Asia Europe Journal最新文献

Abstract

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.

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.

The twenty-first century has brought in its wake a flurry of competing foreign investment players on the African investment sphere. This situation may be called the globalization of foreign investment (Bodomo 2017). Foreign investment features as a salient issue for intellectual discussions of topics such as agency, soft power, and symmetry. In this paper, we outline the important role that China and the European Union (EU), the biggest investment polities in Africa, have played in the globalization of investment in Africa and argue that China has, indeed, created a paradigm shift with respect to its investment engagement with the African continent. This paradigm shift may be calibrated in terms of the volume of engagement; in terms of the speed and efficiency with which investment projects are completed, and, in terms of the very discourse of trade and investment. The argument is advanced further by discussing some of the main features of Chinese investment that distinguish it from that of other global players on the African continent, such as Europe. We further extend arguments from our previous work (Bodomo 2017; Bodomo and Che 2020) to say that if Africa does not sharpen its agency, the end result may be that China and the EU may gain at the expense of Africa but that should Africa play a more proactive and controlling role such as enforcing its investment laws, the mid-twenty-first century may yet see a trilateral win–win-win outcome for Africa, China, and the EU.

This paper provides a historical overview regarding the emergence, development and deepening of divergences between the European Union (EU) and the People’s Republic of China (China) in reducing global aviation emissions. It focuses on their divergences on three specific issues, i.e. under which framework to tackle global aviation emissions, whether and how to reflect the Common but Differentiated Responsibilities and Respective Capabilities (CBDR-RC) principle in the design and implementation of the global market-based measures (MBMs) for international aviation and which role the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) should play in offsetting these emissions. Besides, this paper explains the driving forces behind these divergences by examining both normative and economic-related factors, which have formed different stances of both sides. From a Chinese perspective, considerations about the issues of state sovereignty, fairness regarding burden sharing in tackling climate change, the development of China’s aviation and aircraft manufacturing and its limited capability in promoting the large-scale SAF deployment help explain its hardline stance on reducing global aviation emissions. As for the EU, perceptions of its leading role in the global climate governance and the CBDR-RC principle, the targets of strengthening the EU ETS role in the global carbon market, and the competitiveness of the European airlines are underlying reasons behind its attempt to include the international aviation under its ETS. Moreover, the EU member states’ support to the ICAO can be explained through the conformity between the emissions offsetting objectives under this organisation and the EU’s current climate policies.

The relationship between supervisors and postgraduates is a key factor in postgraduate education, and a harmonious supervisor-postgraduate relationship is a prerequisite for ensuring the quality of postgraduate education. This study analyzes the problems, causes, and solutions of the distorted supervisor-postgraduate relationship. In order to clarify the specific manifestations and causes of the distorted supervisor-postgraduate relationship, this study analyzed ten suicide cases through case studies. In order to sort out the governance initiatives to address the distorted supervisor-postgraduate relationship, this study analyzed the policy documents of postgraduate education in China through policy analysis. The findings indicated that the distortion of supervisor-postgraduate relationship manifests itself as a relationship of employment and control, stemming from the influence of the traditional apprenticeship value habits, and the distortion of academic value under academic capitalism. In order to address the distortion of the supervisor-postgraduate relationship, China has introduced various policy initiatives, such as attaching importance to ethics education and refining the duties and standards of supervisors, reforming the supervisor selection system and establishing supervisor certification, improving the tutor evaluation mechanism and implementing a “one vote veto” on tutor ethics, and strengthening tutor training and improving supervisors’ moral education capabilities.

In this article, we explore the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) as a case of “Contingent Power Extension” (CPE) towards the European Union (EU), assessing its implications for regional (dis)integration in the latter. CPE is a conceptual prism that interprets the BRI as a polymorphous, dynamic, and context-specific mechanism through which Chinese foreign policy elites intend to convey, amplify, and legitimize the regime’s power-reach into other regions, including the EU. Along two examples—the 14 + 1 Cooperation Forum and the Port of Genoa in Italy—we examine the power dynamics of the BRI by tracing (a) the processual impact of power extension towards the EU and (b) the (un)intended consequences for the EU in terms of (dis)integration. The findings of our analysis provide an insight into the multicausal relations between the BRI and European (dis)integration not as a static outcome but rather as a contested process of struggle. The article concludes by discussing whether and how the EU can strengthen its own institutional foundations and use its systemic leverage to respond to the BRI while enhancing regional integration in the process.

Amid rising uncertainty in the global economy and unprecedented economic disruption caused by the COVID-19 pandemic, the concept of supply chain resilience has gained increasing popularity in ASEAN and the EU. However, by comparing their paths to resilient supply chains, this article argues that while both organizations regard resilience as a departure from past doctrines of pure economic efficiency, each has a different understanding of and approach to supply chain resilience. While for ASEAN, supply chain resilience is meant to reconcile inward- and outward-looking dimensions to support ASEAN competitiveness, within the EU, resilience is associated with the search for strategic autonomy with an internal focus. Despite these differences, both groups regard sustainability and digital transformation as crucial components of supply chain resilience, which they see as a way to enhance their economic cooperation and strategic partnership.