context: Beijing envisions the future global trading system to be ‘inclusive’ of all economic models. But signing low-standard trade agreements like RCEP does not help raise China’s voice in trade issues increasingly addressed in high-standard trade agreements rather than through the WTO.
Compared to regional trade agreements led by developed countries, the terms of RCEP are more inclusive, open and to be gradually implemented, as well as lacking SOE, environmental and labour standards, analyses He Xiaoyong
- government procurement
- only applies to central governments
- mostly regulates transparency
- the promised market access does not match WTO (CPTPP and USMCA exceeded WTO terms)
- investment
- includes regular investment protection measures: national treatment, most-favoured nations, restriction by 'negative list'
- no dispute resolution mechanism yet for disputes between investor and investing countries (such discussion should take place within two years of RCEP coming into effect)
- dispute resolution between countries does not cover rejections or conditions for foreign investment
- trade in services
- following GATS (General Agreement on Trade in Services) conditions
- does not require 'negative list' management for mode I (commercial presence) (many regional trade agreements do so by considering commercial presence 'investment')
- financial services
- follows GATS, but adds rules for new forms of financial services and cross-border flow of financial information
- e-commerce
- requires members to allow cross-border flow of commercial information (a first for China)
- EU–Japan EPA has not committed to cross-border flow of commercial information
- subsidy
- largely retaining WTO rules for goods and GATS rules for services (CPTPP and EU–Japan EPA have expanded upon Agreement on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures)
It is an inclusive developmental structure suited for ‘a new era’, says Liu Junhong 刘军红 CICIR (China Institutes of Contemporary International Relations) Centre for Globalisation and Global Governance director. It is flexible, thus more acceptable for members and has more potential for global promotion, says Xu Feibiao 徐飞彪 CICIR Centre for BRICS and G20 Studies vice director.