Validating India’s Withdrawal from RCEP and Its Regional Future

The Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP) is a forward-looking trade agreement between member economies of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) and its free trade agreement (FTA) partners (AFPs) namely Australia, China, Japan, Korea, and New Zealand (i.e., non-ASEAN signatory economies). It presents an opportunity for participating economies to consolidate rules given overlapping sets of FTAs. Because of stalemates that developed between economies in World Trade Organization negotiations, more regional trading agreements (RTAs) have emerged. As RTAs define trade rules and commitments for all its signatories that are geared towards encouraging free movement of goods and services among member economies, it can deepen economic linkages. The RCEP is an alternative avenue for trade liberalization at the regional level, and a challenger to the Trans-Pacific Partnership in terms of coverage and degree of liberalization. Through RCEP, new opportunities for trade and investment may be harnessed. As a result, the enhanced partnership can contribute to human resource and infrastructure development—which are key to the economic growth and development of the Philippines. Hence, we investigate how the RCEP can deepen the contributions of trade in services in the Philippine economy through the commitments made and limitations imposed. We reviewed and assessed the specific commitments of AFPs joining the RCEP in terms of trade in services, particularly on market access and national treatment. We compared these commitments, evaluated their relevance to the needs of the Philippines, and determined the benefits that the Philippines can reap from RCEP.

This article analyses the institutional designs of online personal data protection, location of computing facilities and cross-border data flows (hereinafter referred to as ‘data-related issues’) in the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP) and the free trade agreements (FTAs) concluded between/among the RCEP Parties (hereinafter referred to as ‘inner-FTAs’). Varied institutional designs of the RCEP’s inner-FTAs suggest that uneven liberalization of data flows and regulatory fragmentation are prominent among the parties, but the inner-FTAs are still rooted in the conventional rationale of embedded liberalization. Comparatively, the RCEP’s institutional design concerning data-related issues diverts from the conventional rationale by formally harmonizing its heterogeneous inner-FTAs: the RCEP partially assimilates its inner-FTAs while making some innovations referring to some old elements of the multilateral trading system. In substance, the RCEP allows the Parties to have more autonomy to cultivate consensus and re-adjust the regional legal order as it reasserts the dominance of domestic regulation. The RCEP may head for two directions: it may either complement the multilateral trading system or grow into a novel regional legal order. The destination largely depends on whether the Parties can reach consensus. During the transitional period, soft law and non-state actors will play important roles in bridging the regulatory divide under the shadow of domestic regulation. Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP), free trade agreements, institution, institutional design, online personal data protection, cross-border data flows, data localization, soft law, non-state actor, new legal order

Asia accounted for 167.1 million tons of global fisheries and aquaculture production, 75 percent of the world’s total. Seafood, especially aquaculture products, is a dominant and growing sector and crucial in the Asia-Pacific region for ensuring global food security, supporting sustainable livelihoods, reducing poverty for small-scale fisheries, and promoting environmental sustainability. However, amidst the current backdrop of the World Trade Organization (WTO)‘s inefficiency and dysfunctional mechanism, coupled with a slowdown in global economic growth and the resurgence of trade unilateralism and protectionism, these challenges have created significant barriers to trade, limiting market access and hindering the sustainable growth of the seafood industry. The implementation of the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP) offers Asia-Pacific economies a promising opportunity to expand trade and stimulate economic growth sustainably. In this study, we aim to provide a comprehensive overview of the potential effects of the RCEP on aquatic products trade among the parties. A key marginal contribution in our study is that we adjusted the existing tariff rates under other FTAs to the same period as tariff rates under RCEP and compared the concession rates between these different FTAs to clearly illustrate the potential tariff effects of RCEP. On the non-tariff side, we analyze specific provisions in the RCEP agreement that could potentially affect aquatic products trade and evaluate their possible impacts. The results showed that, as of 2022, in almost all RCEP parties, the average tariffs under the RCEP agreement are generally higher than those under other existing FTAs, which indicates that the tariff concession efforts under RCEP are limited for most parties. However, due to certain progressiveness compared to other FTAs in terms of its provisions on non-tariff measures, such as rules of origin, sanitary and phytosanitary measures (SPS) regulations, etc., RCEP has the potential to benefit a broader range of countries and products, making market access more convenient and inclusive for the seafood industry.

As a well-established trading bloc, rules of origin (ROO) for ASEAN are expected to benefit member states’ businesses by providing preferential tariff treatment which is the fundamental purpose of trade liberalization. However, these rules are prevented from being applied thoroughly due to the lack of government trust in certain member states in business actors and targets of duty collection for customs authorities. The self-certification by business actors has proven to be a solution to the problem but ASEAN A-X Formula may be counterproductive to ROO, eliminating the foundation of regionalization and potentially causing trade deflection. The First Protocol of ASEAN Trade in Goods Agreement (ATIGA) amendment simplifies the procedure of operational certification for ROO. Furthermore, the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP) as a significant trading pact including ASEAN members and five major trading partners has adopted proof of origin allowing self-certification applied earlier in the European Union and NAFTA. Alternative solutions should also be explored since distrust and national financial interests have not been resolved. Recently, blockchain embedded with smart contracts has been applied in various business sectors which should be further applied in free trade area (FTA) applications. Blockchain’s characteristics as an immutable ledger originating from the hashing process and cryptography would address the problem of ASEAN ROO application. Therefore, this study aimed to analyze the effectiveness of ROO within ASEAN and RCEP. A literature review and doctrinal study methodology were applied in this analysis.

Purpose - This research aims to enhance the understanding of Asia’s economic relationships and international economic governance, with a focus on the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP). Specifically, this paper seeks to provide recommendations for South Korea’s participation and effective utilization in RCEP within the Asian region. Also this study suggests the significance of the Rule of Origin in Free Trade Agreements (FTAs), and highlights the importance of a cumulative certificate of origin, which refers to a document that verifies the cumulative origin of goods in international trade, applicable to 15 RCEP countries, as compared to existing bilateral FTAs.
 Design/Methodology/Approach - This paper reviews previous studies related to ASEAN and RCEP, discussing the findings and key issues addressed in earlier research efforts. News articles and statistics either of political conflicts or economic implications are utilized in this context.
 Findings - Currently, the global economic governance system, centered around the World Trade Organization (WTO), is facing challenges due to economic and trade friction between major powers, exacerbated by the COVID-19 pandemic. Regional economic integration bodies like RCEP are taking on a new central role in international trade rules.
 Research Implications - This research implies that the economic relations in the Asia-Pacific region have been steadily strengthening, and this contributes to maintaining stability through economic interdependence even in the presence of political conflict, and there is a room for South Korea to contribute.

Whether trade liberalization resulting from mega free trade agreements, such as the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP), will have an impact on the environment is the subject of ongoing debate and remains an empirical matter. In this paper, we contribute to the debate on the relation between trade and the environment by considering the case of the RCEP and examining whether it will increase or decrease greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. We measure the impact of the RCEP on GHG emissions using the Global Trade Analysis Project (GTAP) model and the GTAP CO2 and non-CO2 emissions databases. Our results suggest that the RCEP is likely to “increase” the total amount of GHG emissions in the 16 RCEP members and the world.

INTRODUCTION In the past decades, the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) has evolved rapidly to become one of the key emerging regional institutions in the world. As one of its key agendas, ASEAN has promoted progressive regional integration alongside the reduction of the intra-regional development gap. The process of ASEAN integration has been wide-ranging and inclusive, leading to significant benefits to members, even the less-developed ones such as Cambodia, Lao PDR, Myanmar, and Vietnam (CLMV). Although the “CLMV growth story is one ASEAN success story with lessons … on the potential benefits of economic integration” (ERIA 2014), maintaining the momentum for further improvement is essential. The idea of the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP) is not new. The initiative actually represents a continuation of the “Concentric Circle Strategy”, which gradually builds on ASEAN integration in the form of the ASEAN Economic Community (AEC) to be created by 2015 and ASEAN-plus integration with “ASEAN centrality”. The RCEP was initiated by ASEAN itself in 2011 with the Association's Framework for RCEP. In 2012, leaders of all sixteen economies — including ASEAN members, China, Japan, Korea, Australia, New Zealand, and India — supported and agreed to launch the RCEP negotiations. Fundamentally, the RCEP resembles the various efforts around the region for broader regional integration, such as the East Asian Free Trade Area (EAFTA) initiative by China and the Comprehensive Economic Partnership in East Asia (CEPEA) proposal by Japan. Since the RCEP originates from ASEAN's aspirations, a couple of natural questions arise. The first is whether the RCEP arrangement can be really effective for sustaining growth and narrowing the development gap in the CLMV countries. The second question is whether the RCEP can benefit from the AEC framework. In answering these questions, one may need to start by identifying their possible impacts on these member economies. Complications introduced by the new context of Asia-Pacific integration — i.e., the ongoing Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) negotiations — should also be considered carefully even though not all the CLMV countries participate directly in the process. These questions and issues constitute the main analytical focus of this chapter. The remainder of the chapter is structured as follows. Section 2 summarizes the main possible impacts of the RCEP on the CLMV countries.

Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) centrality was one of the biggest motivations for ASEAN's proposal of the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP) in 2011. In order to gain both politically and economically, ASEAN should play proactive roles in the RCEP negotiation as the driver of substance. ASEAN has already started exercising its influence over the substances of ASEAN + 1 free trade agreements (FTAs). In order to further strengthen its leadership in the RCEP, ASEAN should utilise the ASEAN Economic Community (AEC) as the model for RCEP. AEC has achieved a much deeper level of integration than the existing ASEAN + 1 FTAs by setting high ambitions with processes to induce reform initiatives of member states. By using familiar AEC measures, ASEAN can create a single and common position despite the large development gaps among its member states. If modelled after AEC, the RCEP will enforce ASEAN's reform efforts.

East Asia was slow in establishing free trade agreements (FTAs) compared to other parts of the world, where FTAs began to be actively formed in the late 1980s. Despite a slow start, East Asia quickly caught up with other regions in the FTA race. The Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) has been a main player in the FTA race in East Asia, as ASEAN enacted ASEAN Free Trade Area as early as 1993 and then in the 2000s enacted five ASEAN+1 FTAs, separately with China, Japan, Korea, India, Australia and New Zealand. Economic as well as non-economic motives are found behind active establishment of FTAs by East Asian countries. Talks about establishing a region-wide FTA began in the early 2000s, but region-wide FTAs have not yet been formed. Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) covering 12 East Asian as well as Pacific countries was signed, but the US withdrawal from the TPP terminated the TPP process. Instead of the TPP, TPP11 or Comprehensive and Progressive Trans-Pacific Partnership (CPTPP) without the USA was successfully negotiated and signed. Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP) involving 16 East Asian countries has been under negotiation but facing difficulty in reaching an agreement because of different views on various issues including market access among the negotiating members. Faced with growing protectionism in the world, it is important for RCEP and CPTPP to be enacted to keep the momentum toward trade liberalization. To successfully conclude the negotiations, compromise and strong political will of the leaders are needed. The paper also found that FTAs have contributed to promote trade between and among FTA members, contributing to the promotion of regional economic integration.

The Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP) agreement was signed in 2020 as a giant free trade agreement signed by 15 countries, including China. In this context, the RCEP agreement is the world's largest free trade agreement in terms of GDP and trade volume. In this study, commercial relations between RCEP countries between 2012 (the year when negotiations of the RCEP agreement began) and 2021 were examined using social network analysis. In the analyses, export values of RCEP countries to each other were used and the data were obtained from Trade Map. In the study, social network analyzes for the years 2012, 2015, 2018 and 2021 were analyzed using the Ucinet program, while trade networks were visualized with the Gephi program. For social network analyses, basic ego network indicators, degree centrality values, hub and authority centrality values and eigenvector values were calculated. As a result of the analysis, it is seen that the hub and authority country in trade between RCEP countries is China for all four years (2012, 2015, 2018 and 2021). On the other hand, it has been determined that China's most important trade partners are Japan and South Korea. Additionally, the development in Vietnam's trade level during this period is remarkable.

India’s decision to pull out from the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP) was a surprise to analysts as RCEP is currently the most significant Free Trade Agreement (FTA). This paper examines the rationality of India’s decision. We used gravity set-up and Poisson Pseudo Maximum Likelihood (PPML) estimator to analyse India’s export and import data for nine sectors with 45 trading partners for the period 2001-2021. The results show that India’s export is inelastic to tariff while import to India is elastic to tariff. Export remains positive despite tariff on Indian export while import declines with tariff imposed by India. This rationalizes India’s decision to pull out from RCEP. At the sectoral level, tariff elimination reduces India’s export of vegetables, food, minerals and chemicals, plastics and plastics goods. However, tariff elimination increases India’s export of animal and animal food, leather, wood and wood products, textiles and foot ware. Tariff elimination increases import of vegetable, food stuffs, chemicals, plastic and leather to India. The sectoral results show that India has reason to doubt its gain from joining RCEP as the sectoral results are mixed and the overall gain might not be in favour of India.

Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP): Progress and Challenges

Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP) is a regional multilateral free trade agreement between the Asia-Pacific nations of China, Japan, South Korea, Malaysia, Singapore, Indonesia, Thailand, Cambodia, Brunei, Laos, the Philippines, Myanmar, Vietnam, Australia and New Zealand. With the signed of RCEP among these fifteen countries, a world's largest trading bloc which covering nearly a third of the global economy is formed. Furthermore, the involvement of almost all the major East Asia trading nations has make RCEP significant in terms of its sheer scale. As an economic cooperation arrangement, RCEP will spur the partners continuing to deepen the economic integration between their economies. The question is being asked more and more, especially since the negotiations for the RCEP was successfully concluded in 15 Nov 2020, is RCEP really about trade or is it more concerned with the world's geopolitical climate? This paper focuses on geopolitical considerations associated with Malaysia's membership of RCEP and the economic implications on Malaysia SMEs. Malaysia stands to benefit, but must move forward positively in both its domestic organization and external negotiations to optimize its gains.

The Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership ( RCEP ) is a vital framework in furthering regional and global economic integration amidst heightened protectionism and anti-globalisation sentiments. The paper tries to discern how the RCEP , as one of the largest trade agreements in the world, serves to stimulate economic integration within the Asia-Pacific area through trade liberalisation, encouraging investment flows, and integrating regional supply chains. The paper further studies the possibility of the RCEP serving as a global trade agreement model through regulatory harmonisation, lowering trade barriers, and fostering sustainable economic practices. The paper also considers the implications of the RCEP on small and medium-sized enterprises ( SME s) and local industries to demonstrate how it supports inclusive growth and regional economic resilience. In addition, the paper offers critical perspectives and comparative analysis, highlighting the RCEP ’s limited commitments on labour and environmental standards relative to agreements like the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership ( CPTPP ) and the European Union ( EU ) Single Market. Ultimately, the RCEP represents a pragmatic step toward economic integration, but its long-term significance will depend on whether it evolves into a platform that balances economic ambition with stronger social, environmental, and institutional commitments.

Constructing and Multilateralizing the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership: An Asian Perspective