Holdninger til utenlandske investeringer fra Kina i de nordiske land
How does the Nordic public view foreign investments? Does the country of origin for such investments matter for the public? Would the public be more critical of investments into certain sectors of the economy, whilst being less critical to foreign investments in others? This essay presents the results from an extensive survey of public opinion conducted across all the Nordic countries.
Mathilde Tomine Eriksdatter Giske
Mathilde Tomine Eriksdatter Giske is a Junior Research Fellow in the Research group on Security on Defence, working on the «Re-Engaging with Neigh...
Roads to Power? The political effects of infrastructure projects in Asia (ROADS)
Does investing in roads and railroads in another country generate increased political influence? ROADS seeks to answer this question by zooming in on China´s role in building high-speed railways (HSR)...
Consequences of Investments for National Security (COINS)
How can liberal open societies reap the benefits of open economies, but at the same time protect their legitimate security interests? In the project “Consequences of Investments for National Security”...
The WTO Reference Paper meets EU common regulatory policy in CETA
International trade and investment in telecommunications are governed by the World Trade Organization’s (WTO) General Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS) and its Annex and Reference Paper (RP) on telecommunications. This paper discusses whether the 25-year old WTO framework is still fit for purpose. It makes two contributions to the literature. First, it offers a systematic comparison between the provisions in the RP, the EU-Canada Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement (CETA) and EU common regulatory framework. GATS builds on an outdated classification of telecommunications which is repeated in the CETA. The RP obliges countries to regulate interconnection, which is also largely repeated in CETA, although regulatory forbearance is permitted. CETA does not offer new market access in telecommunications to either party. Second, the paper investigates empirically whether binding regulation in trade agreements strengthen market openness, measured by imports of telecommunications services, and finds that it does not. The paper concludes that trade agreements may not be suitable for international cooperation on telecommunications regulation. Trade agreements run the risk of making regulation hostage to unrelated trade policy issues while adopting the RP runs a risk of legal obligations to over-regulate telecommunications.
Can trade preferences stimulate sectoral development? The case of Namibian and Botswanan beef exports to Norway
• While market access quotas have generated high levels of rents for traders and exporters in Namibia, Botswana, Norway, and offshore entities in the UK, their developmental benefits are diffuse, unclear, and difficult to unpack; • The consolidation of trade between small supply (Namibia, Botswana) and demand markets (Norway) provides some unique advantages for trading parties, given the former’s efficiency and scale disadvantages in international trade, and the latter’s desire to actively manage its food imports; • However, such a strategy is not necessarily replicable or scalable, as it entails both high entry costs for access and high risks from the over-reliance on a limited number of markets and the specter of animal disease incursions.
Free trade agreements increasingly important for Norway
The EEA Agreement is Norway’s most significant free trade agreement by far. However, free trade agreements with other countries are becoming increasingly important, notes NUPI Senior Research Fellow Hege Medin.
Russia in world trade: Between globalism and regionalism
The article examines Russia’s participation in world trade and trade policy, using trade data for 1996–2017 and simulations of a numerical world trade model where Russia is divided into domestic regions. Since the mid-1990s, Russia’s foreign trade has grown much faster than the world average. This was accompanied by rapid deterioration in the trade balance for manufacturing, and fast redirection of imports, with more from China and relatively less from others, especially Eastern Europe. Only 1/8 of Russia’s foreign trade in 2017 was with Eastern Europe. This is why Russia can gain more from trade integration with the world beyond Eastern Europe, according to the model simulation analysis. For Russian domestic regions, multilateral liberalization among all countries has a similar effect across all of them, with a welfare gain due to lower import prices. For the commodity-exporting regions of Russia, preferential free trade agreements (FTAs) have a similar impact. For the more industrialized Russian regions, on the other hand, FTAs lead to manufacturing growth, rising wages and higher prices, and a larger welfare gain. According to the model simulations, trade integration promotes industrial diversification, with manufacturing growth also in some commodity regions. The results indicate that external liberalization is particularly important for the central parts of Russia; with Volga and West Siberia generally obtaining the strongest manufacturing boost from trade integration.
Theory Seminar: Crafting Payoffs: Strategies and Effectiveness of Economic Statecraft
When is it effective to use economic instruments in international politics?
Breakfast seminar: China as a Development Actor in Africa
China’s role as an international development actor is growing. What is China hoping to achieve? How do African actors respond, and what are possible implications for Norwegian development policy?