下面是小编为大家整理的欧盟-东盟，西非经共体和南方共同市场差异：比较分析,供大家参考。
Diff er entiation
in
ASEAN, ECOW AS
and
MERCOSUR:
A
Compar ativ e
Analysis
Bar t
Gaens, Bernar do
V enturi and
Anna
A yuso
This
pr oject has
r eceived
funding fr om
the
E ur opean
Union ’ s Horiz on
2020 r esear ch and
inno v ation pr ogramme under
grant agreement
No
822622
Diff erentiation
in
ASEAN,
ECOW AS
and MERCOSUR:
A
Compar ativ e
Analysis
Bar t
Gaens,
Bernar do
V enturi and
Anna
A yuso
Abstract
This
policy
paper
explor es
how
div erse
modes of
diff er entiation occur
in r egions
be y ond
E ur ope.
F r om
the
perspectiv e
of
compar ativ e
r egionalism, the
paper
examines
how
the
pr actice
of
diff er entiation
facilitates
flexibility and
accommodates
div ersity
in
r egional
cooper ation pr ocesses
in
Asia, Africa and
Latin
America.
Examining
the
Association of
Southeast
Asian Nations
(A SEAN),
the
E conomic
Community
of
W est
African
States (ECOW AS)
and
the
Southern
Common Market ( Mer cado
Común
del
Sur , MERCOSUR),
the
paper
analyses
how
diff er entiation is applied
and
how it
ties
in
with
primarily
tr ade
integr ation.
Specifically ,
the
paper
assesses whether
diff er entiation leads
t o centrifuga l
or centripetal
dynamics,
and it
examines
the
impact
of
diff er entiation on
internal
as
well
as
external cooperation.
After comparing the
thr ee
cases,
the
paper
draws policy r ecommendations for
the
EU.
Bar t
Gaens
is Senior
Resear ch F ellow
at
the
Finnish
Institute of
International
Affairs (FII A).
Bernar do V enturi
is Senior
F ellow
at
the
Istitut o Affari Internazionali
(I AI).
Anna
A yuso
is Senior
Resear ch F ellow
at
the
Bar celona
Centr e
for
International Affairs (CIDOB).
Ex ecutiv e
summar y
Dr awing
lessons
fr om
practices
in the
Association
of
Southeast
Asian Nations
(ASEAN), the
E conomic
Community
of
W est
African
States (ECOW AS)
and the
Southern Common Market
( Mer cado
Común
del
Sur ,
MERCOSUR),
this
policy
paper argues that
diff er entiation, including
mu lti-speed,
concentric
cir cles,
multiple
sub-or ganisations
and à
la
car te ,
is
a “ normal”, e v en
essential element
of
r egional cooper ation
pr ocesses: •
it
is
a
k e y
instrument
t o
tackle
heterogeneity and dev elopment
disparities; •
it pr omotes
flexibility ,
and
pr eser v es
state
so v er eignty;
•
it
accommodates
the
pr ef er ences
for
so ver eignty ,
intergo v ernmentalism
and
non- inter f er ence;
•
it
enables progr ess and av oids
the
paralysis gener ated
b y
the
emphasis
on
consensus
decision-making,
for
example
b y
facilitating
pathfinder
gr oups;
•
it
can
function
as a
def ensiv e
component
on
the
par t
of
weak er
states.
While
facilitating
cooper ation, diff er entiation
can
also
r esult
in centrifugal
dynamics
and sustain
or
lead
t o
fr agmentation:
•
it
can
cr eate “ elite ”
gr oups;
•
It
can
exacerbate existing
clea v ages,
and ultimatel y
only mak es
a
modest
contribution t o
closing
the
dev elopment
gap;
•
internal
diff er ences can
lead
t o
the
cr eation
of
“ nested” sub-organisations; •
mor e
power ful
states
can
use it
t o
impose
their
agenda;
•
it
can
incr ease
competition
for
r esour ces
among
external act ors,
and the
involv ement of
the
latter
can
r esult
in intr a-or ganisational
rifts.
A t
the
interr egional le v el
it
can
lead t o
a
bilater al and fr agmen ted
approach
t o
E conomic
P ar tnership
Agr eements
(EP As), r ather
than
t o
r egion-t o-r egion tr ade
deals.
Thr ee
recommendations
can
be
consider ed:
1. First,
diff er entiation
in
other
r egions
off ers
lesson s
in
flexibility ,
pr o viding
models
of how
flexible
fr ameworks
can
be
cr eated
while
r especting
national
economic
needs.
2. The
EU
can
off er
its
own
exper tise
t o
other
r egions in or der t o
apply diff er entiation
in fields
be y ond
the
economy ,
including
security
or
political
cooper ation,
in
cases
wher e non-homogeneous
and
flexible
cooper ation
can
contribute
t o
deepening
r egional integr ation.
3. Thir d,
in light
of
one of
the
cor e
drivers of
diff er entiation
in the
thr ee
cases analysed, namely
the
diff er ent
le v els
in
dev elopment,
the
EU
should
continue
t o
seek
t o contribute
t o
the
closing
of
the
dev elopment
gap in other
r egions,
in or der t o
facilitate oppor tunities
for
r egion-t o-r egion inter action.
Intr oduction
This
policy
paper
tak es
a
comparativ e
appr oach
in
or der
t o explor e
how div erse modes of
diff er entiation occur in
r egions
be y ond
E ur ope.
F r om
the
perspectiv e
of comparativ e
r egionalism,
the
paper
examines
how
the
practice
of
diff er entiation facilitates
flexibility
and
accommodates
div ersity
in
r egional
cooper ation
pr ocesses in
Asia,
Africa and
Latin
America.
Examining
the
Association of
Southeast
Asian Nations (ASE AN),
the
E conomic
Community of
W est African
States
(ECOW AS)
and the
Southern
Common Market ( Mer cado
Común
del
Sur ,
MERCOSUR),
the
paper analyses
how diff er entiation is applied
in
these
r egional
or ganisations
and
how it ties in
with
primarily tr ade
integration.
As
ar gued
b y
Su
(2007:
56)
and
W arleigh-Lack
(2015:
876),
diff er entiation includes thr ee
main types:
multi-speed,
in
which member states pursue
the
same
collectiv e objectiv es
but
at
diff er ent
times;
concentric
cir cles,
also
ref err ed
t o
as
v ariable geometr y ,
consisting of
v arious
tiers of
member states or ganised
ar ound
a
“har d nucleus”,
and
deriving
fr om
member
states’
long-term
inability
t o
implement
a policy;
and
à
la
car te
diff er entiation,
which
off ers
member
states
the
choice
not t o
participate,
r egar dless
of
capacity ,
r esulting
in
policy
r egimes
with
diff er ent memberships.
It
is clear
that
applying
categories
such as
these,
dev eloped
in
the EU,
t o other or ganisation s is a
challenge,
not
in
the
least
because
the
thr ee
cases analysed
her e
ar e
inter go v ernmental,
r ather
than supr anational,
or ganisations.
This paper
therefor e
focuses on
political r ather
than institutional or legal
pr actices,
and on
pragmatic approache s t o managing
heterogeneity .
“Diff er entiated
integr ation ”
in these
cases
thus applies
primarily t o r egional
inter go v ernmental
cooperation.
Thr ee
r egional
or ganisations
fr om
the
Global
South
wer e
chosen
as
cases
for comparison. ASEAN,
ECOW AS
and
MERCOSUR
seek
t o establish
fr ee
tr ade
ar eas, and
each
r epr esents
the
most
complex and
adv anced
system of
integr ation and coordination in
its
r espectiv e
r egion, 1
allowing
for
a
limited comparison with
the
EU. In
addi tion,
the y
all
centr e
on
tr ade
integr ation,
which facilitates comparison between them. How does
diff er entiation occur in
these
r egional
or ganisations?
Is
it
true that diff er entiation should
be
seen
as
a
“ neutr al
and
t o-be-anticipated”
f eatur e
of
r egional integr ation,
as
well
as
“ an
enduring,
and
possibl y
permanent”
one
( W arleigh-Lack 2015:
872)?
Does
it
accommodate wide
discr epancies
in
economic dev elopment or div ersity
of
national
inter ests (Su
2007,
Leuff en
2013,
Aimsir anun
2020)?
Does
it
lead t o fr agmenta tion, or
does
it
facilitate
flexibility?
Finally ,
what
r ole
does
diff er entiation pla y
in
r elations
with
the
external
world?
After briefly
sur v e ying
the
thr ee
or ganisations, this
policy
paper
addr esses
these
questions b y
pro viding
an
o v er view
of
practices of
diff er entiated
cooper ation,
dr awing
comparativ e
conclusions,
and
off ering
policy recommendations for
the
EU.
1
The
cases
of
MERCOSUR and
ASEAN ar e
clear
in
this
r egar d.
The
selection
of
ECOW AS
r ather than the
African
Union
is based
on
the
fact
that
the
latter ’ s Continental
F r ee
T r ade
Ar ea
project is far fr om
being
a
r eality ,
and
it
is ECOW AS
that
has
made
the
most
progr ess
along
this
path on
the
African continent.
1. ASEAN,
ECOW AS
and
MERCOSUR: The
back gr ound
Needless
t o sa y ,
the
thr ee
r egional
or ganisations
in
the
Global
South
ar e
v ery
diff er ent fr om
each
other and
fr om
the
EU
in
terms
of
membership,
hist or y ,
siz e,
GD P ,
tr ade, debt and
stages
of
integr ation (cf. T able
1).
T able
1
|
ASEAN,
ECOW AS,
MERCOSUR
and
the
EU
at
a
glance
ASEAN
ECOW AS
MERCOSUR
EU
Member
states
Brunei, Cambodia, Indonesia, Laos,
Mala ysia, Myanmar , Philippines, Singapor e, Thailand, Vietnam
Benin,
Burkina F aso,
Cabo V er de,
Côte d’Iv oir e,
Gambia, Ghana,
Guinea, Guinea
Bissau, Liberia,
Mali, Niger ,
Nigeria, Senegal,
Sierr a Leone,
T ogo Argentina, Br azil,
P ar agua y , Urugua y
Suspended: V enezuela
In
r atification:
Bolivia
A ustria,
Belgium, Bulgaria,
Cr oatia, Cyprus,
Cz ech Rep.,
Denmark, Est onia,
Finland, F r ance,
Germany , Gr eece,
Hungar y , Ir eland,
Italy , Latvia,
Lithuania, L ux embour g Malta, Netherlands, P oland,
P or tugal, Romania, Slo v akia, Slo v enia,
Spain, Sweden
Y ear
of
cr eation
1967
1975
1991
1957
P opulation
(million people)
649.6
376.8
304.8
514.7
Combined
GDP (million
US
dollars)
2,955
615
2,627.5
18,417.4
GDP
per
capita
(US dollars)
4,549
1,632
8,622
35,781
T otal
mer chandise tr ade
2018
(billion US
dollars)
2,882.9
206.2
638.8
12,959.6
T otal
tr ade
in commercial ser vices,
2018 (billion
US
dollars)
773.5
69.1
153.8
4,678.1
Debt
(% of
GDP)
45.92
36.59
84.68
80.75
Le v el
of
integr ation
Regional or ganisation; political, economic,
s...
