Search

Begin New Search Topic International Trade and Finance Political Geography Europe Publication Year within 10 Years Publication Year within 5 Years

31. Energy Markets and the Design of Sanctions on Russia

Author:
Christof Ruhl
Publication Date:
03-2022
Content Type:
Commentary and Analysis
Institution:
Center on Global Energy Policy (CGEP), Columbia University
Abstract:
Sanctions against the citizens, institutions, and products of the Russian Federation are evolving rapidly. Energy sanctions started late, but the number of countries embargoing oil, gas, or coal imports from Russia is expanding. These sanctions are likely to increase global fuel prices while depressing the price of the sanctioned fuel. The experience to date suggests that the current, gradual approach of reducing oil and gas imports from Russia one country at a time may have room to go further. Before the invasion of Ukraine, the sweeping and unprecedented sanctions promised in the event of a Russian invasion were often conceived as a two-pronged pincer movement. The idea was to isolate Russia from the global financial system while limiting its commodity and energy exports. Both moves were aimed at the source of the financial strength of “fortress Russia,” namely, its persistent balance of payment surplus.
Topic:
Energy Policy, International Trade and Finance, Sanctions, Financial Markets, and Conflict
Political Geography:
Russia and Europe

32. U.S. Strategy: Rebalancing Global Energy between Europe, Russia, and Asia and U.S. Security Policy in the Middle East and the Gulf

Author:
Anthony H. Cordesman
Publication Date:
05-2022
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Center for Strategic and International Studies
Abstract:
The war in Ukraine has already shown how dangerous it is for the U.S. to assume that it can rebalance its forces to one region and count on a lasting peace or detente in others. It now is all too clear that U.S. strategy must continue to focus on Europe as well as China. What is less clear is the extent to which the Ukraine War is an equal warning that the U.S. must have a truly global strategy – and one that continues to focus on other critical regions like the Middle East. The sudden escalation of the Ukraine crisis into a major regional conflict and the need for political and diplomatic support in the UN as well as for sanctions are warnings that much of the U.S. success in deterrence and defense lies in creating long-term global diplomatic and political support as well as true and lasting strategic partnerships.
Topic:
Security, Energy Policy, International Trade and Finance, Hegemony, and Strategic Interests
Political Geography:
Russia, Europe, Middle East, Asia, North America, and United States of America

33. CONTAINMENT 2.0: SANCTIONS FOR THE LONG HAUL

Author:
David A. Lake
Publication Date:
03-2022
Content Type:
Commentary and Analysis
Institution:
Political Violence @ A Glance
Abstract:
The West is not imposing coercive sanctions on Russia to stop its current aggression. No one seriously expects that the sanctions will cause President Putin to withdraw from Ukraine. NATO made clear before the war that its members will not defend Ukraine with military force. The European members have also, as expected, carved out exceptions to the sanctions regime for oil and gas so as not to impose too much pain on their own economies. Putin anticipated the general scope of the sanctions likely to be imposed on Russia and decided it was worth invading Ukraine anyways. While he may have been surprised by the extent of the sanctions and unity of NATO so far, this is not enough to alter his calculus. Indeed, he is doubling down on the original plan. He also knows that he has other weapons and forms of coercion against the West up his sleeve. Rather, we are seeing the birth of a possible Containment 2.0, a forced decoupling of Russia from the Western international economy. This is a long-term, not a short-term, strategy. The point is to undermine the Russian economy, stifle its technological progress, deny Russians a standard of living comparable to that of the West, and break support for the regime over time. In doing so, the West undermines Russia’s ability to compete militarily, aiming to forestall further Ukraines, and weakens Putin’s hand at home and abroad.
Topic:
NATO, International Trade and Finance, Sanctions, Economy, and Containment
Political Geography:
Russia, Europe, Ukraine, Global Focus, and United States of America

34. EU carbon border adjustment mechanism faces many challenges

Author:
Gary Clyde Hufbauer, Jeffrey J. Schott, Megan Hogan, and Jisun Kim
Publication Date:
10-2022
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Peterson Institute for International Economics
Abstract:
This Policy Brief assesses the evolving EU Emissions Trading System and EU carbon border adjustment mechanism (CBAM) and explains objections within Europe and from major trading countries likely to be affected by the proposed CBAM import levies. While EU officials have sought to ensure that the CBAM is consistent with obligations under the World Trade Organization (WTO), key aspects of the CBAM could violate WTO rules and are likely to be contested, taking years to play out. Meanwhile, several other countries will adopt new carbon-inspired border restrictions, adding to global trade frictions. Major carbon-emitting countries, therefore, need to act cooperatively instead of unilaterally to both advance the fight against climate change and update the rules-based global trading system. Two-thirds of greenhouse gas emissions result from nontraded activities, such as road transport, electricity generation, and home and office heating. Countries can curb emissions in these activities, while developing guidelines for carbon abatement in traded sectors.
Topic:
Climate Change, Economics, International Trade and Finance, World Trade Organization, European Union, and Carbon Emissions
Political Geography:
Europe

35. Is South Korea vulnerable to EU and US carbon border restrictions?

Author:
Jeffrey J. Schott and Megan Hogan
Publication Date:
07-2022
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Peterson Institute for International Economics
Abstract:
South Korean exports, especially carbon-intensive products like steel, are increasingly vulnerable to both the European Union’s proposed carbon border adjustment mechanism (CBAM)—set to begin on January 1, 2023—and the proposed Clean Competition Act (CCA) before the US Congress. Schott and Hogan caution that Korean exporters should not count on Korea’s decade-old EU and US free trade agreements (FTAs), nor on the multilateral trading rules of the World Trade Organization (WTO), to protect them from new carbon-based import barriers in key foreign markets. The WTO and the FTAs have broad and loosely defined exemptions for environmental protection. Nor is Korea likely to be shielded by its own cap-and-trade emissions trading system (the K-ETS), because of extensive use of free allowances and large differences between EU and Korean carbon prices. While the threat the EU CBAM poses to Korean exports is imminent, passage of the CCA faces major legislative obstacles. But US imports of Korean steel and other carbon-intensive goods are still subject to climate-related duties at the US border under US unfair trade statutes. The US Department of Commerce has ruled that free allowances issued under the K-ETS (and EU ETS) are implicit subsidies that can be offset by countervailing duties. These charges are in addition to the harsh tariff-rate quotas on imported Korean steel applied under the “national security” authority of Section 232 of US trade law, which are more restrictive than measures imposed against European and other steel exporters. The authors suggest relaxing these US barriers, as they have been for shipments from Europe, in return for Korean participation in the nascent US-EU talks to establish a “Global Arrangement on Sustainable Steel and Aluminum.”
Topic:
Economics, International Trade and Finance, European Union, Exports, and Carbon Emissions
Political Geography:
Europe, Asia, South Korea, and United States of America

36. Has Globalisation Really Peaked for Europe?

Author:
Lucian Cernat
Publication Date:
11-2022
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
European Centre for International Political Economy (ECIPE)
Abstract:
This paper builds on the recent arguments put forward by Richard Baldwin and others debunking the myth that we enter a period of de-globalisation. The paper argues that globalisation is a complex phenomenon that requires detailed, firm-level indicators going beyond simple aggregate metrics. When using such indicators, the picture is much more nuanced and, in the case of Europe, the role of global trade is as important as ever for hundreds of thousands of companies and millions of jobs supported by global trade flows. A strong participation in the “new globalisation” is also key for the future EU competitiveness in technology-driven sectors.
Topic:
Globalization, International Trade and Finance, Science and Technology, European Union, and Trade
Political Geography:
Europe

37. The impact of the Ukraine crisis on international trade

Author:
Zsolt Darvas and Catarina Martins
Publication Date:
12-2022
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Bruegel
Abstract:
We study the economic implications of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, by scrutinising global trade volumes and commodity prices, trade balances and bilateral trade flows between major economic powers and Russia. We find that energy prices increased more in 2021 than in 2022, suggesting that the war and the sanctions were not the most important drivers. Nevertheless, International Monetary Fund forecast revisions from October 2021 to October 2022 suggest that the volume of global trade in goods and services declined by 3.4 percent, energy prices increased by about 100 percent, and the prices of non-energy commodities by 8 percent. The war could be an important driver of these forecast revisions, though other factors were also at play. While forecasts for important industrial production input costs were not revised, soaring energy prices deteriorated the trade balance of countries importing energy. Only half of the increase in Russia’s trade surplus was related to soaring energy prices. The other half resulted from the collapse of Russian imports, which will likely undermine the Russian economy’s productive capacity over time. Falling Russian exports of goods other than mineral fuels suggest Russia’s productive capacity has already weakened. Russia’s trade has been reoriented from advanced economies to China, India and Turkey, but this has only partially compensated for the decline in trade with advanced countries. We find that sanctions had an impact on trade. There is no evidence of European and US companies circumventing sanctions by re-routing sanctioned goods to Russia via China and Turkey. The UK and the US have already stopped importing fossil fuels from Russia, and such imports by the EU have declined. With the EU’s Russian seaborne crude petroleum import ban taking effect in December 2022 and the refined petroleum ban coming to effect in February 2023, Russia’s revenues from fossil fuel exports to the EU are set to shrink significantly, with limited options for redirecting exports to other countries. The three main policy-relevant implications from our research are: The war and the sanctions are not the most important drivers of energy price; The direct aim of sanctions seems to have been achieved; The capacity of the Russian state to finance the war from fossil fuel revenues is bound to shrink. The dataset used for most charts of this working paper is regularly updated and is available in the Russian foreign trade tracker
Topic:
International Trade and Finance, Sanctions, Fossil Fuels, and Russia-Ukraine War
Political Geography:
Russia, Europe, and Ukraine

38. Economic and Social Impacts of FDI in Central, East and Southeast Europe

Author:
Doris Hanzl-Weiss and Branimir Jovanovic
Publication Date:
11-2022
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
The Vienna Institute for International Economic Studies (WIIW)
Abstract:
This study assesses the economic and social impacts of foreign direct investment (FDI) in 17 economies in Central, East and Southeast Europe (CESEE). More precisely, we investigate how different FDI inflows have affected various economic and social indicators, such as GDP growth, labour market outcomes, and poverty and inequality, for the period since the fall of communism until 2020. We pay particular attention to FDI that originates from the EU, as well as FDI from Germany and Austria, in order to evaluate whether their effects are different from the effects of FDI from other places of origin. We also examine whether there are differences in the impacts of different types of FDI – equity capital, reinvested earnings and intra-company debt, as well as of FDI that goes to different sectors of the economy – the primary, secondary and tertiary sectors. We find that FDI inflows have had, in general, a positive effect on economic growth in CESEE, and that this effect has been particularly strong for German and Austrian FDI. For total FDI, higher inflows of 1 percentage point (pp) of GDP are associated with 0.19 pp higher GDP growth. For FDI from Germany and Austria, this effect is five times higher – FDI inflows of 1 pp of GDP have led to 0.9 pp higher GDP growth. The positive GDP effects have come from the higher consumption and exports that the FDI has induced. FDI inflows have also reduced unemployment and increased wages, but have had no effects on labour productivity. Total FDI has had only limited effects on inequality and poverty, but FDI from Germany and Austria has been found to reduce both inequality and poverty, likely because they have benefitted mainly lower-income persons. There are differences in the effects of the different types of FDI, with reinvested earnings and equity capital having in general more beneficial effects than intra-company loans. Also, FDI in different sectors of the economy has had different effects, with inflows to the secondary and tertiary sectors having greater effects than inflows to the primary sector. The policy implications of these results are that CESEE economies should not give up on their efforts to attract more FDI, but also that their endeavours should be more targeted, focusing on investments that have greater economic and social impacts. Moreover, foreign investment should not be criticised for the perhaps unsatisfactory economic and social performances of the economies from this region. Instead, the reasons for this should be sought in domestic factors and in the modest growth of the European Union during the past two decades.
Topic:
Development, International Trade and Finance, Poverty, Foreign Direct Investment, Inequality, Economic Growth, and Unemployment
Political Geography:
Europe, Eastern Europe, Germany, and Austria

39. Brothers in arms: The value of coalitions in sanctions regimes

Author:
Sonali Chowdhry, Julian Hinz, Katrin Kamin, and Joschka Wanner
Publication Date:
10-2022
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Kiel Institute for the World Economy (IfW)
Abstract:
This paper examines the impact of coalitions on the economic costs of the 2012 Iran and 2014 Russia sanctions. By estimating and simulating a quantitative general equilibrium trade model under different coalition set-ups, we (i) dissect welfare losses for sanction-senders and target; (ii) compare prospective coalition partners and; (iii) provide bounds for the sanctions potential — the maximum welfare change attainable — when sanctions are scaled vertically, i.e. across sectors up to an embargo, or horizontally, i.e. across countries up to a global regime. To gauge the significance of simulation outcomes, we implement a Bayesian bootstrap procedure that generates confidence bands. We find that the implemented measures against Iran and Russia inflicted considerable economic harm, yielding 32 – 37% of the vertical sanctions potential. Our key finding is that coalitions lower the average welfare loss incurred from sanctions relative to unilateral implementation. They also increase the welfare loss imposed on Iran and Russia. Adding China to the coalition further amplifies the welfare loss by 79% for Iran and 22% for Russia. Finally, we quantify transfers that would equalize losses across coalition members. These hypothetical transfers can be seen as a sanctions-equivalent of NATO spending goals and provide a measure of the relative burden borne by coalition countries.
Topic:
Globalization, International Trade and Finance, Markets, Sanctions, Alliance, and Embargo
Political Geography:
Russia, China, Europe, Asia, North America, and United States of America

40. Post-Covid-19 EU-Southern Neighbourhood Trade Relations

Author:
Katarzyna Sidlo, Esmat Mostafa Kamel, Hussein Suleiman, and Guillaume Van der Loo
Publication Date:
05-2021
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
IEMed/EuroMeSCo
Abstract:
The European Union (EU) is a key trade partner, both in terms of goods and services, for the countries in its Southern Neighbourhood (SN): Morocco, Algeria, Tunisia, Egypt, Israel, Palestine,[1] Jordan and Lebanon.[2] The economic (and otherwise) relationship between the two partners is governed by the Euro-Mediterranean Association Agreements (EMAAs), which came into force from the early to mid-2000s. The ongoing COVID-19 pandemic has, however, affected the trade exchange between the two, just as it has an adverse impact on trade globally. As pointed out in the second chapter of this policy study, one of the sectors of great importance to both the EU and the SN is agri-foods. Despite a general drop in merchandise trade, the agri-food exports from the EU actually increased globally by 0.5% during the first 10 months of the pandemic compared to the same period the year before, up to €151.8 billion. In the case of the SN, exports of agri-foods during the first three quarters of 2020 (year-on-year) grew particularly strongly in the case of Morocco (27.2%) and Algeria (20.3%) and decreased most visibly in the case of Lebanon (-37.9%). As for exports from the EU to the SN, during the same period a particularly impressive growth was witnessed in the case of Tunisia (40.3%) but the value of agri-food imports of Morocco also went up (8.4%). Trade in services, as analysed in chapter three, was hit more severely than trade in goods and declined significantly in all countries in the region during the first months of the pandemic. For Morocco, for instance, during the first three quarters of 2020 it plummeted by almost 60% (year-on-year). Because of lockdowns and travel bans, the tourism sector was among the hardest hit, even though the countries in the SN are mostly visited by travellers from nearby markets: the SN region or Europe – in 2019 the latter constituted between 29.4% (Tunisia) and 68.2% (Morocco) of all arrivals (after excluding nationals of SN countries who live abroad). As a result, tourism revenues plummeted (in Palestine, for instance, by an estimated 68%) and a significant number of people were made redundant; before the pandemic, between just under 6% (Algeria and Israel) and nearly 20% (Lebanon) of all (formally employed) workers were employed in the travel and tourism sector. The disturbances outlined above have adversely impacted food security in the region, as initial data presented in chapter four suggests. While isolating the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on food security is difficult, as many other factors – such as bad harvest due to weather conditions in Morocco – were in play in 2020, the pandemic clearly affected both supply of and demand for foodstuffs. Some countries were more affected than others, as has already been mentioned above in the case of agri-food trade with the EU. At the same time, the impact on food security within the countries was also far from homogenous, with refugees (e.g., due to loss of work in informal sector) and poorer households – spending a bigger share of domestic budget on increasingly more expensive food products – more often forced to adopt emergency livelihood coping strategies, such as limitation of daily calory intake. Looking towards the post-COVID-19 trade relations, as outlined in chapter one of this study, the EU’s post-pandemic recovery plans and trade strategy review offer a new momentum for the SN countries to strengthen and modernise their framework for trade relations with the EU, to capitalise on potential re-shoring and near-shoring trends in EU and global value chains, and to promote (intra-) regional economic integration. However, the envisaged Deep and Comprehensive Free Trade Areas (DCFTAs) currently under negotiation with Tunisia and Morocco may not be the most realistic option at this stage. A more gradual approach based on sectoral agreements could be adopted in the short- to medium-term instead, leading to a DCFTA-like model of trade integration. Moreover, in order to strengthen the (intra-)regional economic and value chain integration, modernisation of the Pan-Euro-Mediterranean Convention should remain a priority. Finally, the modernisation of EU-SN trade relations should be linked and integrated into the broader (and longer-term) plans for EU-Africa trade relations, with an eye on the “continent-to-continent Free Trade Area” in the long run. Internally, governments in the SN should prioritise development of high productivity service sectors and work towards curbing their reliance on tourism and transportation. In order to achieve that goal, improving the quality of their institutions is as important as upgrading telecommunications infrastructure or adopting incentives such as tax breaks. More broadly, speeding up digital transformation would both facilitate servicification and reduce costs associated with merchandise trade.
Topic:
International Trade and Finance, Regional Cooperation, European Union, Pandemic, and COVID-19
Political Geography:
Europe and Mediterranean