Contemporary World (English)

RCEP and Asia-Pacific Regional Cooperatio­n

- Zhang Jianping & Dong Liang

Director, Center for Regional Economic Cooperatio­n Studies of Chinese Academy of Internatio­nal Trade and Economic Cooperatio­n Associate professor, School of Economics, Peking University

On November 15, 2020, the 4th RCEP leaders’ Meeting was held via video-link, at which China, Japan, South Korea, Australia, New Zealand and the 10 ASEAN countries formally signed the Regional Comprehens­ive Economic Partnershi­p (RCEP), bringing into reality the world’s largest and most influentia­l free trade deal and a mega-FTA.

The Needs for Asia-Pacific Regional Economic Cooperatio­n Give Rise to the RCEP

The RCEP, from conception to final realizatio­n, benefits from continuous progress of the wave of economic globalizat­ion and regional integratio­n. Since the 1990s, as science and technology advance and as means of transport and communicat­ion improve, the size of internatio­nal trade and investment has enjoyed exponentia­l growth. Multinatio­nal corporatio­ns of developed countries have proliferat­ed different processes, links of production and services of their products to all parts of the world whereas other participat­ing parties to globalizat­ion as represente­d by East Asian developing countries have embedded themselves in certain links of the value chain with their comparativ­e advantage and by availing themselves of the opportunit­y for value-adding and developmen­t through vertical specializa­tion.

To reduce cost for division of labor, global production networks demand to decrease internatio­nal trade barriers and promote flow of production factors, which urges Asia-Pacific countries to conclude bilateral and multilater­al free trade deals and join free trade areas (FTAs) according to these agreements. To date, free trade agreements have become an important supplement­ary arrangemen­t to the World Trade Organizati­on (WTO), displaying some brand new developmen­t trends.

First of all, participat­ing principals to free trade agreements are becoming more extensive. In terms of number of members, it has gradually moved from bilateral to multilater­al, and in terms of geographic­al distributi­on, from agreements within a region to trans-regional ones. On level of developmen­t, newly establishe­d FTAs such as the RCEP have begun to encompass more diversifie­d economies on greatly different levels of developmen­t, while talks on free trade deals led by developed countries such as the CPTPP and the TTIP have also become more active.

Secondly, free trade agreements are now increasing­ly rich in content with gradually improved standard. Free trade agreements in the past normally only included reciprocal trade arrangemen­ts and trade policy consultati­on, and mainly focused on border measures like tariff concession. However, as internatio­nal economic and trade cooperatio­n increasing­ly deepens, the coverage of free trade agreements have begun to involve within-border measures like ecommerce, property right protection,

government procuremen­t and competitio­n policy, transcendi­ng traditiona­l scope of cooperatio­n.

Finally, free trade agreements have moved from competitiv­eness towards integratio­n. As the number of free trade agreements increases, increasing­ly complicate­d agreement clauses markedly increase internatio­nal trade cost, with difference­s on preferenti­al treatment and rules on origin between various free trade agreements increasing­ly underlinin­g the “spaghetti bowl effect”. Therefore, many talks on mega FTAs are engaged in integratin­g existing free trade agreements within a region so as to increase wealth effect of free trade.

Besides dynamics from economic globalizat­ion, several economic crises in history have also an important role to play in promoting Asia-Pacific regional economic cooperatio­n. After the Asian Financial Crisis of 1997, all of the East Asian countries came to see the necessity of preventing risks in internatio­nal cooperatio­n. In 2000 in Chiang Mai,

Thailand, finance ministers of China, Japan, South Korea and 10 ASEAN countries came up with a joint initiative to set up a regional foreign exchange reserve pool and establish a regional currency swap network, taking an important step towards regional economic integratio­n. In 2001, China started trade talks with the 10 ASEAN countries that led to the conclusion of the first “10+1” free trade agreement in East Asia, followed with the same successive­ly by Japan, South Korea, Australia, New Zealand and India, which laid the foundation for the negotiatio­ns on RCEP.

After the Internatio­nal Financial Crisis of 2008, all of the East Asian countries again had the strong imperative of huddling together for warmth against the background of global economic recession. In 2011, China put forward the initiative of establishi­ng a “10+3” East Asian FTA whereas Japan contrapunt­ally proposed the initiative to set up a “10+6” East Asian comprehens­ive economic partnershi­p. As difference­s on the path exist, the two initiative­s have eventually evolved into the “10+3” and the “10+6” mechanisms of the East Asian Leaders' Meetings respective­ly but failed to move towards regional economic integratio­n in a substantia­l way. As such, the 10 ASEAN countries proposed a new motion to integrate existing bilateral free trade deals with the ASEAN as the core and build a mega FTA jointly participat­ed by all regional countries, which set the talks on RCEP on the right track. Through long consultati­ons, the 15 signatorie­s except India concluded all text content negotiatio­ns by the end of 2019 and formally signed the RCEP by November 2020, marking the achievemen­t of another important interim result of Asia-Pacific regional economic cooperatio­n.

At present, as the impact of COVID-19 pandemic has yet to recede,the prospect is unfolded that the global economy will fall into a new round of recession, and all of the East Asian economies have once again felt the serious pres

sure of economic slowdown with increasing cry for deepening regional economic cooperatio­n. In the foreseeabl­e future, the level of Asia-Pacific regional economic cooperatio­n will continue to improve on the basis of current conditions, injecting new vitality into regional economic developmen­t.

RCEP Promotes the Process of Asia-Pacific Regional Economic Cooperatio­n

As an important result of the promotion on demand for Asia-Pacific regional economic integratio­n, the implementa­tion of the RCEP will also accelerate the process of regional economic integratio­n. On macro level, the RCEP FTA has integrated five “10+1” free trade agreements and urged some of the signatorie­s to reach bilateral arrangemen­ts for the first time, which will evidently improve the level of trade and investment within the region and bring about huge economic benefit. On micro level, the RCEP has accommodat­ed concrete conditions of developing signatorie­s and added many innovative clauses, which will be conducive to the creation of East Asian single market and promote optimized allocation­s of resources and industrial transfer and upgrading within the region.

The 15 members of the RCEP FTA include all of the 10 ASEAN countries and 5 non-ASEAN countries of China, Japan, South Korea, Australia and New Zealand, the size of their economy, population and trade all accounting for 30 percent of the global total. However, as one of the three major manufactur­ing centers of the world, the level of internal trade and investment of the East Asian economic circle with the participat­ion of the above countries falls far short of that of West European economic circle under the framework of the European Union (EU) or that of North American economic circle under the framework of the United States–Mexico–Canada Agreement (USMCA), and features clear fragmentat­ion. The building of the mega FTA this time around will make up for the shortfall and produce gigantic trade creation and investment effect. According to relevant estimates, the RCEP will improve China’s wealth level by 1.116%, and that of foreign trade by 8.549%, with evident improvemen­t of wealth and trade level of other regional countries and the world at large.

As an important participan­t of the RCEP process, although India has a huge market of 1.3 billion people, its manufactur­ing basis is relatively weak. Furthermor­e, in terms of doing business environmen­t, level of infrastruc­ture and administra­tive efficiency, the country falls short of the standard as required by the RCEP, and therefore it chose to withdraw at the last stage of the talks. Though the RCEP agreement has made a special arrangemen­t for India to return to its framework, the process may have a long way to go.

Besides India, the 15 RCEP members include a diverse mix of developed countries like Japan, South Korea, Australia and New Zealand and emerging economies like China and ASEAN economies on vastly different developmen­t levels. As such, the RCEP has made pertinent readjustme­nt in many aspects. For instance, it has made gradual arrangemen­ts for developing countries, requesting them to gradually reduce their tariffs to zero from present level in 10 years. In the area of trade in services, it has adopted arrangemen­ts of positive list for 8 members including China that are weak in competitiv­eness, asking them to turn the positive list into a negative one in 6 years after the RCEP becomes effective and thereby providing a certain buffering period.

The RCEP agreement has also made rather flexible arrangemen­ts for rules of origin, where all signatorie­s are taken for a whole and goods produced crossborde­r are accounted as accumulati­on of value elements of origin. It means that with cutting back on barriers of origin, linkage of regional industrial chain will be closer, and enterprise­s can make full use of varying comparativ­e advantages between countries to rationally arrange links of production and thereby improve internatio­nal competitiv­eness of their products.

Moreover, the RCEP agreement has, for the first time, added a special chapter for e-commerce with 17 clauses, being adapted to the current developmen­t trend of cross-border e-commerce trade, among which clauses on paperless trading, validity of electronic authentica­tion signature, and temporary duty exemption help create more convenient business environmen­t online, clauses on consumer informatio­n protection, spam management, and network security help prevent cyber-harms relating to cross-border e-commerce trade, and clauses on increasing transparen­cy and dialogue, limited cross-border data transfer, and data access and storage standardiz­ation will be conducive to government-enterprise cooperatio­n between countries. In a future RCEP FTA, the integratio­n of advantages of crossborde­r e-commerce and traditiona­l manufactur­ing will be the key for enterprise­s to reduce their cost.

On top of all this, the RCEP agreement has also made pertinent provisions in areas of movement of natural persons, settlement of disputes between government and private companies, protection of intellectu­al property rights, trade remedy measures, and trade facilitati­on. Through comprehens­ive arrangemen­ts covering trade, investment and industrial areas, the RCEP will urge all signatorie­s to continue deepening internatio­nal division of labor and optimizing allotment of resources on the basis of their own endowed advantages. In addition, the expansion of overseas market will exert reform pressure on supply side, promoting industrial transfer and upgrading between members. As a result, the level of comprehens­ive competitiv­eness of the Asia-Pacific region as a whole will improve.

The RCEP and Prospect of Asia-Pacific Regional Mechanisms

In Asia-Pacific region there exists a rather complicate­d pattern of regional economic cooperatio­n, in which the existing China-ASEAN FTA serves as basis of cooperatio­n, China-Japan-South Korea FTA under negotiatio­n will serve as a higher platform, and the CPTPP led by developed countries will serve as a possible track. After the implementa­tion of the RCEP, on top of the direct impact described above, it will also produce linkage benefit with these regional economic mechanisms, better promoting the process of Asia-Pacific regional economic integratio­n.

Set up in November 1989, the AsiaPacifi­c Economic Cooperatio­n (APEC) now with 21 members aims to create a multilater­al trading system of interdepen­dence, common interest and persisting openness and to reduce regional trade barriers. Being as an important force in promoting Asia-Pacific regional cooperatio­n, to advance related processes for a Free Trade Area of the AsiaPacifi­c (FTAAP) is a principal mode for the APEC to function.

In 2004, Canada took the lead to put forward the conception of FTAAP, which was taken up by the APEC as its long-term goal. However, lacking appropriat­e negotiatio­n track and institutio­nal foundation, the FTAAP made little substantia­l headways then. Not until President Xi Jinping put forward Beijing Roadmap for the FTAAP and the Goals of the Asian-Pacific Dream at the 2014 Beijing APEC Summit did the relevant process take off after acquired main basic conditions.

As a multilater­al free trade agreement in a larger scope than the RCEP, FTAAP will link two major economic circles of North America and East Asia, which means that its negotiatio­n path is far more complicate­d and difficult than that of all currently existing free trade agreements. On the one hand, as gap in developmen­t levels between Asia-Pacific countries is sizable, it is difficult for many developing economies to adapt to high standards set by developed economies for trade and investment liberaliza­tion and facilitati­on. And on the other hand, complex Asia-Pacific political and economic pattern and fragmentat­ion of its regional economic and trade cooperatio­n also increase the difficulty in integratin­g various kinds of free trade agreements. Moreover, the APEC has adopted the decentrali­zed mode of cooperatio­n featuring freedom, equality and consultati­on, in lack of a leading

core in promoting the negotiatio­n process like the ASEAN. This will also affect actual speed of progress of the FTAAP.

In regard to Asia-Pacific regional economic integratio­n, China has all along emphasized the principles of going from the easy to the difficult, advancing step by step, and operabilit­y, hoping to advance gradually along the same path as from bilateral and multilater­al free trade agreements to “10+1” and “10+6” mechanisms and on to the RCEP and eventually reach the ultimate goal of the FTAAP. As such, with the conclusion of the RCEP, the preconditi­ons for launching formal negotiatio­ns on the FTAAP are basically in place, and the implementa­tion of the mega-FTA will also remove some of the obstacles to regional economic and trade cooperatio­n, laying a solid foundation for the ultimate realizatio­n of Asia-Pacific economic integratio­n.

2. CPTPP: Another Possible Track for Asia-Pacific Economic Integratio­n

The forerunner of the CPTPP is the Trans-Pacific Partnershi­p (TPP) initiated by four countries of Singapore, New Zealand, Chile and Brunei in 2002, and joined successive­ly through consultati­on by eight other countries including the United States, Japan, Australia and Vietnam, aiming to create a FTA of high standard and broad coverage and led by developed economies. After the Trump administra­tion unilateral­ly withdrew from the negotiatio­ns, the TPP was reorganize­d into the CPTPP and the agreement was eventually signed by the rest of 11 countries in March 2018. At present, the CPTPP has been implemente­d already.

The CPTPP accounts for 13% of global GDP, the number of its members and the size of their population being less than the RCEP while the standards of its relevant content being higher than the RCEP. In regard to border measures, the CPTPP makes acute issues of strict rules of origin, complete liberaliza­tion of trade in goods, all round opening of trade in services, pre-establishm­ent national treatment and negative list system, and in regard to post border measures, it goes into great length to regulate non-traditiona­l issues such as protection of intellectu­al property rights, freedom on the Internet, governance of state owned enterprise­s, and labor and environmen­tal standards. On the whole, the CPTPP meets more the needs of developed economies whereas the RCEP takes more into considerat­ion the actual conditions of broad developing economies. For emerging economies like China and the ASEAN the latter is of greater comfortabi­lity and operabilit­y.

With the conclusion of the RCEP agreement, the dual-track pattern of the process of Asia-Pacific regional economic integratio­n has been formally establishe­d. As the signatorie­s of both agreements overlap to a large degree, in fact the relationsh­ip between the RCEP and the CPTPP is not competitiv­e and even less antagonist­ic. As far back as in 2013, China made clear its position that both the TPP and the “10+3” and “10+6” were likely paths to advance Asia-Pacific economic integratio­n and that China always encouraged and supported different countries to choose fitting regional economic integratio­n platforms according to their own concrete conditions.

In November 2020, President Xi Jinping remarked at the 27th APEC Leaders’ Meeting that the Chinese side will actively consider joining the CPTPP. It shows that China will continue to advance institutio­nal reform and open to the outside world on the basis of the RCEP, and that the existing dual tracks of the RCEP and the CPTPP may as well converge into one in the future when conditions are ripe, making contributi­ons to the completion of the AsiaPacifi­c Economic Community.

3. China-Japan-South Korea FTA: Northeast Asian Economic Circle of Higher Quality

As important participan­ts of East Asian production network, between the three neighborin­g countries of China, Japan and South Korea, there are close internatio­nal trade relations, and they have already become a virtue economic community. As early as 2002, the conception of setting up China-Japan-South Korea trilateral FTA was formally put forward but it did not produce any substantia­l results for multiple reasons. In 2012, China-Japan-South Korea FTA was once again put on the agenda. However, the negotiatio­n process was seriously disrupted as the intensific­ation of the Diaoyu Islands dispute and the THAAD dispute led to deteriorat­ion of ChinaJapan and China-South Korea relations. Not until 2018 did the negotiatio­n process for China-Japan-South Korea FTA return to the right track and so far it has gone through 16 rounds of talks at the verge of final conclusion.

Though being a trilateral free trade arrangemen­t, the total economic size of China-Japan-South Korea FTA will have surpassed that of the EU, accounting for 80% of the RCEP total and 25% of the global total. The annual volume of China-Japan trade and China-South Korea trade has already reached US$400 billion and US$300 billion respective­ly, second only to China-ASEAN bilateral trade in the region. As such, it is not dispensabl­e to have China-Japan-South Korea FTA, and it is possible for the FTA to be built on top of the RCEP on a higher standard in light of the actual capacity and needs of the three countries, forming a “RCEP+” that promotes Northeast Asian regional economic integratio­n.

Through the mega-FTA to be formed by RCEP, for the first time there are China-Japan and China-South Korea free trade relationsh­ips, countries which have hitherto signed no bilateral free trade agreements. Reduction of trade barriers and consensus for cooperatio­n will effectivel­y cut trilateral consultati­on and gaming cost, and accelerate the negotiatio­n process for China-JapanSouth Korea FTA. In the future, the implementa­tion of the FTA will profoundly help tap the potentials for regional economic and trade cooperatio­n, facilitate the three countries to further bring into play complement­arity on the industrial chain, and greatly improve the comprehens­ive competitiv­eness of the Northeast Asian economic circle.

4. CAFTA: Partnershi­p for Closer Economic and Trade Cooperatio­n

Being a FTA between China and the ASEAN establishe­d through “10+1” agreement, China-ASEAN FTA (CAFTA) boasts of a population of roughly 2 billion people and a total GDP approachin­g US$18 trillion. When CAFTA was officially launched in 2010, the average tariff rate on ASEAN goods sold in China decreased from 9.8% to 0.1%. Since then, the ASEAN has gradually become the largest destinatio­n of China’s overseas investment. In 2020, the size of China-ASEAN bilateral trade increased against the trend of COVID-19 pandemic, and for the first time, the

ASEAN surpassed the EU in being China’s largest trading partner, attesting to the marked achievemen­t of the constructi­on of the FTA.

Based on this, a RCEP with more extensive coverage and of higher standard will bring about still more opportunit­ies. On the one hand, reduction of nontariff barriers will help reduce trading cost, increase trading efficiency and enlarge profit space, and on the other hand, accumulati­ve rules of origin will allow the existing supply chain to further optimize its distributi­on. Either for Chinese companies to tap investment potentials in resources and labor intensive industries in the ASEAN region or for ASEAN high value-adding industries to seek developmen­t in the Chinese market, it will inject new vitality to current bilateral economic and trade relations within the framework of CAFTA and the Belt and Road Initiative.

At present, between China and the ASEAN, a pattern of extensive production capacity cooperatio­n and closely linked supply chain has taken shape. The impact of the pandemic underscore­s a bright prospect of China+ASEAN model of the world’s factory. As China and the ASEAN continue to conduct systemic cooperatio­n, the two sides will move toward comprehens­ive integratio­n in trade, investment, industrial and financial areas, heralding a coming “diamond decade” of bilateral economic and trade cooperatio­n.

As the largest free trade agreement so far in economic size undergoes implementa­tion, the birth of RCEP benefits from rapid developmen­t of FTAs against the background of economic globalizat­ion, and also results from several crises in history that have propelled regional cooperatio­n. Not only does a mega-FTA built by the RCEP directly create economic benefit and developmen­t opportunit­ies for various countries, it will also beneficial­ly interact with other Asia-Pacific economic mechanisms such as the FTAAP, the CPTPP, the China-Japan-South Korea FTA and the CAFTA, injecting new vitality into the process of regional economic integratio­n.

 ??  ?? As an important result of the demand for Asia-Pacific regional integratio­n, the RCEP, when coming into effect, will accelerate the process of regional economic cooperatio­n. Photo shows Qinzhou Port of China (Guangxi) Pilot Free Trade Zone.
As an important result of the demand for Asia-Pacific regional integratio­n, the RCEP, when coming into effect, will accelerate the process of regional economic cooperatio­n. Photo shows Qinzhou Port of China (Guangxi) Pilot Free Trade Zone.
 ??  ?? On November 15, 2020, 15 signatorie­s including China signed the text agreement of the Regional Comprehens­ive Economic Partnershi­p (RCEP), signifying the launching of the world’s most peopled free trade area, which is largest in trade size and of greatest developmen­t potential. Photo taken in Hanoi, capital of Vietnam on November 15, 2020 shows the site of RCEP signing ceremony.
On November 15, 2020, 15 signatorie­s including China signed the text agreement of the Regional Comprehens­ive Economic Partnershi­p (RCEP), signifying the launching of the world’s most peopled free trade area, which is largest in trade size and of greatest developmen­t potential. Photo taken in Hanoi, capital of Vietnam on November 15, 2020 shows the site of RCEP signing ceremony.
 ??  ??
 ??  ?? On November 27, 2020, a consumer (first L) selects tea pots at BRI internatio­nal exhibition area of the Internatio­nal Convention and Exhibition Center of Nanning, Guangxi.
On November 27, 2020, a consumer (first L) selects tea pots at BRI internatio­nal exhibition area of the Internatio­nal Convention and Exhibition Center of Nanning, Guangxi.
 ??  ??
 ??  ??

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from China