Any country including India which has registered remarkable growth has done so by participating in the economic integration process led by global and regional trade liberalization. India has an emerging web of cooperation with East Asian countries, especially Association of South East Asian Nations (ASEAN) through the ASEAN–India dialogue process, the bilateral free trade agreement with Malaysia, Singapore, and Thailand and subregional initiatives such as the Mekong–Ganga Cooperation and the Bay of Bengal Initiative for Multi-Sectoral Technical and Economic Cooperation (BIMSTEC; Yong 2005).
India's free trade agreements and regional trade agreements with countries in this region have not been models of success in their implementation even when there were benefits. The main idea of the formal trade negotiation was to enhance ASEAN-India partnership, specifically in the economic arena. However, India's position in ASEAN's external trade and investment flows has not yet experienced any special momentum. The two-way trade between India and ASEAN is tilted toward ASEAN with the trade gap expanding rapidly.
Thus, to understand India's trade with ASEAN, the chapter would examine India's trade prospects with the ASEAN-5 (Indonesia, Malaysia, Thailand, Philippines, and Vietnam) particularly in merchandise trade. This chapter would identify new products that India can export to the ASEAN, which will increase its share in ASEAN's market. In order to achieve this, the chapter seeks to discuss the detailed microanalysis at HS 6-digit level to capture the trade creation effects based on lower unit value items for estimating product-specific potential exports and imports to/from ASEAN.
The purpose of this paper to examine if there is continuous macroeconomic compatibility between ASEAN‐5 and China. Thus, in addition to the typical VECM test of the long…
The purpose of this paper to examine if there is continuous macroeconomic compatibility between ASEAN‐5 and China. Thus, in addition to the typical VECM test of the long run macroeconomic cointegration test, this paper examines the existence of an ongoing cointegration analysis.
The degree of convergence during different sub‐sample period of the full sample is employed, via Johansen cointegration rank tests, to examine if there is evidence of ongoing and improved cointegrating relationship among the economies.
A successful ASEAN‐China economic cooperation would only work if there is continuous macroeconomic interdependence between the partnership. Since a smooth transition of ACFTA will complement AFTA, the effective ASEAN‐China coordination plan is essential to endorse a successful ASEAN‐China coalition.
This paper suggests a quick yet effective verification on the continuous compatibility of economies intended to have a long‐term economic coordination.
The leaders of the Association of the Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) announced to negotiate a Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RECP) in November 2012, which…
The leaders of the Association of the Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) announced to negotiate a Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RECP) in November 2012, which is comprised of 10 ASEAN Member States (Thailand, Indonesia, Philippines, Malaysia, Singapore, Brunei, Vietnam, Cambodia, Laos, and Myanmar) and its six FTA partner countries (China, Japan, South Korea, Australia, New Zealand, and India). Embedded in the ASEAN Charter and implemented in all existing ASEAN + 1 FTAs, the ASEAN Centrality has been a corner stone principle in ASEAN-centric economic initiatives. Emerging discord in the region, complicated security climate and the rise of China, among others, have put the ASEAN Centrality under challenge. The development of the RCEP provides a timely case to assess ASEAN’s leadership role in creating the world’s most populous Free Trade Area. The RCEP may enhance ASEAN’s central role, but ASEAN needs to address challenges facing the regional integration now and beyond 2015. On the country/economy level, the chapter reviews some ASEAN Member States and their FTA Partners how they practice their ASEAN policy and seek leadership role in ASEAN. The three major players in ASEAN-Indonesia, Thailand, and Malaysia have reiterated the importance of the ASEAN Centrality in their foreign policy in the past, but debates emerge whether, such as in Indonesia, ASEAN Centrality best suits the national interests. The chapter also explores how the major powers, including China and the United States, respond to and collaborate with the group of smaller developing country players.
This chapter uses a global trade model, supplemented with household survey data, to explore the potential impact of ASEAN trade liberalization on poverty in Cambodia, Lao…
This chapter uses a global trade model, supplemented with household survey data, to explore the potential impact of ASEAN trade liberalization on poverty in Cambodia, Lao PDR, Thailand, and Vietnam. Our tentative results suggest that ASEAN liberalization is likely to bring substantial gains to the region and lead to significant reductions in poverty. In a simulation of full removal of intra-ASEAN tariffs, we find 320,000 people are moved out of extreme poverty, with a further 1.4 million lifted above the $2 per day poverty line. Poverty reductions are particularly significant in the case of agricultural and rural diversified households and for Cambodia. Under broader ASEAN+3 and ASEAN+6 liberalizations, we find a similar pattern of poverty reduction and the overall reduction in poverty is much higher.
For the past decades, issues concerning the impact of economic integration on financial integration, especially exchange rate integration, has been criticized among several regions such as ASEAN. This chapter intends to: (i) test for the exchange rate integration among the ASEAN-5, including Indonesia, Philippines, Malaysia, Singapore, and Thailand, using panel data techniques; and (ii) determine the impact of economic integration on the level of exchange rate integration among the ASEAN-5 countries. The purchasing power parity (PPP) is tested using panel unit root tests on monthly data. The results confirm the PPP among the ASEAN-5 countries due to lower transaction costs from ASEAN agreements. The chapter applies Multivariate GARCH (M-GARCH) models using daily data to determine the level of exchange rate integration among the ASEAN-3, including Malaysia, Singapore, and Thailand. The results of panel cointegration tests using quarterly data of economic integration and exchange rate integration confirm the impact of international trade openness on exchange rate integration. With free trade agreements leading to lower trade barriers, lower transaction costs, and low transportation costs, the economic integration among ASEAN countries practically leads to a higher degree of exchange rate integration. The findings imply that trade liberalization has the strongest effect on the real exchange rate. As such, regulators of ASEAN countries should pay more attention to the exchange rate policies of each other because of the interdependence of their exchange rates.
This paper explores the issue of developing and enhancing intra-ASEAN international student mobility given the context of ASEAN integration, regionalization of ASEAN…
This paper explores the issue of developing and enhancing intra-ASEAN international student mobility given the context of ASEAN integration, regionalization of ASEAN higher education and the various intra‐ASEAN student mobility schemes currently implemented.
It explores higher education policies, available higher education and international student mobility data, as well as the various intra‐ASEAN (and relevant) student mobility schemes to present the current status of intra‐ASEAN student mobility, challenges and opportunities to further enhance student mobility within the ASEAN region.
Aside from showing that intra‐ASEAN student mobility is significantly low compared to outbound student mobility from ASEAN countries, the paper also highlights the relationship between a country’s income status with choice of intra‐ASEAN or extraASEAN student mobility. Finally, it recommends developing a comprehensive intra‐ASEAN mobility scheme taking the merits of the various intra‐ASEAN mobility schemes currently implemented and guided by developments in the European ERASMUS mobility programs.
This is probably the first (in fact, it is an exploratory) paper that address the issue of intra‐ASEAN international student mobility, which aims to explore relevant issues to address the development of a comprehensive ASEAN mobility scheme.
Ng (2002), and Lim and McAleer (2003) explained that if the national economies are not converging, or if the responses of national economies to random shocks are…
Ng (2002), and Lim and McAleer (2003) explained that if the national economies are not converging, or if the responses of national economies to random shocks are asymmetric, the cost of premature monetary integration would be high. This chapter investigates the feasibility of adopting a single currency for ASEAN-5 countries. The research uses the Kalman Filter procedure to test the economic convergence among ASEAN-5 countries, relative to Japan and the US. In addition, the symmetry of underlying structural shocks is also examined by applying a structural vector autoregression (SVAR) model. The research findings showed that Singapore, Malaysia, and Thailand (ASEAN-3) appear to be relatively suitable for forming an Optimum Currency Area. However, the results did not show significance evidence whether the Japanese Yen or the US dollar will be a suitable currency for the ASEAN-3 countries to adopt commonly.