Colombia Internacional

Colomb. int. | eISSN 1900-6004 | ISSN 0121-5612

A controvérsia dos lateralismos: uma comparação entre os ALCs da China e dos Estados Unidos

No. 107 (2021-07-01)
  • Ana Luiza Beck
    University of Glasgow (United Kingdom)
  • Mayara T. Muller
    Federal University of Santa Catarina (Brazil)
  • Fernando Seabra
    Federal University of Santa Catarina (Brazil)
https://doi.org/10.7440/colombiaint107.2021.02

Resumo

Objetivo/contexto: neste estudo avalia-se a expansão do bilateralismo. De fato, a dicotomia multilateralismo/regionalismo falha em explicar com precisão as formas de integração comercial das duas últimas décadas. Metodologia: para avaliar a ascensão do bilateralismo, opta-se pelo uso de uma metodologia que examina o papel protagonista da China e dos Estados Unidos no cenário de integração internacional. Conclusões: empiricamente, os resultados mostram que a China e os Estados Unidos mantêm aproximadamente o mesmo número de acordos vigentes. Os resultados deste estudo revelam três principais discrepâncias que se destacam como diferenciadoras nas estratégias nacionais com relação aos acordos comerciais. Primeiro, quanto ao perfil político — mostra-se, confirmando estudos teóricos anteriores, que os Estados Unidos seguem uma estratégia comercial padrão, enquanto a China privilegia uma postura idiossincrática no âmbito de suas negociações comerciais. Segundo, constata-se que a China mostra uma clara preferência por estabelecer acordos com países vizinhos, o que ratifica a estratégia chinesa de consolidar sua hegemonia regional na Ásia. Por fim, a terceira distinção ratifica a hipótese de proximidade política, que se mostrou mais influente para as iniciativas das autoridades comerciais chinesas. Originalidade: a principal contribuição refere-se à comparação de acordos comerciais multilaterais/regionais e bilaterais, no que se refere ao escopo de bens e serviços, ao conteúdo geopolítico e ao grau de flexibilidade das políticas. Teoricamente, o regionalismo e o bilateralismo beneficiam suas partes com a negociação de ganhos e perdas provenientes dos acordos; este último permite um acordo ainda mais adequado por meio de medidas discricionárias compatíveis às necessidades dos países.

Palavras-chave: bilateralismo, acordos de livre comércio, China, Estados Unidos

Referências

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

Licença

Creative Commons License

Este trabalho está licenciado sob uma licença Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.