The Mystery of Reciprocal Demand for Regional Trade Partnership: Indian Experience in RCEP Regional Value Chains

IF 0.4 Q3 LAW
D. Chakraborty, J. Chaisse
{"title":"The Mystery of Reciprocal Demand for Regional Trade Partnership: Indian Experience in RCEP Regional Value Chains","authors":"D. Chakraborty, J. Chaisse","doi":"10.1515/ldr-2020-0078","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract The decision of a country to join regional trade agreements (RTAs) is guided by its expected welfare gains, though potentials of both trade creation and trade diversion cannot be ruled out through such arrangements. The slow progress of the World Trade Organization negotiations has created a demand for mega-regional trade agreements in the last decade, but the recent US and Indian pullout from Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) and Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP), respectively, raised a question on their attraction. One of the major underlying objectives of RTAs is to deepen intra-bloc participation in regional value chains (RVCs) and International Production Networks (IPNs), through adoption of reformed rules of origin (ROO) provisions and mutual recognition agreements (MRA) for standard harmonization. This article, through an analysis of the RVC–IPN participation of the RCEP countries, attempts to understand to what extent the Indian pullout from RCEP can be linked to its unfulfilled expectations. The observations indicate that, relatively modest participation in the RVCs, declining domestic value added content of exports and the associated adverse trade balance scenario have critically shaped the Indian standpoint. The evolving Indian orientation towards trade remedy mechanism can be viewed in this backdrop. The analysis concludes that in the post-coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) period, the Indian decision to consolidate domestic manufacturing sector needs to acknowledge the reality rather than being guided by the rhetoric.","PeriodicalId":43146,"journal":{"name":"Law and Development Review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.4000,"publicationDate":"2020-10-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"6","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Law and Development Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1515/ldr-2020-0078","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 6

Abstract

Abstract The decision of a country to join regional trade agreements (RTAs) is guided by its expected welfare gains, though potentials of both trade creation and trade diversion cannot be ruled out through such arrangements. The slow progress of the World Trade Organization negotiations has created a demand for mega-regional trade agreements in the last decade, but the recent US and Indian pullout from Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) and Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP), respectively, raised a question on their attraction. One of the major underlying objectives of RTAs is to deepen intra-bloc participation in regional value chains (RVCs) and International Production Networks (IPNs), through adoption of reformed rules of origin (ROO) provisions and mutual recognition agreements (MRA) for standard harmonization. This article, through an analysis of the RVC–IPN participation of the RCEP countries, attempts to understand to what extent the Indian pullout from RCEP can be linked to its unfulfilled expectations. The observations indicate that, relatively modest participation in the RVCs, declining domestic value added content of exports and the associated adverse trade balance scenario have critically shaped the Indian standpoint. The evolving Indian orientation towards trade remedy mechanism can be viewed in this backdrop. The analysis concludes that in the post-coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) period, the Indian decision to consolidate domestic manufacturing sector needs to acknowledge the reality rather than being guided by the rhetoric.
区域贸易伙伴关系互惠需求之谜:印度在RCEP区域价值链中的经验
一个国家加入区域贸易协定(rta)的决定受到其预期福利收益的指导,尽管这种安排不能排除贸易创造和贸易转移的潜力。世界贸易组织(wto)谈判进展缓慢,在过去10年催生了对大型区域贸易协定的需求,但最近美国和印度分别退出了跨太平洋伙伴关系协定(TPP)和区域全面经济伙伴关系协定(RCEP),这让人们对它们的吸引力产生了质疑。区域贸易协定的主要基本目标之一是通过采用改革后的原产地规则(ROO)条款和相互承认协议(MRA)来协调标准,加深集团内部对区域价值链(rvc)和国际生产网络(ipn)的参与。本文通过对RCEP国家参与RVC-IPN的分析,试图理解印度退出RCEP在多大程度上与其未能实现的期望有关。观察结果表明,相对适度地参与rvc,国内出口增加值含量下降以及相关的不利贸易平衡情景严重影响了印度的立场。在这一背景下,可以看到印度对贸易救济机制的发展方向。分析得出的结论是,在2019年冠状病毒病(COVID-19)后时期,印度巩固国内制造业的决定需要承认现实,而不是被言辞所引导。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
12
期刊介绍: Law and Development Review (LDR) is a top peer-reviewed journal in the field of law and development which explores the impact of law, legal frameworks, and institutions (LFIs) on development. LDR is distinguished from other law and economics journals in that its primary focus is the development aspects of international and domestic legal orders. The journal promotes global exchanges of views on law and development issues. LDR facilitates future global negotiations concerning the economic development of developing countries and sets out future directions for law and development studies. Many of the top scholars and practitioners in the field, including Professors David Trubek, Bhupinder Chimni, Michael Trebilcock, and Mitsuo Matsushita, have edited LDR issues and published articles in LDR. The journal seeks top-quality articles on law and development issues broadly, from the developing world as well as from the developed world. The changing economic conditions in recent decades render the law and development approach applicable to economic issues in developed countries as well as developing ones, and LDR accepts manuscripts on law and economic development issues concerning both categories of countries. LDR’s editorial board includes top scholars and professionals with diverse regional and academic backgrounds.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信