Logistics observatories and regional integration indicators: the Mesoamerica project

This FAL Bulletin analyses the development of logistics observatories and the construction of regional integration indicators in Latin America and the Caribbean. To this end, it examines experiences, in the region and worldwide, in relation to the construction of indicators and presents a set of policy recommendations for proper implementation. The Mesoamerica Project is used as a case study to construct a set of indicators for logistics infrastructures.

Logistics and mobility policies for sustainable development and regional integration: conceptual framework and regional experiences

This FAL Bulletin summarizes the main findings and proposals contained in the document “Políticas de logística y movilidad para el desarrollo sostenible y la integración regional”, recently published by the Natural Resources and Infrastructure Division (NRID), ECLAC. It contains a proposal for a paradigm shift in the formulation of national logistics and mobility policies, with common guidelines for Latin American and Caribbean countries.

Essays on the political economy of European integration

Recently, a rising interest in political and economic integration/disintegration issues has been developed in the political economy field. This growing strand of literature partly draws on traditional issues of fiscal federalism and optimum public good provision and focuses on a trade-off between the benefits of centralization, arising from economies of scale or externalities, and the costs of harmonizing policies as a consequence of the increased heterogeneity of individual preferences in an international union or in a country composed of at least two regions. This thesis stems from this strand of literature and aims to shed some light on two highly relevant aspects of the political economy of European integration. The first concerns the role of public opinion in the integration process; more precisely, how economic benefits and costs of integration shape citizens' support for European Union (EU) membership. The second is the allocation of policy competences among different levels of government: European, national and regional. Chapter 1 introduces the topics developed in this thesis by reviewing the main recent theoretical developments in the political economy analysis of integration processes. It is structured as follows. First, it briefly surveys a few relevant articles on economic theories of integration and disintegration processes (Alesina and Spolaore 1997, Bolton and Roland 1997, Alesina et al. 2000, Casella and Feinstein 2002) and discusses their relevance for the study of the impact of economic benefits and costs on public opinion attitude towards the EU. Subsequently, it explores the links existing between such political economy literature and theories of fiscal federalism, especially with regard to normative considerations concerning the optimal allocation of competences in a union. Chapter 2 firstly proposes a model of citizens’ support for membership of international unions, with explicit reference to the EU; subsequently it tests the model on a panel of EU countries. What are the factors that influence public opinion support for the European Union (EU)? In international relations theory, the idea that citizens' support for the EU depends on material benefits deriving from integration, i.e. whether European integration makes individuals economically better off (utilitarian support), has been common since the 1970s, but has never been the subject of a formal treatment (Hix 2005). A small number of studies in the 1990s have investigated econometrically the link between national economic performance and mass support for European integration (Eichenberg and Dalton 1993; Anderson and Kalthenthaler 1996), but only making informal assumptions. The main aim of Chapter 2 is thus to propose and test our model with a view to providing a more complete and theoretically grounded picture of public support for the EU. Following theories of utilitarian support, we assume that citizens are in favour of membership if they receive economic benefits from it. To develop this idea, we propose a simple political economic model drawing on the recent economic literature on integration and disintegration processes. The basic element is the existence of a trade-off between the benefits of centralisation and the costs of harmonising policies in presence of heterogeneous preferences among countries. The approach we follow is that of the recent literature on the political economy of international unions and the unification or break-up of nations (Bolton and Roland 1997, Alesina and Wacziarg 1999, Alesina et al. 2001, 2005a, to mention only the relevant). The general perspective is that unification provides returns to scale in the provision of public goods, but reduces each member state’s ability to determine its most favoured bundle of public goods. In the simple model presented in Chapter 2, support for membership of the union is increasing in the union’s average income and in the loss of efficiency stemming from being outside the union, and decreasing in a country’s average income, while increasing heterogeneity of preferences among countries points to a reduced scope of the union. Afterwards we empirically test the model with data on the EU; more precisely, we perform an econometric analysis employing a panel of member countries over time. The second part of Chapter 2 thus tries to answer the following question: does public opinion support for the EU really depend on economic factors? The findings are broadly consistent with our theoretical expectations: the conditions of the national economy, differences in income among member states and heterogeneity of preferences shape citizens’ attitude towards their country’s membership of the EU. Consequently, this analysis offers some interesting policy implications for the present debate about ratification of the European Constitution and, more generally, about how the EU could act in order to gain more support from the European public. Citizens in many member states are called to express their opinion in national referenda, which may well end up in rejection of the Constitution, as recently happened in France and the Netherlands, triggering a European-wide political crisis. These events show that nowadays understanding public attitude towards the EU is not only of academic interest, but has a strong relevance for policy-making too. Chapter 3 empirically investigates the link between European integration and regional autonomy in Italy. Over the last few decades, the double tendency towards supranationalism and regional autonomy, which has characterised some European States, has taken a very interesting form in this country, because Italy, besides being one of the founding members of the EU, also implemented a process of decentralisation during the 1970s, further strengthened by a constitutional reform in 2001. Moreover, the issue of the allocation of competences among the EU, the Member States and the regions is now especially topical. The process leading to the drafting of European Constitution (even if then it has not come into force) has attracted much attention from a constitutional political economy perspective both on a normative and positive point of view (Breuss and Eller 2004, Mueller 2005). The Italian parliament has recently passed a new thorough constitutional reform, still to be approved by citizens in a referendum, which includes, among other things, the so called “devolution”, i.e. granting the regions exclusive competence in public health care, education and local police. Following and extending the methodology proposed in a recent influential article by Alesina et al. (2005b), which only concentrated on the EU activity (treaties, legislation, and European Court of Justice’s rulings), we develop a set of quantitative indicators measuring the intensity of the legislative activity of the Italian State, the EU and the Italian regions from 1973 to 2005 in a large number of policy categories. By doing so, we seek to answer the following broad questions. Are European and regional legislations substitutes for state laws? To what extent are the competences attributed by the European treaties or the Italian Constitution actually exerted in the various policy areas? Is their exertion consistent with the normative recommendations from the economic literature about their optimum allocation among different levels of government? The main results show that, first, there seems to be a certain substitutability between EU and national legislations (even if not a very strong one), but not between regional and national ones. Second, the EU concentrates its legislative activity mainly in international trade and agriculture, whilst social policy is where the regions and the State (which is also the main actor in foreign policy) are more active. Third, at least two levels of government (in some cases all of them) are significantly involved in the legislative activity in many sectors, even where the rationale for that is, at best, very questionable, indicating that they actually share a larger number of policy tasks than that suggested by the economic theory. It appears therefore that an excessive number of competences are actually shared among different levels of government. From an economic perspective, it may well be recommended that some competences be shared, but only when the balance between scale or spillover effects and heterogeneity of preferences suggests so. When, on the contrary, too many levels of government are involved in a certain policy area, the distinction between their different responsibilities easily becomes unnecessarily blurred. This may not only leads to a slower and inefficient policy-making process, but also risks to make it too complicate to understand for citizens, who, on the contrary, should be able to know who is really responsible for a certain policy when they vote in national,local or European elections or in referenda on national or European constitutional issues.

Integration under 'One Country, Two Systems' - The Case of Mainland China and Hong Kong-

Ever since the handover of the territory in 1997, Hong Kong has had its own unique law and its own economic system and international legal personality, and has not been integrated with Mainland China. The Basic Law guarantees the uniqueness of the Hong Kong SAR until 2047. But close economic ties between Hong Kong and the Mainland will promote closer economic integration. The Basic Law limits only a customs union and the introduction of a single currency, but not the formation of a Free Trade Agreement (hereafter FTA) and monetary union. FTA has already been realized in the form of the Closer Economic Partnership Arrangement (hereafter CEPA). The Hong Kong SAR government, including the bureaucrat as well as the Chief Executive Tung Chee Hwa, was opposed to, and hesitant towards, the formation of a regional trade agreement with the Mainland, but the business community made them to adopt a positive attitude towards the CEPA. It is unclear how much integration can been deepened, but it can be argued that the current policy of the Hong Kong SAR is too supportive of business, and an excessive degree of economic integration may threaten the uniqueness of Hong Kong. But if Hong Kong achieves democracy and enjoys complete autonomy, it will be easy for economic integration to co-exist with the 'One Country, Two Systems' approach, in the interests of the business community and of the citizens of the SAR.

Interindustrial Structure in the Asia-Pacific Region: Growth and Integration, by Using 2000 AIO Table

Over the past 20 years Asian countries have achieved a certain degree of economic growth and at the same time deepened spatial interdependence. In January 2006, IDE completed the 2000 Asian International Input-Output Table, which covers eight major East Asian countries/regions as well as Japan and the United States. Given the dynamic changes in the economies of East Asia, this paper attempts to summarize the characteristics and their patterns of change in industrial structures and trade structures of the countries/regions in the Asia-Pacific region from the three viewpoints of time, space, and industry, by using the AIO table for 1985, 1990, 1995, and 2000.

Public Support for Enlargement: Economic, Cultural, or Normative?

The current research questioned whether public opinion on enlargement can be adequately explained only by economic calculation and cultural/community identity. When the analytical viewpoint was expanded from the conventional individual level to state level, it was revealed that constructivist considerations-such as the democratization and reunification of Europe-play a critical role in pushing forward enlargement. Drawing on the perspective of international relations, this study introduced a synthetic model to analyze public opinion on enlargement in the EU's 15 old member states. The analysis using a Eurobarometer dataset showed that on public support for enlargement, constructivist attitudes held as much sway as cultural/community attitudes. In fact, expectations of democratization were the most important determinant of support for enlargement in the case of Turkey.

Looking Toward the “New Era” Features and Background of the Japan-Thailand Economic Partnership Agreement

This paper examines Thai-Japanese relations through analysis of EPA. There are two questions. The first involves the features of JTEPA as an EPA. By scrutinizing the features of the EPA, we would like to approach the institutional framework of the “new era” which will be brought about by JTEPA. The second question is how did the governments of Thailand and Japan come to conclude JTEPA? By reviewing the focal points of the negotiations, we will describe the background of the formation and aims of JTEPA. Finally, we conclude that JTEPA is a culmination of the existing Thai-Japanese relations, and was built based upon the existing divergence of economic institutions. At the same time it upgrades the bilateral partnership to a framework for multilateral cooperation by considering assistance toward Cambodia, Laos and Myanmar and Vietnam. The author would like to emphasize that JTEPA was designed based on the idea of a further integration of CLMV and Thailand, an original member of ASEAN.

Border Trade and Economic Zones on the North-South Economic Corridor: Focusing on the Connecting Points between the Four Countries

The North-South Economic Corridor (NSEC), the road between Bangkok and Kunming, China, including the Laos route (R3B) and the Myanmar route (R3B), has been developed since 1998 following the GMS program. The region covering Yunnan Province in China, Shan State in Myanmar, Northern Laos and Northern Thailand has historical and ethnic closeness, and is a comparatively poor mountainous, boundary area. In the wake of the development of the NSEC, however, the region has started to show signs of change. Consequently, a review is to be carried out concerning the movement of people and cars, border trade and the situation concerning the progress of border economic zones at the five nodal border points in the four countries, and over three routes: R3A, R3B, and the Mekong River route.

Shock Transmission Mechanism of the Economic Crisis in East Asia : An Application of International Input-Output Analysis

This paper investigates the impacts of the 2008 economic crisis on industries in East Asia. By using the updated Asian international input-output table for 2008, the paper attempts to identify the transmission mechanism and the magnitude of impact of the crisis on industries in East Asia. The analyses reveal that the crisis significantly affected industrial output of the nine East Asian countries. In particular, the countries which are deeply involved in production networks were affected most seriously. Moreover, the analyses show that the impact was transmitted to East Asian industries considerably through the “triangular trade”, in which China imports parts and components from neighboring East Asian countries and then exports final products to the U.S. and EU markets.

Recent trends in Asian integration and Japanese participation

In East Asia, de facto integration is taking place because Free Trade Agreements (FTAs) and Economic Partnership Agreements (EPAs) are flourishing in the region. ASEAN aims to form an ASEAN Economic Community (AEC) by 2015 with the completion of the ASEAN Free Trade Area (AFTA). Surrounding countries have been competing with each other to forge FTAs or EPAs with ASEAN, including China, Japan, Korea, Australia and New Zealand, and India. As a result, ASEAN has become a trading hub in East Asia. Bilateral FTAs/EPAs are also partly in place among 16 countries (ASEAN + 6). These economic ties in trade, services and investment are accelerating this region’s development as the world’s largest production base and biggest consumption market, helping to turn around the global recession in the aftermath of the so-called Lehman Shock. However, some problems also need to be pointed out in the East Asian integration such as the spaghetti bowl effect, severe competition, labor issues, environmental destruction and power struggles.

Chapter 4 A Review of the Availability of and Studies on Spatial Economic Data in Laos

Spatial data are being increasingly used in a wide range of disciplines, a fact that is clearly reflected in the recent trend to add spatial dimensions to the conventional social sciences. Economics is by no means an exception. On one hand, spatial data are indispensable to many branches of economics such as economic geography, new economic geography, or spatial economics. On the other hand, macroeconomic data are becoming available at more and more micro levels, so that academics and analysts take it for granted that they are available not only for an entire country, but also for more detailed levels (e.g. state, province, and even city). The term ‘spatial economics data’ as used in this report refers to any economic data that has spatial information attached. This spatial information can be the coordinates of a location at best or a less precise place name as is used to describe administrative units. Obviously, the latter cannot be used without a map of corresponding administrative units. Maps are therefore indispensible to the analysis of spatial economic data without absolute coordinates. The aim of this report is to review the availability of spatial economic data that pertains specifically to Laos and academic studies conducted on such data up to the present. In regards to the availability of spatial economic data, efforts have been made to identify not only data that has been made available as geographic information systems (GIS) data, but also those with sufficient place labels attached. The rest of the report is organized as follows. Section 2 reviews the maps available for Laos, both in hard copy and editable electronic formats. Section 3 summarizes the spatial economic data available for Laos at the present time, and Section 4 reviews and categorizes the many economic studies utilizing these spatial data. Section 5 give examples of some of the spatial industrial data collected for this research. Section 6 provides a summary of the findings and gives some indication of the direction of the final report due for completion in fiscal 2010.

The Evolving Integration in East Asia - Too many reservations? CEPS Essay No. 5, 29 April 2013

East Asian economic integration is less well known in Europe than is desirable in the EU’s own enlightened self-interest. It is also badly understood, not least because a range of ‘soft’ cultural, historical and political aspects are insufficiently appreciated in Europe. This CEPS Essay offers a deeper personal reflection on the emergence and development of East Asian economic cooperation and market-driven integration. It attempts to address some of the lingering reservations on both sides and to render the reservations in East Asia more intelligible to Europeans.

The Eurasian Economic Union – more political, less economic. OSW Commentary Number 157/20.01.2015

The Eurasian Economic Union is undoubtedly the most comprehensive form of economic integration of the post-Soviet countries since the break-up of the Soviet Union. However, the way in which the integration process has been unfolding, as well as Russia’s aggressive policy over the last year, are indications that the EEU has become primarily a political project, and the importance of its economic aspects has eroded. This has triggered a change in the way Kazakhstan and Belarus treat the EEU. Initially, the two countries viewed integration as an opportunity for the development of genuine economic co-operation. However, Russia’s annexation of Crimea and the conflict in Ukraine have revealed the real significance of the EEU project – as a tool to reinforce Russian influence in the post-Soviet area and isolate the post-Soviet countries from the West and China. While the Kremlin presents the EEU as the Eurasian equivalent of the European Union, the project is in reality an imitation of integration. The reasons for this include the nature of the political systems in the participating countries, which are authoritarian, prone to instrumentalise law, and affected by systemic corruption; the aggressive policy that Russia has been pursuing over the last year; and Russia’s dominant role in defining the shape of the EEU. The EEU appears to be based on forceful integration, and is becoming less and less economically attractive for its member countries other than Russia. Moreover, it is clearly assuming a political dimension that those other member countries perceive as dangerous. For these reasons, its functioning will depend on the power and position of Russia. In the longer term it is likely that the other member states will try to ‘sham’ and delay closer integration within the EEU. This means that if Russia becomes politically and economically weaker, the EEU may evolve into an increasingly dysfunctional organisation – a development that will be reinforced by the low standards of legal culture in its member states and their reluctance to integrate. Should Russia’s power increase, the EEU will become an effective instrument of Russian dominance in the area of the former USSR.

Can the eurozone’s economic governance combine political accountability, legitimacy and effectiveness? EPC Discussion Paper, 1 September 2015

After years of economic crisis, resulting in significant changes to economic governance at EU level, especially for the eurozone, the time has come to consider the longer term political and economic implications of this new situation for the economic integration process. Not only to determine how well the system is likely to function but also what more needs to be done to ensure long-term stability and to provide the EU institutions with sufficient political legitimacy to carry out this new role. This article does not consider abolishing the euro, based on the conviction that introducing the euro created a path dependency that makes trying to unpick the seams of the process extremely costly. While, economically, the exit of one eurozone member state might conceivably be manageable (but costly, especially for that country), the long term political costs might end up unravelling the whole European integration process, with the potential for a bankrupt and politically unstable state outside the euro but still within the EU. However, the status quo situation is still unstable, politically and economically, and needs further policy reforms.

The Eurasian Economic Union: a time of crisis. OSW COMMENTARY NUMBER 195/27.01.2016

The Eurasian Economic Union (EaEU), a project forced through by Russia which links it to Kazakhstan, Belarus, Armenia and Kyrgyzstan, is currently struggling with serious problems. The economic crisis in Russia – mainly caused by the fall in the price of oil on world markets and exacerbated by sanctions imposed by Western countries in connection with the Ukraine conflict – is affecting these uncompetitive post-Soviet economies which are dependent on Russia. This has resulted in increased economic and political tension among the members of the EaEU. From Russia’s point of view, however, the EaEU project remains useful, because it is not economic integration that is Moscow’s priority. The Union remains its most important instrument for implementing the Kremlin’s geo-political objectives, in particular maintaining its sphere of influence and preventing post-Soviet countries from integrating with the West, as well as restricting their rapprochement with China. Moscow is pushing for the EaEU to include new countries, strengthening its tools for political dominance within the Union, and promoting its project on the international stage. However, the future of this project will depend on both the continued determination of the Kremlin, and whether the other countries can change the rules for integration by taking advantage of the current crisis.