1 / 21

The ECO Experience: A Comparative Understanding of Regional Integration in West and Central Asia

The ECO Experience: A Comparative Understanding of Regional Integration in West and Central Asia. Javad Foronda Heydarian University of the Philippines, Diliman. Outline of Presentation. I. Research Question/Theoretical Puzzle II. Origins of the ECO

havily
Download Presentation

The ECO Experience: A Comparative Understanding of Regional Integration in West and Central Asia

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. The ECO Experience: A Comparative Understanding of Regional Integration in West and Central Asia JavadForondaHeydarian University of the Philippines, Diliman

  2. Outline of Presentation I. Research Question/Theoretical Puzzle II. Origins of the ECO III. A comparative analysis of regional integration economic integration (ECO as compared to ASEAN and EU) IV. Opportunities and Challenges V. Conclusions

  3. Research Questions A.) What are the main drivers behind regional integration in West and Central Asia, especially in the case of ECO? B.) How does the ECO compare with the ASEAN and EU in terms of regional economic integration? C.) What are ECO’s specific areas of institutional strength and vulnerability?

  4. Methodology • Qualitative analysis focusing on: • Interplay of domestic and broader regional and international forces, which influence, shape, and drive integration • Institutional characteristics of identified regional bodies • The nexus between geo-political and economic variables in the overall dynamics/process of integration

  5. Origins of the Economic Cooperation Organization • The CTO (Cold War Era) • The RCD: the triangular alliance among Turkey, Iran, and Pakistan (1964) • The ECO: post-revolution Iran, Turkey, and Pakistan (1985) • Entry of Post-Soviet States (1991)

  6. Observation • Dynamic interaction between domestic and international forces 1.) Domestically: while, the big-3 (B3) had individual strategic and economic reasons to re-establish their triangular ‘partnership’, post-Soviet states were desperate to stabilize their domestic political situation 2.) Internationally: post-Cold War uncertainties, and the intensification of economic globalization in the late-1980s and early 1990s (proliferation of trade blocs, IFI’s role, and economic restructuring in transition-economies). * Defensive Integration 3.) Despite significant changes in the domestic political system, especially in the case of Iran, prior attempts at regional integration have somehow created a ‘path-dependency’

  7. Institutional Characteristics and Objectives: Comparative ApparochI. Dimensions of Regional Organizations (Lin and Pidufala, 2009)

  8. Dimensions of Regional Integration (Lin and Pidufala, 2009)

  9. Institutional Objectives and Characteristics II. Depth of Integration (cuyvers 2002) a.) ECO: Planning to become an FTA or Costumes Union (2015) – no significant sectoral integration yet b.) ASEAN: from an FTA (2002) to a Market Union (2015) – began with sectoral integration c.) EU: from Common Market to Economic Union (potential move towards a fiscal union amidst the sovereign debt crisis) – from sectoral integration to monetary union

  10. Institutional focus and objectives III. ECO’s institutional focus (Isik, 2007) a.) Trade Liberalization b.) Trade Facilitation c.) Projects and Program for regional development * No security-strategic forum: unlike the ASEAN and the EU (i.e. ARF and OSCE)

  11. Challenges • Lack of significant progress on intra-regional trade (6% in ECO vs. 25% in ASEAN and 68% in EU) • Weak macro-economic convergence (development gap and divergent indicators) • Absence of necessary supranational institutions and mechanisms to facilitate deeper integration (e.g.. Structural/cohesion funds, an independent central bank, or empowered secretariat) • Spaghetti Bowl Effect – overlapping memberships (Turkey, a pivotal state, is considering EU membership too)

  12. ECO countries macroeconomic indicators

  13. Strength • Facilitating geo-strategic cooperation among non-Arab Muslim countries: • Regional security • Strategic vacuum • Conflict-management • Emerging complex interdependence • Energy corridors • geo-economics • Synergistic partnership between resource-rich and transit countries • Emerging trans-continental pipeline projects

  14. Stages of Integration: Intergovernmentalist approach

  15. Implications: theoretical and practical • EU: primacy of economics; pooling of sovereignty • ASEAN: higher emphasis on economics; but no decisive move to the third phase yet • ECO: primacy of geo-politics; dominance of national interests in inter-state bargaining * ‘Reversed’ Spill-Over effect: instrumentalization of economic cooperation for strategic ends (i.e. Iran-Turkey relations) • Expectation: ECO has lower probability for deep regional integration

  16. Conclusions • Comparatively, the ECO is at an earlier phase of integration, but econometric models show policy-induced growth in intra-regional trade (Achakzai, 2010) • Formation of an FTA or a Customs Union is the most feasible form of economic integration in the medium to long-run. • Operationally, the ECO is more of a platform for strategic coordination and political dialogue, although its mandate isprimarilyeconomic and cultural • Predominance of national interest calculations in absence of empowered independent supranational bodies (significance of domestic political players in deepening integration efforts)

More Related