IRSP Clio
  • Home
  • About us
    • Board >
      • 2020 - 2021 board
      • 2019 - 2020 board
      • 2018 - 2019 Board
      • 2017-2018 board
      • 2016-2017 board
      • 2015-2016 board
      • 2014-2015 board
      • Older boards
    • Contact us
    • Board of Recommendation
  • Information
    • What do we do?
    • Research Set-up
    • Information for students
    • Brochures
  • Current projects
    • EFSAS
    • Ministry of defense
    • SOMO
    • Think tanks
  • Archive
    • 2019 - 2020 >
      • Ministry of Foreign Affairs
      • International IDEA
      • Ministry of Defence
    • 2018-2019 >
      • Bellingcat >
        • Bellingcat Research Team
      • Max Foundation >
        • Max Foundation Research Team
    • 2017-2018 >
      • ECFR
      • Province of Groningen
      • The Researchers >
        • Province/Baltics Research Team >
          • Introduction Baltics Researchers
          • Introduction Scandinavia Researchers
        • ECFR Research Team >
          • Introduction ECFR Researchers
    • 2016-2017 >
      • Terre des Hommes
      • ECN
      • The Researchers
    • 2015-2016 >
      • Koneksie
      • The Special Tribunal for Lebanon
      • The Embassy of Israel in the Netherlands
    • 2014-2015 >
      • Choice for Youth and Sexuality
      • Care Nederland
      • Ministry of Education
    • 2013-2014 >
      • Municipality of Aa en Hunze
      • Embassy of Rwanda
    • 2012-2013
    • 2011-2012
    • 2010-2011 >
      • Embassy of Rwanda
      • TNT Post
    • 2009-2010 >
      • Dutch Ministry of Foreign Affairs
      • Dutch Ministry of Economic Affairs
      • Unicef
    • 2008-2009 >
      • Agiterra
      • Scientific Bureau of GroenLinks
    • 2007-2008 >
      • Robeco
    • 2006-2007
    • 2005-2006

China and India as responsible stakeholders in the world economy and policy issues for the Netherlands and the European Union

Foto
Researchers
Dave Hoogakker
Erika van Leeuwen
Mara van der Meer
Sigit Rahman
Marloes Roijackers
Annie Yuliyanti

Supervising professor
Dr. R. Gigengack
Ministry of Economic Affairs
File Size: 1600 kb
File Type: pdf
Download File

It is strictly forbidden to use and/or copy (parts of) this research without written approval of the both the IRSP and The Ministry of Economic Affairs, Agriculture and Innovation of The Netherlands.
The term ‘responsible stakeholder’ was introduced for the first time by Robert Zoellick during the Carnegie  Debates in 2005. The purpose was to initiate a new understanding of US-China relations in the current world  order. Given the fact that China’s economic strength has grown tremendously in a short time period, the relative dominance of the US within the trade relations with China had to be altered, as to prevent a possible shift of power towards Asia. With the term‘responsible  stakeholder,’ Zoellick  envisioned  a  world  order  in  which  politics  would  be conducted on basis of multilateralism, diplomacy and peaceful prosperity. The argument was that any state would likely support this system, because it offers durability of agreements and general prosperity.

   Considering the position of the EU – with its own challenges such as speaking with one voice, and  the changing representative faces – this responsible stakeholder point of view is interesting because it could accommodate the rising powers of ‘the East’ and assign them a solid place in the current international order, without shifting the relative dominance in political and economic relations to Asia.

   Using a comparative case approach, we have analyzed the conditions of contemporary Chinese and  Indian trade politics, as well as their bilateral and multilateral trade relations. By using the Hofstede-model as  a socialization model, we argue that we can make use of trade policies in order to influence the ‘Dragon’  and the ‘Elephant’ in the East. We found that by separating the occurring trade problems in structural and  functional problems it is possible to identify which problems can be  most easily tackled. On  these ‘outer  circle,’ or low profile challenges should the EU and the Netherlands focus first, whilst integrating the emerging powers in the system of responsible stakeholders. Eventually, this should result in a multilateral system of and equal dominance for any major trading partner in the international order.

   By applying this reasoning, we also identified the challenges which are more in the center of  China’s  and  India’s  interests  (core  values).  The  costs  for  trying  to  influence  these  are considerably higher than with the functional problems, and positive outcomes are less probable. We  consider  them  ‘structural  problems’  and  are  mostly  associated  with  concepts  such  as ‘identity’ and ‘society’. These problems are called structural, due to the length of time needed to adapt them.  Hence, we argue that combating the functional challenges first, these steps could stimulate the development of an ultimate desirable world order.

   An example of a functional problem for India is its perceived weakness as a tool to raise legitimacy for specific policy choices. Put differently, it explains to the international community that it is not capable of concluding an agreement due to domestic interests, and vice versa. We recognized such a situation during the negotiations on the TRIPS-agreement: India did not want to comply at first, but as soon as the needed domestic legitimacy was raised, they were willing to agree. Arguably, the same holds true for the DDA-negotiations, which ran into a deadlock over technical details of the Special Safeguard Mechanism.

   One  of  the  most  practical  among  the  Chinese  functional  problems  concerns  the implementation and enforcement difficulties. At the level of the central government it appears there are true intentions to implement the WTO-commitments, but since China is unique in its size and number of stakeholders involved – including quite autonomous provinces and cities – China’s behavior can be  categorized as hesitant to make too many promises. In the past, one could  have  noticed  that  generous  offers  by  Zhu  Rongji  with  regard  to  the  WTO-accession conditions were not always received with thankful feelings in his homeland. This partly explain their reluctant attitude in multilateral talks with complex package  deals, such as the DDA. In connection with EU trade policy, the IPR2-project represents a successful joint  regulation and implementation program. Similarly, the China-EU trade could benefit from Chinese ‘copycat behavior’. Of course, this does not refer to expensive European intellectual property, but to European legislation models.

   To conclude, responsible stakeholdership paves the way for a new international order, with at its core the possibility for developed powers to maintain a firm position in world politics and trade.

Picture


  ©Clio/IRSP 2018
      Disclaimer

Sitemap
Home
Information

Contact us
Archive
IRSP is a programme of Study Association Clio
University of Groningen
Oude Kijk in 't Jatstraat 26
Room H1323.0232
9727 EK Groningen
The Netherlands

+ 31 (0) 50 363 52 95


Picture
  • Home
  • About us
    • Board >
      • 2020 - 2021 board
      • 2019 - 2020 board
      • 2018 - 2019 Board
      • 2017-2018 board
      • 2016-2017 board
      • 2015-2016 board
      • 2014-2015 board
      • Older boards
    • Contact us
    • Board of Recommendation
  • Information
    • What do we do?
    • Research Set-up
    • Information for students
    • Brochures
  • Current projects
    • EFSAS
    • Ministry of defense
    • SOMO
    • Think tanks
  • Archive
    • 2019 - 2020 >
      • Ministry of Foreign Affairs
      • International IDEA
      • Ministry of Defence
    • 2018-2019 >
      • Bellingcat >
        • Bellingcat Research Team
      • Max Foundation >
        • Max Foundation Research Team
    • 2017-2018 >
      • ECFR
      • Province of Groningen
      • The Researchers >
        • Province/Baltics Research Team >
          • Introduction Baltics Researchers
          • Introduction Scandinavia Researchers
        • ECFR Research Team >
          • Introduction ECFR Researchers
    • 2016-2017 >
      • Terre des Hommes
      • ECN
      • The Researchers
    • 2015-2016 >
      • Koneksie
      • The Special Tribunal for Lebanon
      • The Embassy of Israel in the Netherlands
    • 2014-2015 >
      • Choice for Youth and Sexuality
      • Care Nederland
      • Ministry of Education
    • 2013-2014 >
      • Municipality of Aa en Hunze
      • Embassy of Rwanda
    • 2012-2013
    • 2011-2012
    • 2010-2011 >
      • Embassy of Rwanda
      • TNT Post
    • 2009-2010 >
      • Dutch Ministry of Foreign Affairs
      • Dutch Ministry of Economic Affairs
      • Unicef
    • 2008-2009 >
      • Agiterra
      • Scientific Bureau of GroenLinks
    • 2007-2008 >
      • Robeco
    • 2006-2007
    • 2005-2006