This article clarifies the various aspect of “The Belt and Road” Initiative (BRI), which is generally recognized as the blueprint of enormous economic zone concept under China’s strong leadership. Although China affirms BRI is an initiative for cooperation, guided by openness, win-win success, but it is hard to understand its real intention and policy priority from outside.
After obtaining the membership of World Trade Organization (WTO), China aggressively started to promote Free Trade Agreement (FTA) policy. Because bilateral negotiations are advantageous to China against the backdrop of overwhelming market power. And It seems China intends to achieve the complex objectives, including diplomatic purposes rather than economic benefits.
BRI was proposed by President Xi Jinping, in autumn 2013, while negotiations for the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) were in progress on the other side. So, there is also a view that BRI was a countermeasure for TPP. It is sure China is very cautious not to be excluded from establishing the world trade regulations. However, BRI differs completely from economic partnership, and China’s countermeasure for TPP is Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP).
Although partner countries can achieve improvement of infrastructures and realize economic development through China’s huge assistance or investment, it becomes impossible to damage a stable relationship with China automatically. Furthermore, international order could be strongly influenced by China’s power.
Meanwhile, TPP12 was suspended by US new President, China has been released from the strong pressure of establishing the trade rules. Therefore, main developed countries, such as Japan, should encourage China to join making a high level of international rules.
China’s outward foreign direct investment (OFDI) has been growing rapidly in the last decade. Since 2014, China has emerged as the second-largest country for OFDI in the world. Empirical investigation of the determinants of OFDI is very important for the formulation of OFDI policies, because OFDI brings various benefits to both investing countries and recipient countries. On the one hand, FDI transfers not only financial resources but also technology and managerial know-how from investing country to recipient country. On the other hand, for investment country, FDI can enable them to use their resources efficiently.
In the light of important contributions that OFDI delivers to both investing and recipient countries, it is useful to discern the factors that would promote China’s OFDI. However, few papers have studied the determinants of China’s OFDI. By using firm-level OFDI data covering the period 2005–2015, this paper attempts to fill this gap by investigating the determinants of China’s ODI.
This paper focus on how the destinations’ institutional environment affects China’s OFDI location choice. We apply principal component analysis to six dimensions of world governance indicators, and use the first principal component as an institutional environment proxy. As the method of empirical analysis, this paper uses the conditional logit model. We also use the probit model and logit model to do the robustness checks. The results do not show a significant relationship between the destinations’ institutional environment and China’s OFDI. However, the results show a significant relationship between OFDI by Chinese State-Owned Enterprises and the destinations’ institutional environment.
We find that sizable local market, low-wage labor, and abundance of natural resources in the recipient countries are important factors that attract Chinese firms’ OFDI. Furthermore, the results show that the accumulation of Chinese enterprises in recipient countries play an important role on attracting China’s OFDI. This paper also investigates the impacts of RMB revaluation and it’s volatility on China’s OFDI. However, the results do not show significant relationships.
East Asia has continued high growth within a framework of world economy for over half a century. The major driving force behind growth and integration is foreign direct investment (FDI) by multinational corporations of advanced economies. It has promoted economic integration in East Asia by means of the generating international production networks or, in other words, production process division of labor. At the same time, in East Asia there has emerged middle class, and transformed the region from ‘world factory’ to ‘world market’. East Asia has also changed its growth mechanism during this century, which is reflected in the altering of the regional major emerging economies from ‘Newly Industrializing Economies (NIEs) between 1960s and 1980s to BRICs. And, China stands on top of emerging economies.
In this article, author traces East Asia’s miracle growth, its factors and mechanisms, and discusses China’s “One Belt One Road” Initiative and its meanings for both Asia and the world economy as a whole.
The aim of this paper is to raise a new concept; namely, the “China Rise Syndrome”, which is based on the concentric spreading characteristics for analyzing the phenomena of the conflicts in four different levels due to the rise of China.
The paper emphasizes the steadfast rejection of democratization under the circumstances of rapid growth of power is the origin of the syndrome. Before the rise of China, the negative influence exercised by the authoritarian CCP was only limited in mainland China. However, it has been spreading quickly to other territories outside the country while corresponding with the growth of China’s power; firstly, Hong Kong; secondly, Taiwan; thirdly, the neighboring countries with which China has sovereignty disputes over the nearby islands, and lastly, the rest of the world. In this period, CCP‘s China backed by her exponential growth of political, economic and military power tends to press severely her ideology against the challenges from the outside world, thus inducing varied conflicts.
There are three major findings in this paper:
Firstly, Hong Kong and Taiwan, China’s “closest peripheries”, experience interferences and threats from China much more directly and fiercely than others, and on the other hand, were also driven to the most intense rebellions.
Secondly, although China claims her territorial sovereignty on both Hong Kong and Taiwan simultaneously, the speed of Chinization in Hong Kong is faster than Taiwan which is still cherishing her independence from China.
Thirdly, with the Chinization phenomena in Hong Kong and Taiwan and the anti-democracy virus of China Rise running alongside, the people’s local identity and the centrifugal force away from China in both societies have been staying at the strongest in history.
This paper lays stress upon the phenomena of Chinization and the rebellions against China in both Hong Kong and Taiwan are the paramount observation points in understanding how the Chinese Value, the Chinese Model, and the Chinese System in the era of China Rise spread externally, and how do they induce misgivings, tension, threats, panic and collision with the outside world and how do they influence the world order.
This paper tries to shed more light on the relations between the European Union (EU) and Asia in these two decades from the middle of 1990’s to today. Two regions have been undergoing significant changes internally, and at the same time heavily strengthening relations between them.
There are three levels of relations between EU and Asia to be examined due to the division of the competence between the EU and the Member States.
The first is a multilateral forum called Asia-Europe Meeting (ASEM), born in 1996 at the first summit at Bangkok and will celebrate 20 years anniversary in 2016 at Ulaanbaatar. The one of the visible changes of the ASEM is the enlargement of its members. With enlargement of members from 26 in 1996 to 53 in 2014, the EU is no longer Europe, and the ASEM has become a forum for real region-to-region dialogue and cooperation.
The second is bilateral relations between the EU and the members of Asia grouping of ASEM just as the EU・Japan relations. As the EU had changed its policy from world trade round to bilateral FTAs in October 1996, more emphasis have been on bilateral FTAs and mega FTAs.
The third is traditional bilateral relations of the Member States of the EU and the members of the Asian grouping of the ASEM such as Anglo・Chinese relations. To conclude trade agreement is matter of the power of the EU but the Member States are able to make trade promotions separately. Especially China matters for European countries as rush of the bilateral summit meetings in Autumn 2015 vividly showed.
By analysing these complicated multi-layer relations between the Europe and Asia, this paper is to examine how both groupings mean to each other.