Pub Date : 2023-02-24DOI: 10.1007/s10308-023-00668-8
Qi Haixia
China’s rise, along with deepening Sino-European economic relations, seems to have a strong impact on the diplomatic outlook of actors in Europe. An interesting phenomenon is that, while several major European states have become strategic partners of China, they remain US allies at the same time. In the context of trade tensions and a possible decoupling between China and the USA, what are the diplomatic effects of the close economic relations between Europe and China? To find the answer, this study builds models on the functions of trade and partnerships with China with respect to voting choice of China’s partners, including those in Europe, in the United Nations General Assembly (UNGA). After making a statistical analysis and presenting detailed analysis on France, Germany, the UK, and Poland, this paper finds that the close economic and trade ties do indeed enhance voting similarity between China and major states in Europe in the UNGA.
{"title":"China’s partners or US allies: the dual status of major European states and their voting behaviour in the UNGA","authors":"Qi Haixia","doi":"10.1007/s10308-023-00668-8","DOIUrl":"10.1007/s10308-023-00668-8","url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>China’s rise, along with deepening Sino-European economic relations, seems to have a strong impact on the diplomatic outlook of actors in Europe. An interesting phenomenon is that, while several major European states have become strategic partners of China, they remain US allies at the same time. In the context of trade tensions and a possible decoupling between China and the USA, what are the diplomatic effects of the close economic relations between Europe and China? To find the answer, this study builds models on the functions of trade and partnerships with China with respect to voting choice of China’s partners, including those in Europe, in the United Nations General Assembly (UNGA). After making a statistical analysis and presenting detailed analysis on France, Germany, the UK, and Poland, this paper finds that the close economic and trade ties do indeed enhance voting similarity between China and major states in Europe in the UNGA.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":45680,"journal":{"name":"Asia Europe Journal","volume":"21 2","pages":"225 - 250"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6,"publicationDate":"2023-02-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"50044868","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-02-21DOI: 10.1007/s10308-023-00667-9
Herman Voogsgeerd
In the period between 2015 and 2020, we have witnessed an increase in ‘system friction’ in the trade and investment relations between the EU and the People’s Republic of China (PRC). This paper focuses on the meaning of this notion of ‘system friction’, originally coined by Sylvia Ostry and on how the EU and especially the European Commission reacted to this friction. This notion might present an alternative to the notion of ‘system rivalry’. The result of system friction in the relation between the EU and the PRC had been a convergence towards more trade defensive moves. A form of managed trade with help of a ratified Investment treaty between the two sides might be a potential outcome.
{"title":"‘System friction’ in China-EU economic relations and the reaction of the EU","authors":"Herman Voogsgeerd","doi":"10.1007/s10308-023-00667-9","DOIUrl":"10.1007/s10308-023-00667-9","url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>In the period between 2015 and 2020, we have witnessed an increase in ‘system friction’ in the trade and investment relations between the EU and the People’s Republic of China (PRC). This paper focuses on the meaning of this notion of ‘system friction’, originally coined by Sylvia Ostry and on how the EU and especially the European Commission reacted to this friction. This notion might present an alternative to the notion of ‘system rivalry’. The result of system friction in the relation between the EU and the PRC had been a convergence towards more trade defensive moves. A form of managed trade with help of a ratified Investment treaty between the two sides might be a potential outcome.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":45680,"journal":{"name":"Asia Europe Journal","volume":"21 2","pages":"209 - 223"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6,"publicationDate":"2023-02-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s10308-023-00667-9.pdf","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"9502932","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-02-17DOI: 10.1007/s10308-023-00669-7
Michal Kolmaš
The Visegrad Group format — coordinated policy forum for Czechia, Slovakia, Poland and Hungary — has been dubbed as a significant policy tool that advocates the interests and builds synergies among the four partners. The “Visegrad Four + ” format, which coordinates foreign relations of these four countries, has been narrated as the key foreign policy venue of the V4, and the V4 + Japan is often understood as the key partnership within this format. Due to the recently growing Chinese influence in Central and Eastern Europe, and the impacts of the war in Ukraine in 2022, many have come to expect the coordination to strengthen and ramify. This article argues, however, that the V4 + Japan platform represents only a marginal policy forum and is unlikely to gain any significant political momentum in the foreseeable future. Basing the analysis on a set of interviews with the V4 and Japanese policymakers, the paper posits three reasons that have prevented the deepening of the V4 + Japan coordination: (i) there are significant limits to socialization in the group, (ii) there are diverse threat perceptions among V4 members, and (iii) there is little interest in deepening economic coordination vis-a-vis third parties. These findings question the viability of foreign policy coordination among the Visegrad Group members, and highlight the impediments for the expansion of V4 + Japan cooperation.
{"title":"Diverging perceptions of the “Visegrad Four + ” format and the limits of the V4 + Japan cooperation","authors":"Michal Kolmaš","doi":"10.1007/s10308-023-00669-7","DOIUrl":"10.1007/s10308-023-00669-7","url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>The Visegrad Group format — coordinated policy forum for Czechia, Slovakia, Poland and Hungary — has been dubbed as a significant policy tool that advocates the interests and builds synergies among the four partners. The “Visegrad Four + ” format, which coordinates foreign relations of these four countries, has been narrated as the key foreign policy venue of the V4, and the V4 + Japan is often understood as the key partnership within this format. Due to the recently growing Chinese influence in Central and Eastern Europe, and the impacts of the war in Ukraine in 2022, many have come to expect the coordination to strengthen and ramify. This article argues, however, that the V4 + Japan platform represents only a marginal policy forum and is unlikely to gain any significant political momentum in the foreseeable future. Basing the analysis on a set of interviews with the V4 and Japanese policymakers, the paper posits three reasons that have prevented the deepening of the V4 + Japan coordination: (i) there are significant limits to socialization in the group, (ii) there are diverse threat perceptions among V4 members, and (iii) there is little interest in deepening economic coordination vis-a-vis third parties. These findings question the viability of foreign policy coordination among the Visegrad Group members, and highlight the impediments for the expansion of V4 + Japan cooperation.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":45680,"journal":{"name":"Asia Europe Journal","volume":"21 1","pages":"101 - 116"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6,"publicationDate":"2023-02-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s10308-023-00669-7.pdf","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"10800029","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-02-02DOI: 10.1007/s10308-023-00664-y
Sirma Altun, Ceren Ergenc
As two major powers that are willing to lead the design and evolution of the global climate regime, the EU and China have maintained a dialogue on climate change and biodiversity while clashing over other economic and political issues. This paper investigates EU-China relations in the global climate regime by briefly analysing three main areas that are key for the global green transition: standardization, green taxonomy, and the renewables sector. The paper claims that EU-China relations in the global climate regime develop within the dialectical collaboration-competition nexus, showing moments of consensus as well as contention between the two major powers in the three selected cases.
{"title":"The EU and China in the global climate regime: a dialectical collaboration-competition relationship","authors":"Sirma Altun, Ceren Ergenc","doi":"10.1007/s10308-023-00664-y","DOIUrl":"10.1007/s10308-023-00664-y","url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>As two major powers that are willing to lead the design and evolution of the global climate regime, the EU and China have maintained a dialogue on climate change and biodiversity while clashing over other economic and political issues. This paper investigates EU-China relations in the global climate regime by briefly analysing three main areas that are key for the global green transition: standardization, green taxonomy, and the renewables sector. The paper claims that EU-China relations in the global climate regime develop within the <i>dialectical collaboration-competition nexus</i>, showing moments of consensus as well as contention between the two major powers in the three selected cases.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":45680,"journal":{"name":"Asia Europe Journal","volume":"21 3","pages":"437 - 457"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6,"publicationDate":"2023-02-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"50002982","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-01-31DOI: 10.1007/s10308-023-00665-x
Radhika Lakshminarayanan, Tigran Yepremyan
Abstract
In the twenty-first century, changing global power equations are impacting the dynamics of foreign and security policy choices of small states, as they seek to develop alliances and partnerships to offset their geopolitical and geo-economic vulnerabilities. In this context, Armenia’s security orientation is largely seen as consistently intertwined with Russia even after independence. Armenia has also attempted to develop a “normative alliance” with the European Union, relying mostly on its special relations with France. In recent years, various factors including domestic politics, deficit of security, and Russian dominance have led to a gradual re-orientation in the Armenian alliance trajectory towards more multilateral partnerships indicating a tendency towards “hedging” alliances. Conceptualizing from a theoretical foundation relating to small-state alliance options, this paper presents a case for Armenia-India strategic partnerships, given the historical and cultural ties between the two nations and the rapid growth of India as an emergent giant in the multipolar world. In this context of strategic analysis, the Georgia-Armenia-Iran corridor has a potential of vital geo-economic and geopolitical axis for India as well as for Russia, the EU, and China. The position of Armenia with its “both… and” integration approach, approximation with the EU, and strategic partnership with Russia has proved to be insufficient in security issues; however, the friendly disposition of a rising power, such as India, leaves Armenia with the capacity to diversify its security as a local civilizational and geo-economic connector.
{"title":"Armenia-India partnership: geopolitical and geo-economic implications in the Eurasian context","authors":"Radhika Lakshminarayanan, Tigran Yepremyan","doi":"10.1007/s10308-023-00665-x","DOIUrl":"10.1007/s10308-023-00665-x","url":null,"abstract":"<div><h2>Abstract\u0000</h2><div><p>In the twenty-first century, changing global power equations are impacting the dynamics of foreign and security policy choices of small states, as they seek to develop alliances and partnerships to offset their geopolitical and geo-economic vulnerabilities. In this context, Armenia’s security orientation is largely seen as consistently intertwined with Russia even after independence. Armenia has also attempted to develop a “normative alliance” with the European Union, relying mostly on its special relations with France. In recent years, various factors including domestic politics, deficit of security, and Russian dominance have led to a gradual re-orientation in the Armenian alliance trajectory towards more multilateral partnerships indicating a tendency towards “hedging” alliances. Conceptualizing from a theoretical foundation relating to small-state alliance options, this paper presents a case for Armenia-India strategic partnerships, given the historical and cultural ties between the two nations and the rapid growth of India as an emergent giant in the multipolar world. In this context of strategic analysis, the Georgia-Armenia-Iran corridor has a potential of vital geo-economic and geopolitical axis for India as well as for Russia, the EU, and China. The position of Armenia with its “both… and” integration approach, approximation with the EU, and strategic partnership with Russia has proved to be insufficient in security issues; however, the friendly disposition of a rising power, such as India, leaves Armenia with the capacity to diversify its security as a local civilizational and geo-economic connector.</p></div></div>","PeriodicalId":45680,"journal":{"name":"Asia Europe Journal","volume":"21 1","pages":"81 - 100"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6,"publicationDate":"2023-01-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"50056950","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-01-28DOI: 10.1007/s10308-023-00663-z
Mathias Lund Larsen
To address environmental problems, efforts to green financial systems are proliferating across the globe. However, green finance policy approaches differ substantially and in ways left unexplained in current literature. Focusing on the EU and China as the most active and influential in green finance, the paper provides a comparative analysis and conceptualization of their approaches. The analysis is based on the dissection of policy documents, a review of stakeholder statements and articles, and insights from semi-structured interviews and participant observation. The paper finds that in terms of similar characteristics, both parties seek inclusive expertise input, establish thematic committees, and initiate green finance efforts through financial system-wide guidelines. In terms of different characteristics, the paper finds that through a consultation-based, transparent, and limited mandate approach, the EU is characterized by longer time horizons and organic growth. This can be contrasted with the Chinese technocratic, closed-door, and non-limited mandate approach, characterized by rapid rollout and command-and-control growth. These findings can be conceptualized as a bottom-up market-facilitating approach in the EU and a top-down market-steering approach in China. The different approaches help explain current difficulties in coordination between the EU and China and imply that cooperation is only possible through compatibility rather than harmonization. The findings show that different governance models can actively use the state to pursue sustainable development, and second that such an active state can function in very different ways towards the same goals.
{"title":"Bottom-up market-facilitation and top-down market-steering: comparing and conceptualizing green finance approaches in the EU and China","authors":"Mathias Lund Larsen","doi":"10.1007/s10308-023-00663-z","DOIUrl":"10.1007/s10308-023-00663-z","url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>To address environmental problems, efforts to green financial systems are proliferating across the globe. However, green finance policy approaches differ substantially and in ways left unexplained in current literature. Focusing on the EU and China as the most active and influential in green finance, the paper provides a comparative analysis and conceptualization of their approaches. The analysis is based on the dissection of policy documents, a review of stakeholder statements and articles, and insights from semi-structured interviews and participant observation. The paper finds that in terms of similar characteristics, both parties seek inclusive expertise input, establish thematic committees, and initiate green finance efforts through financial system-wide guidelines. In terms of different characteristics, the paper finds that through a consultation-based, transparent, and limited mandate approach, the EU is characterized by longer time horizons and organic growth. This can be contrasted with the Chinese technocratic, closed-door, and non-limited mandate approach, characterized by rapid rollout and command-and-control growth. These findings can be conceptualized as a <i>bottom-up market-facilitating</i> approach in the EU and a <i>top-down market-steering</i> approach in China. The different approaches help explain current difficulties in coordination between the EU and China and imply that cooperation is only possible through compatibility rather than harmonization. The findings show that different governance models can actively use the state to pursue sustainable development, and second that such an active state can function in very different ways towards the same goals.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":45680,"journal":{"name":"Asia Europe Journal","volume":"21 1","pages":"61 - 80"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6,"publicationDate":"2023-01-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s10308-023-00663-z.pdf","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"10796490","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-01-23DOI: 10.1007/s10308-023-00662-0
Fangxing Qin, Jeremy Garlick, Siyang Liu
After the introduction of the 16 + 1 cooperation platform in Central and Eastern Europe (CEE) in 2012, bilateral relations between China and Czechia warmed up in the period 2015–2017, most notably when they became strategic partners in 2016. However, relations declined thereafter due to factors such as China’s underwhelming investment programme, the Czech focus on security and human rights, and some Czech politicians’ engagement with Taiwan. This article analyses the shortcomings inherent in Chinese and Czech interpretations of their partner’s approaches to the relationship. The analysis demonstrates that several factors have undermined China’s efforts to build solid bilateral relations. Above all, China’s misunderstanding of the ways in which the Czech political system and culture influence the formulation of Czech policy towards China, combined with underwhelming economic results, have undermined China’s diplomatic efforts. At the same time, the fragmentation of Czech political power structures means that it is difficult for Czechia to form a stable consensus on China policy. In addition, lack of understanding of China’s history and the contemporary context of its foreign policy means that Czech views on China have become politicised and polarised. These problems have seriously affected the mutual trust and development of relations between the two countries, in the same way as they have impacted relations between China and other CEE countries, most notably Lithuania.
{"title":"A meteoric strategic partnership? The still long march of mutual understanding and trust between China and the Czech Republic","authors":"Fangxing Qin, Jeremy Garlick, Siyang Liu","doi":"10.1007/s10308-023-00662-0","DOIUrl":"10.1007/s10308-023-00662-0","url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>After the introduction of the 16 + 1 cooperation platform in Central and Eastern Europe (CEE) in 2012, bilateral relations between China and Czechia warmed up in the period 2015–2017, most notably when they became strategic partners in 2016. However, relations declined thereafter due to factors such as China’s underwhelming investment programme, the Czech focus on security and human rights, and some Czech politicians’ engagement with Taiwan. This article analyses the shortcomings inherent in Chinese and Czech interpretations of their partner’s approaches to the relationship. The analysis demonstrates that several factors have undermined China’s efforts to build solid bilateral relations. Above all, China’s misunderstanding of the ways in which the Czech political system and culture influence the formulation of Czech policy towards China, combined with underwhelming economic results, have undermined China’s diplomatic efforts. At the same time, the fragmentation of Czech political power structures means that it is difficult for Czechia to form a stable consensus on China policy. In addition, lack of understanding of China’s history and the contemporary context of its foreign policy means that Czech views on China have become politicised and polarised. These problems have seriously affected the mutual trust and development of relations between the two countries, in the same way as they have impacted relations between China and other CEE countries, most notably Lithuania.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":45680,"journal":{"name":"Asia Europe Journal","volume":"21 1","pages":"43 - 59"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6,"publicationDate":"2023-01-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"50043964","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-01-21DOI: 10.1007/s10308-023-00658-w
Suetyi LAI
Abstract
Economic relationship has been the cornerstone of the China-EU relation as well as the China-EU comprehensive strategic partnership which was established in 2003. On the other side of the coin, economic relations have been main sources of disputes between China and the EU since the 2005–2006 textile disputes. This paper examines their mutual perceptions in this field as one way of explaining the development of the bilateral relationship, supported by substantial empirical data. It is found that the successful economic development of China has generated different perceptions between the EU and China. With the difference in the development level reducing, the EU side was concerned more about the rise of China, while the Chinese side emphasised more the relative decline of the EU’s economic might.
{"title":"Not seeing eye to eye: perception of the China-EU economic relationship","authors":"Suetyi LAI","doi":"10.1007/s10308-023-00658-w","DOIUrl":"10.1007/s10308-023-00658-w","url":null,"abstract":"<div><h2>Abstract\u0000</h2><div><p>Economic relationship has been the cornerstone of the China-EU relation as well as the China-EU comprehensive strategic partnership which was established in 2003. On the other side of the coin, economic relations have been main sources of disputes between China and the EU since the 2005–2006 textile disputes. This paper examines their mutual perceptions in this field as one way of explaining the development of the bilateral relationship, supported by substantial empirical data. It is found that the successful economic development of China has generated different perceptions between the EU and China. With the difference in the development level reducing, the EU side was concerned more about the rise of China, while the Chinese side emphasised more the relative decline of the EU’s economic might.</p></div></div>","PeriodicalId":45680,"journal":{"name":"Asia Europe Journal","volume":"21 2","pages":"137 - 154"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6,"publicationDate":"2023-01-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"50098319","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-01-19DOI: 10.1007/s10308-023-00661-1
Amadeo Navarro Zapata, María Arrazola, José de Hevia
This article analyses trade flows EU-ASEAN, focusing on export performance and technological intensity, covering the years 2004–2016. The aim of this paper is to analyse to what extent, a further trade integration between the EU and ASEAN, could generate business opportunities for countries in both trading blocs. This analysis could serve as a basis for designing and implementing effective policies and strategies by policymakers in the face of a deepening EU-ASEAN trade integration. Therefore, a detailed analysis of the degree of complementarity of trade patterns, the weight of intra-industry trade, and the revealed comparative advantages allows us to outline some of those challenges and opportunities. Results suggest that intra-industry trade is moderate, mainly focused on few manufactures, accounting for a low value of total trade flows between the two blocs, and concentrated in a few countries. The Lafay index analysis suggests that the EU and ASEAN are natural partners regarding the technological patterns of the revealed comparative advantages; therefore, a deepening in trade integration between this trading blocs could allow to exploit those comparative advantages.
{"title":"Technological intensity in manufacturing trade between ASEAN and the EU: challenges and opportunities","authors":"Amadeo Navarro Zapata, María Arrazola, José de Hevia","doi":"10.1007/s10308-023-00661-1","DOIUrl":"10.1007/s10308-023-00661-1","url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>This article analyses trade flows EU-ASEAN, focusing on export performance and technological intensity, covering the years 2004–2016. The aim of this paper is to analyse to what extent, a further trade integration between the EU and ASEAN, could generate business opportunities for countries in both trading blocs. This analysis could serve as a basis for designing and implementing effective policies and strategies by policymakers in the face of a deepening EU-ASEAN trade integration. Therefore, a detailed analysis of the degree of complementarity of trade patterns, the weight of intra-industry trade, and the revealed comparative advantages allows us to outline some of those challenges and opportunities. Results suggest that intra-industry trade is moderate, mainly focused on few manufactures, accounting for a low value of total trade flows between the two blocs, and concentrated in a few countries. The Lafay index analysis suggests that the EU and ASEAN are natural partners regarding the technological patterns of the revealed comparative advantages; therefore, a deepening in trade integration between this trading blocs could allow to exploit those comparative advantages.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":45680,"journal":{"name":"Asia Europe Journal","volume":"21 1","pages":"23 - 42"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6,"publicationDate":"2023-01-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s10308-023-00661-1.pdf","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"50037146","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-01-16DOI: 10.1007/s10308-023-00660-2
Sunkung Choi
Economic diplomacy receives growing interest in the field of international relations research ever since the end of the cold war. Despite the vast number of literature on economic diplomacy, there are not many studies measuring the effect of economic diplomacy quantitatively. The purpose of this paper is to propose a method to measure economic diplomacy using the event study method that observes the influence of specific events on stock prices. In this study, the summit talks between the EU and China are selected as specific events that are considered as a form of economic diplomacy, and Airbus stock price, the proxy of the reaction to the economic diplomacy, was observed to verify the influence of it. The study categorized the summit talks by the type of participants whether the top politicians were included or not. The result shows that, among all summit talks, the summit talks between top politicians between the EU and China influence the stock price of Airbus positively, and it is statistically significant.
{"title":"Measuring economic diplomacy using event study method: the case of EU-China summit talks and Airbus stock price changes","authors":"Sunkung Choi","doi":"10.1007/s10308-023-00660-2","DOIUrl":"10.1007/s10308-023-00660-2","url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Economic diplomacy receives growing interest in the field of international relations research ever since the end of the cold war. Despite the vast number of literature on economic diplomacy, there are not many studies measuring the effect of economic diplomacy quantitatively. The purpose of this paper is to propose a method to measure economic diplomacy using the event study method that observes the influence of specific events on stock prices. In this study, the summit talks between the EU and China are selected as specific events that are considered as a form of economic diplomacy, and Airbus stock price, the proxy of the reaction to the economic diplomacy, was observed to verify the influence of it. The study categorized the summit talks by the type of participants whether the top politicians were included or not. The result shows that, among all summit talks, the summit talks between top politicians between the EU and China influence the stock price of Airbus positively, and it is statistically significant.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":45680,"journal":{"name":"Asia Europe Journal","volume":"21 2","pages":"155 - 171"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6,"publicationDate":"2023-01-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s10308-023-00660-2.pdf","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"50031916","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}