridge) 4465 (4465): 1–39. https://doi.org/10.3386/w4465
Baldwin, Richard. 2006. “Multilateralizing Regionalism: Spaghetti Bowls as Building Blocs on the Path to Global Free Trade.” The World Economy 29: 1451–1518. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9701.2006.00852.x
Bhagwati, Jagdish, and ArvindPanagariya. 1996. “Preferential Trading Areas and Multilateralism: Strangers, Friends or Foes?” Discussion Paper Series 9596–04 (9596): 1–66.
Carranza, Mario Esteban. 2017. South American Free Trade Area or Free Trade Area of the Americas?: Open Regionalism and the Future of Regional Economic Integration in South America. Routledge.
Crivelli, Pramila. 2016. “Regionalism and Falling External Protection in High and Low Tariff Members.” Journal of International Economics 102: 70–84. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jinteco.2016.06.001
Crowley, Meredith A. 2003. “An Introduction to the WTO and GATT.” Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago Economic Perspectives 27 (4): 42–57.
Dreher, Axel, PeterNunnenkamp, and RainerThiele. 2008. “Does US Aid Buy UN General Assembly Votes? A Disaggregated Analysis.” Public Choice 136 (1/2): 139–64. http://www.jstor.org/stable/27698295
Ethier, Wilfred J. 1998. “The New Regionalism.” Economic Journal 108 (449): 1149–1161. https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-0297.00335
Gabuev, Alexander. 2016. “One Belt One Road Initiative: A Revolution on Regional and Global Development” 12 (2) https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1080/24761028.2016.11869097.
García-Durán, Patricia, BenjaminKienzle, and MontserratMillet. 2014. “Revisiting European Influence: The Case of Agricultural Trade Negotiations.” Journal of World Trade 48 (5): 1057–1076.
Hoadley, Stephen, and JianYang. 2007. “China’s Cross-Regional FTA Initiatives: Towards Comprehensive National Power.” Pacific Affairs 80 (2): 327–348. https://doi.org/10.5509/2007802327
Hummer, Waldemar, and MichaelSchweitzer. 1994. “Chapter VIII regional arrangements.” in B.Simma (ed) The Charter of the United Nations: A Commentary. Oxford. OUP:
Irwin, Douglas A. 1998. “The Smoot-Hawley Tariff: A Quantitative Assessment.” Review of Economics and Statistics 80 (2): 326–34. https://doi.org/10.1162/003465398557410
Li, Chunding, JingWang, and JohnWhalley. 2014. “China’s Regional and Bilateral Trade Agreements” National Bureau of Economic Research 19853: 1–26. https://www.nber.org/papers/w19853.pdf
Liu, Xuepeng, and EmanuelOrnelas. 2014. “Free Trade Agreements and the Consolidation of Democracy.” American Economic Journal: Macroeconomics 6 (2): 29–70. https://doi.org/10.1257/mac.6.2.29
Mansfield, Edward D. 1998. “The Proliferation of Preferential Trade Agreements.” Journal of Conflict Resolution 42 (5): 523–543. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022002798042005001
MOFCOM. China FTA Network.http://fta.mofcom.gov.cn/english/index.shtml.
Perrotti, Daniel E. 2015. “The People’s Republic of China and Latin America: the impact of Chinese economic growth on Latin American exports.” CEPAL Review.
Renard, Thomas. 2016. “Partnerships for Effective Multilateralism? Assessing the Compatibility between EU Bilateralism, (Inter-)Regionalism and Multilateralism.” Cambridge Review of International Affairs 29 (1): 18–35. https://doi.org/10.1080/09557571.2015.1060691
Ruggie, John Gerard. 1992. “Multilateralism: the Anatomy of an Institution.” International Organization: 561-598. https://www.jstor.org/stable/2706989
Saggi, Kamal. 2002. “Trade, Foreign Direct Investment, and International Technology Transfer.” The World Bank Development Research Group 17 (2): 191–235. https://doi.org/10.1093/wbro/17.2.191
Saggi, Kamal, and HalisMurat. 2010. “Bilateralism, Multilateralism, and the Quest for Global Free Trade.” Journal of International Economics 81 (1): 26–37. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jinteco.2010.01.004
Schiff, Maurice, and L. AlanWinters. 2002. “Regional Integration and Development.” World Bank and Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1596/1813-9450-2872
Salidjanova, Nargiza. 2015. “China’s Trade Ambitions: Strategy and Objectives behind China’s Pursuit of Free Trade Agreements.” U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission Staff Research Report.
Schwab, Susan. 2011. “After Doha: Why the Negotiations Are Doomed and What We Should Do About It.” Foreign Affairs 90: 104-117. https://www.jstor.org/stable/23039412
Teló, Mario. 2007. “Introduction: Globalization, New Regionalism and the Role of the EU.” European Union and New Regionalism: Regional Actors and Global Governance in a Post-Hegemonic Era, 406. http://books.google.com/books/about/European_Union_and_New_Regionalism.html?id=ZpxQRKn0ARUC&pgis=1
USTR. 2020. The Office of the U.S. Trade Representative. Free Trade Agreements.https://ustr.gov/trade-agreements/free-trade-agreements
WTO. 2018. “Regional Trade Agreements and Preferential Trade Arrangements.” 2018. https://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/region_e/rta_pta_e.htm
Wunderlich, Jens-Uwe. 2016. Regionalism, Globalization and International Order: Europe and Southeast Asia. Ashgate Publishing, Ltd.
Ye, Min. 2015.“China and Competing Cooperation in Asia-Pacific: TPP, RCEP, and the New Silk Road.” Asian Security 11 no. 3: 206-224. https://doi.org/10.1080/14799855.2015.1109509
Licencia
Esta obra está bajo una licencia internacional Creative Commons Atribución-NoComercial-SinDerivadas 4.0.