Regionalism And Multilateralism

Interest in regional integration has recently revived in both developed and developing countries. The US has responded to the lack of progress in the Uruguay Round of the GATT by pursuing bilateral trade negotiations, while developing countries have been prompted to re-evaluate the potential benefits of regional integration. The tendency for the world trading system to divide into three blocs - the European Community, the Americas and East Asia - is providing their members with guaranteed access to large markets; however, poor non-member countries will suffer from the loss of access and the risk of trade wars is increased. In this book leading international experts assess the renewed attractiveness of regional integration to individual countries, the types of integration that are suitable to various circumstances, the conditions necessary to their success, and the relationship of regionalism to multilateral free trade.

This book discusses the impact of cultural diversities and identities on regional and interregional cooperation, as well as on multilateralism. Employing a comparative approach to organizations such as ASEAN, MERCOSUR, SAARC, and the African and European Unions, this volume seeks to understand their distinctive features and patterns of interaction. It also explores the diffusion of multidimensional interregional relations, including but not limited to the field of trade. Scholars from several disciplines and four continents offer insights concerning the consequences of both multiple modernities and the rise of authoritarian populism for regionalism, interregionalism, and multilateralism. The Covid-19 pandemic confirmed the decline of hegemonic multilateralism. Among alternative possible scenarios for global governance, the "new multilateralism" receives special attention. This book will be of key interest to European/EU studies, economics, history, cultural studies, international relations, international political economy, security studies, and international law.

November 1996 Do the forces that regional integration arrangements set up encourage or discourage a trend toward globally freer trade? We don't know yet. The literature on regionalism versus multilateralism is growing as economists and political scientists grapple with the question of whether regional integration arrangements are good or bad for the multilateral system. Are regional integration arrangements building blocks or stumbling blocks, in Jagdish Bhagwati's phrase, or stepping stones toward multilateralism? As economists worry about the ability of the World Trade Organization to maintain the GATT's unsteady yet distinct momentum toward liberalism, and as they contemplate the emergence of world-scale regional integration arrangements (the EU, NAFTA, FTAA, APEC, and, possibly, TAFTA), the question has never been more pressing. Winters switches the focus from the immediate consequences of regionalism for the economic welfare of the integrating partners to the question of whether it sets up forces that encourage or discourage evolution toward globally freer trade. The answer is, We don't know yet. One can build models that suggest either conclusion, but these models are still so abstract that they should be viewed as parables rather than sources of testable predictions. Winters offers conclusions about research strategy as well as about the world we live in. Among the conclusions he reaches: * Since we value multilateralism, we had better work out what it means and, if it means different things to different people, make sure to identify the sense in which we are using the term. * Sector-specific lobbies are a danger if regionalism is permitted because they tend to stop blocs from moving all the way to global free trade. In the presence of lobbies, trade diversion is good politics even if it is bad economics. * Regionalism's direct effect on multilateralism is important, but possibly more so is the indirect effect it has by changing the ways in which groups of countries interact and respond to shocks in the world economy. * Regionalism, by allowing stronger internalization of the gains from trade liberalization, seems likely to facilitate freer trade when it is initially highly restricted. * The possibility of regionalism probably increases the risks of catastrophe in the trading system. The insurance incentives for joining regional arrangements and the existence of shiftable externalities both lead to such a conclusion. So too does the view that regionalism is a means to bring trade partners to the multilateral negotiating table because it is essentially coercive. Using regionalism for this purpose may have been an effective strategy, but it is also risky. This paper - a product of the International Trade Division, International Economics Department - was prepared for a conference on regional integration sponsored by the Centre for Economic Policy Research, La Coru-a, Spain, April 26-27, 1996, and will appear in the conference proceedings.

There is no doubt that the open multilateral trading system after World War II was a key ingredient in the rapid economic development of the entire world. Especially in Hong Kong, Korea, Singapore, and Taiwan, exports increased dramatically both in absolute terms and as a percentage of GNP. In the 1980s, however, preferential trading arrangements (PTAs) began to emerge as significant factors affecting world trade. This volume contains thirteen papers that analyze the tensions between multilateral trading systems and preferential trade arrangements and the impact of these tensions on East Asia. The first four chapters introduce PTAs conceptually and focus on the unique political issues that these agreements involve. The next five essays present more direct empirical analyses of existing PTAs and their economic effects, primarily in East Asia. The last four papers concentrate on the outcomes of individual East Asian nations' trading policies in specific instances of preferential agreements.

In today's globalized international system, international and regional organizations can only function effectively within the context of a larger social partnership with governments, the private sectors, and a plethora of increasingly influential interest groups. Regionalism Versus Multilateralism seeks to illustrate these new roles by tracing the way the Organization of American States (OAS), the oldest regional organization, has pursued its objectives in the context of evolving hemispheric and international circumstances. It analyzes the impact of these circumstances on the operations, programs and activities of the Organization, and the adjustments and direction which `metamorphosed' the regional membership at certain crucial junctures of hemispheric and international evolution. The book does so in three parts: through an historic examination of the objectives of the Organization; a critical analysis of its response over time to the forces of growth, transformation and change; and the projection of what continuing developments might dictate on the future characteristics of the Organization if it is to respond effectively to the needs and aspirations of member states. This book is a collaboration between Christopher R. Thomas and Julian T. Magloire, with both parties contributing equally to its content and preparation.

Reconciling regionalism and multilateralism is a challenge common to all branches of global economic governance. While the Bretton Woods/GATT (WTO) institutions, decades-old multilateral framework for global economic governance, are facing serious challenges to their effectiveness, regional framework are emerging as complementary or alternative means of global economic governance. The real challenge is how to reconcile multilateralism and regionalism in global economic governance. This book tackles this problem by analysing issues of multilateral/regional conciliation and coordination in global economic governance, focusing on Asia. Chapters of the book deal with challenges of multilateralism and regionalism in three fields of global economic governance, namely, global monetary/financial governance, global trade governance, and global investment governance. The major regional focus is on Asia, though some chapters deal with regionalism in Europe and North America. Topics include Asian Monetary Fund and Asian financial architecture, open accession provisions of regional trade agreements, and APEC’s role in multilateral investment rules. As a whole, the book elucidates the contemporary reach of Asian regionalism in global economic governance, and shows the neat balance between regionalism and multilateralism in global economic governance. It is of particular use to the students and practitioners of international economic law, international political economy, international finance and international economics, both with and without Asian focus.

Over the past decade, international economic liberalization has been pursued through both multilateral and regional arrangements. In the Uruguay Round, more than one hundred governments pledged their commitment to greater open trade in goods and services, and established new rules under the enforcement of the World Trade Organization. At the same time, however, many regional arrangements have been negotiated--including the European Union and the North American Free Trade Agreement. Nonetheless, controversy still rages about these arrangements. Are regional arrangements stumbling blocks or, in fact building blocks for a more integrated and successful international economy? In this book, Robert A. Lawrence addresses this question and explains both sides of the debate. A volume of Brookings' Integrating National Economies Series

This publication considers whether regional trade agreements have led to a new form of economic co-operation, by promoting deeper integration in the regulatory structures of participating countries. An examination of recent experiences are found to show that, although there is no single model for deeper integration, regional trade agreements have generally more effective than more remote WTO procedures in facilitating trade and improving transparency. Regional processes and rules are found to have been consistent with the multilateral obligations of each party, with additional commitments in the regional agreements complementing WTO rules.