Labour Migration, Trade and Investment: From Fragmentation to Coherence

Trade, investment and migration are strongly intertwined, being three key factors in international production. Yet, law and regulation of the three has remained highly fragmented. Trade is regulated by the WTO on the multilateral level, and through preferential trade agreements on the regional and bilateral levels – it is fragmented and complex in its own right. Investment, on the other hand, is mainly regulated through bilateral investment treaties with no strong links to the regulation of trade or migration. And, finally, migration is regulated by a web of different international, regional and bilateral agreements which focus on a variety of different aspects of migration ranging from humanitarian to economic. The problems of institutional fragmentation in international law are well known. There is no organizational forum for coherent strategy-making on the multilateral level covering all three areas. Normative regulations may thus contradict each other. Trade regulation may bring about liberalization of access for service providers, but eventually faces problems in recruiting the best people from abroad. Investors may withdraw investment without being held liable for disruptions to labour and to the livelihood and infrastructure of towns and communities affected by disinvestment. Finally, migration policies do not seem to have a significant impact as long as trade policies and investment policies are not working in a way that is conducive to reducing migration pressure, as trade and investment are simply more powerful on the regulatory level than migration. This chapter addresses the question as to how fragmentation of the three fields could be reme-died and greater coherence between these three areas of factor allocation in international economic relations and law could be achieved. It shows that migration regulation on the international level is lagging behind that on trade and investment. Stronger coordination and consideration of migration in trade and investment policy, and stronger international cooperation in migration, will provide the foundations for a coherent international architecture in the field.

Globalization and the Evolution of the Supply Chain: who gains and who loses?

This paper focuses on two distinct facets of globalization: the decrease in the trade costs of goods and the decline of communication costs between headquarters and production facilities within firms. When the unskilled have about the same wage in the two regions, the decrease of these costs fosters the gradual agglomeration of plants in the core region accommodating the headquarters. By contrast, when the wage gap is significant, the process of integration eventually triggers the re-location of plants into the periphery. In particular, when the process of re-location is driven by falling communication costs, the welfare of all workers living in the core goes down whereas the welfare of those who reside in the periphery rises.

Chairmanship in ASEAN+3:A Shared Rule of Behavior

ASEAN+3 is a cooperative framework among ASEAN members and the countries of Japan, China and Korea. It functions at the senior official, ministerial and summit levels. This article concerns how institutions in ASEAN+3 affect development of the direction and nature of this framework. ASEAN+3 is regarded as a loose framework that has regularized meetings as its main activity but has no organizational settings such as the secretariat. Little institutional analysis has been conducted on the development of this framework. This article introduces 'Chairmanship' as an analytical concept in which the chair or chairing member plays an important role in preparing and managing meetings. 'Chairmanship' is therefore an institution with an organizational element. It is also a shared rule of behavior among member states in that the chair's roles are not explicitly written in documents. Thus, it can be argued that the ASEAN+3 framework has an institution with an organizational element that affects development of its characteristics.

日中経済関係の今後－「対中ODA中止合意」を超えて

日中間では、外交関係が冷え切っていた時にも経済関係は好調を持続していた。実際、両国間貿易、日本の対中直接投資ともに急増し、かつその内容も高度化の様相を示している。当然さまざまな経済摩擦も発生しているが、問題は、摩擦が経済分野に留まらず2005年春の「反日騒動」に見られたように政治問題化したり、逆に政治問題が経済摩擦をもたらす土壌が両国関係に残っていることだろう。本稿ではまず、両国の経済が相互補完関係を深めている現状を確認し、次に経済摩擦の実態と背景を整理する。そして最後にこうした作業を踏まえて、今後の日中経済関係のあり方を探ってみたい。

The Policy Making Process in FTA Negotiations: A Case Study of Japanese Bilateral EPAs

This paper analyzes Japanese bilateral EPA negotiations, focusing on the areas that each country decided were most important, as well as which actors played the most important roles in each set of negotiations. The negotiations with Mexico and Thailand, which tried to increase agricultural exports to Japan through FTAs, will be discussed. Japan, one should note, still seeks to protect its agricultural sector in spite of the spread of liberalization. The Philippines, Thailand and Malaysia’s efforts to improve and compete in developing their automotive industries, in the face of the completion of AFTA in 2010, are also examined. In addition, this paper discusses whether economic cooperation, the essential Japanese strategy in EPA negotiations, alters the negotiation process in any significant way.