EU Regional Trade Agreements as a Tool for Global Adaptation
- Autores: Gorbunova M.L1, Komarov I.D1, Rykhtik M.I1
-
Afiliações:
- Institute of International Relations and World History Lobachevsky State University
- Edição: Nº 6 (134) (2025)
- Páginas: 141-152
- Seção: PROBLEMS OF ECONOMY
- URL: https://ogarev-online.ru/0201-7083/article/view/357491
- DOI: https://doi.org/10.7868/S3034599525060117
- ID: 357491
Citar
Resumo
The EU maintains its great power status based on its trade, economic and normative (structural) power. The EU’s large-scale and highly differentiated system of regional trade agreements (RTAs) represents a power projection tool in the context of multipolar world order formation. In accordance with the hypothesis that the ongoing inter-regional expansion of the EU’s RTAs network is a factor of geopolitical rivalry with the US and China, the authors assessed the “mercantilist effect”, i.e. an increase in GDP. The latter is achieved within the framework of the EU’s bilateral trade agreements (1) in force, (2) notified (early announced), calculating the foreign trade balance for the entire set of goods and for environmental goods and comparing the data obtained with the results of the EU trade with the US and China. The study showed that the EU’s presence in the markets of the RTA partner states provides an increase in GDP, comparable in size and sustainability to the effect of trade with the US. Currently, the EU does not receive similar advantages in trade with partners under the notified agreements. In goods supply the EU has strategic resource potential (self-sufficiency) and displays it in the framework of both in-force and notified RTAs as well as in its trade with the US, only China demonstrates an advantage in this area in comparison to the EU. Thus, the EU’s strategy for regional trade agreements expansion, characterized by an inter-regional approach and a major economic pragmatism, fits into the logic of mercantilism, representing a tool for global adaptation, since it is able to provide advantages within the framework of great power rivalry and a “green” transition.
Sobre autores
M. Gorbunova
Institute of International Relations and World History Lobachevsky State University
Autor responsável pela correspondência
Email: gorbunova@iee.unn.ru
Doctor of Sciences (Economics), Associate Professor, Leading Researcher Nizhny Novgorod, Russia
I. Komarov
Institute of International Relations and World History Lobachevsky State University
Email: igor.komarof@gmail.com
Candidate of Sciences (History), Senior Researcher Nizhny Novgorod, Russia
M. Rykhtik
Institute of International Relations and World History Lobachevsky State University
Email: rykhtik@imomi.unn.ru
Doctor of Sciences (Politics), Professor, Leading Researcher Nizhny Novgorod, Russia
Bibliografia
- Горбунова М.Л., Комаров И.Д. (2020) Ведущие центры силы в обеспечении безопасности неустойчивых государств мира. Сравнительная политика. Т. 11. № 3. С. 57–74. doi: 10.24411/2221-3279-2020-10036.
- Дегтерев Д.А. (ред.) (2024) Конкуренция между США и КНР: возможности для России. Издательство «Аспект Пресс», Москва. 300 с.
- Конопляник А.А. (2023) Год великого перелома в мировой энергетике: 2022-й как новый 1973-й. О некоторых новых глобальных вызовах и путях их преодоления в России: Ч. 2. Нефтегазовая вертикаль. № 4. С. 72–86.
- Мочалова А.И. (2024) Тема трансформации внешнеэкономической политики ЕС в современной научной литературе. Научно-аналитический вестник Института Европы РАН. № 4(40). С. 58–71. doi: 10.15211/vestnikieran420245869.
- Полуэктов А.Б. (2015) Региональные торговые соглашения Европейского Союза: тенденции и перспективы. Торговая политика. № 4(4). С. 88–105.
- Сергеев Е.А., Сорока К.В. (2024) ЕС как торговая сила: настройка инструментов внешнеэкономической политики. Современная Европа. № 4 (125). С. 73–86. doi: 10.31857/S0201708324040065
- Сергеев Е.А., Воротников В.В. (2023) Стратегия Европейского союза в условиях глобальной перестройки: автономия или эвтаназия? МГИМО-Университет, Москва. 52 с. URL: https://mgimo.ru/upload/iblock/24f/x869ex6ouwkkwvhbbeu0tn6mb4aqorrc/eu-strategy-2023.pdf (дата обращения: 14.07.2025).
- Энтина Е.Г., Дарванова С.Б. (2022) Позиции Европейского парламента по торговым соглашениям «второго поколения». Современная Европа. № 7(114). С. 17–29. doi: 10.31857/S0201708322070026.
- Ciccaglione B., Strickner A. (2014) Global Crises: The Need to Go Beyond Transnational Solidarity in the Struggle Against the Expansion of Free Trade Agreements. Globalizations. Vol. 11. Issue 1. P. 143–153. doi: 10.1080/14747731.2014.860805
- Herranz-Surralles A. (2024). The EU Energy Transition in a Geopoliticizing World. Geopolitics. Vol. 29. Issue 5. P. 1882–1912. doi: 10.1080/14650045.2023.2283489
- Jovanovic T.H., Kristensen S.B. (2015) The EU and Multidimensional Forms of Power: Critical Moments and Change in Actorness and Power. International Journal of Public Administration, Vol. 38. Issue 12. P. 838–848. doi: 10.1080/01900692.2015.1053609
- Keynes J.M. (1936) The General Theory of Employment, Interest and Money. Reprinted 2007. Macmillan, London. 420 p.
- Meissner K.L. (2018) Commercial Realism and EU Trade Policy: Competing for Economic Power in Asia and the Americas. Routledge, Abingdon, UK; N.Y., USA. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781351047647
- Strange S. (1994) State and Markets. 2nd Edition. Continuum, London.
- Uryupina A.E. (2023) Priorities and the key challenges of EU interregional policy. Social'no-gumanitarnye znanija. Issue 12. P. 167–171.
Arquivos suplementares

