Competitive features of country associations based on the Global Competitiveness Index: the case of the United States – Mexico – Canada Agreement
-
DOIhttp://dx.doi.org/10.21511/ppm.18(4).2020.16
-
Article InfoVolume 18 2020, Issue #4, pp. 181-190
- Cited by
- 885 Views
-
543 Downloads
This work is licensed under a
Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License
Modern architecture of the world economy is determined not only by the indicators of development of individual national economies and not only by their individual efforts, but also by coordinated efforts of several countries, such as trade agreements. One of such agreements that should lead to freer market relations, fairer trade and sustainable economic growth in the region, better resolution of international disputes, environmental protection, intellectual property protection, etc., is the United States – Mexico – Canada Agreement (USMCA). The aim of this paper is an attempt to analyze the level of global competitiveness of intergovernmental associations (agreements) as influential participants in the international market. To do this, the concepts of “competitive power of the country” and “competitive power of international integration groups” are compared with the concept of firm competitiveness. The competitiveness of the country association was analyzed through the example of the USMCA based on The Global Competitiveness Report 2019 and The Global Competitiveness Index 4.0. used in it. The paper also examines the global challenges and obstacles affecting the level of competitiveness and competitive advantage that each country receives when participating in an international integration agreement. This analysis helps explain real competitive processes in the global economy.
- Keywords
-
JEL Classification (Paper profile tab)F15, F63
-
References41
-
Tables2
-
Figures2
-
- Figure 1. Average Global Competitiveness Index for USMCA (2019)
- Figure 2. Average Global Competitiveness Index for USMCA, EU and ASEAN
-
- Table 1. Criteria for assessing the global competitiveness of countries
- Table 2. USMCA member states in The Global Competitiveness Report 2019
-
- Cann, O. (2016). What is competitiveness? World Economic Forum.
- Chugaiev, O. (2015). National Economic Image and Soft Economic Power Evaluation. Torun International Studies, 1(8), 13-25.
- Chugaiev, O. (2017). The Social and Economic Image of a Country in Terms of the Solidarity Economy. In Filipenko, A. S. (Ed.), Social and Solidarity Economy. The Choice of Ukraine (pp. 144-160). Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.
- Coughlin, C. C., & Novy, D. (2012). Is the International Border Effect Larger than the Domestic Border Effect?: Evidence from US Trade (27 p.). London: London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Research Online.
- Fendel, R., & Frenkel, M. (2005). The international competitiveness of Germany and other European economies: the assessment of the global competitiveness report. Intereconomics, 40, 29-35.
- Frank, J. (2017). The Empirical Consequences of Trade Sanctions for Directly and Indirectly Affected Countries (17 p.) (FIW Working Paper No. 174). Vienna: FIW – Research Centre International Economics.
- Gancia, G., Ponzetto, G. A. M., & Ventura, J. (2017). Globalization and Political Structure (51 p.) (Working Paper No. 78). Barcelona: Barcelona Graduate School of Economics.
- GfK. (2014). Germany Knocks USA off Top Spot for “Best Nation” after 5 Years.
- Haluani, M. (2008). The Shaping of the National Power of States: How Capabilities, Advantages and Individual Performance Produce Competitive Regional Hierarchies. Paper prepared for delivery at the Second Global International Studies Conference of the World International Studies Committee (WISC) (Ljubljana, July 23–26, 2008) (32 p.).
- Hellwig, M. F. (2019). Competitiveness as doublespeak: an interview with Martin Hellwig. Fools’ Gold rethinking competition.
- Jaffe, E. D., & Nebenzahl, I. D. (2001). National Image and Competitive Advantage – The Theory and Practice of Country-of-Origin Effect (237 p.). Copenhagen: Copenhagen Business School Press, Handelshøjskolens Forlag.
- Kharaishvili, E., Gechbaia, B., & Mamuladze, G. (2018). Vegetable market: competitive advantages of Georgian product and competition challenges. Innovative Marketing, 14(3), 8-16.
- Krugman, P. R. (1994). Competitiveness: A Dangerous Obsession. Foreign Affairs, 73, 28-44.
- Krugman, P. R. (1996). Making sense of the competitiveness debate. Oxford Review of Economic Policy, 12, 17-25.
- Lawrence, E., & Garber, J. (2019). USMCA trade agreement reached. Fox Business.
- Menrad, M. (2020). Systematic review of omni-channel banking and preview of upcoming developments in Germany. Innovative Marketing, 16(2), 104-125.
- Office of the United States Trade Representative. (2019). UNITED STATES–MEXICO–CANADA TRADE FACT SHEET Modernizing NAFTA into a 21st Century Trade Agreement.
- Okubo, T., Picard, P., & Thisse, J.-F. (2013). On the Impact of Competition on Trade and Firm Location (34 p.) (CREA Discussion Paper No. 2014-05). Luxemburg: Center for Research in Economic Analysis, University of Luxembourg.
- Panteleev, A. (2019). The system of integration indicators as a tool for analyzing the functioning of regional integration associations. Eurasian Economic Commission. Indikatory integratsii. (In Russian).
- Perelman, M. (2012). Thorstein Veblen: An American Economic Perspective.
- Porter, M. E. (1990). The Competitive Advantage of Nations. Harvard Business Review, 68, 73-91.
- Reinert, E. S. (1994). Competitiveness and its predecessors – a 500-year cross-national perspective (MPRA Paper No. 48155).
- Romaniuk, I. (2015). The System of Statistical Objective and Subjective Indicators of Measuring Quality of Life. Bulletin of Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv, 4, 46-52. (In Ukrainian).
- Rose, A. K. (2015). Like Me, Buy Me: the Effect of Soft Power on Exports (27 p.) (Working Paper No. 21537). Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research.
- Schiff, M. V., & Winters, A. L. (2003). Regional Integration and Development. Washington: The International Bank for Reconstruction and Development/The World Bank.
- Schwab, K. (2018). The Global Competitiveness Report 2018. World Economic Forum.
- Schwab, K. (2019). The Global Competitiveness Report 2019. World Economic Forum.
- Shatz, H. (2016). U.S. International Economic Strategy in a Turbulent World (152 p.). Santa Monica, CA: RAND Corporation.
- Sidenko, V. (2012). Modification of the World Economy under the Influence of New Factors of Global Transformational Crisis. Ukraine Economy, 5, 18-31. (In Ukrainian).
- Siggel, E. (2006). International competitiveness and comparative advantage: A survey and a proposal for measurement. Journal of Industry, Competition and Trade, 6, 137-159.
- Soo, K. T. (2013). Intra-industry Trade: A Krugman-Ricardo Model and Data (Economics Working Paper No. 2013/006). Lancaster: Lancaster University.
- Spolaore, E. (2018). Small States and the Future of International Integration (Presentation). Prepared for the Conference: Competitiveness Strategies for the EU Small States. Luxembourg, Kirchberg.
- Stokes, B. (2013). What Japanese and Americans Think about Each Other. Washington, D. C.: Pew Research Center.
- Suknunan, S., & Maharaj, M. (2019). The role of knowledge management in institutional strategy development and competitiveness at leading African universities. Knowledge and Performance Management, 3(1), 19-30.
- Swanson, A., & Tankersley, J. (2020). Trump Signs Trade Deal with Canada and Mexico. The New York Times.
- Vlachvei, A., & Notta, O. (2016). Firm Competitiveness: Theories, Evidence and Measurement. In Factors Affecting Firm Competitiveness and Performance in the Modern Business World (pp. 1-42). IGI Global.
- Vlados, Ch. M. (2019). Porter’s diamond approaches and the competitiveness web. International Journal of Business Administration, 10(5), 33-52.
- Voinescu, R., & Moisoiu, C. (2015). Competitiveness, Theoretical and Policy Approaches. Towards a more competitive EU. Procedia Economics and Finance, 22, 512-521.
- Wigell, M. (2016). Conceptualizing Regional Powers’ Geoeconomic Strategies: Neo-imperialism, Neo-mercantilism, Hegemony, and Liberal Institutionalism. Asia Europe Journal, 14, 135-151.
- Wolf, M. (2004). Why Globalization Works 268 p. Yale University Press.
- World Economic Forum. (2020). Shaping a Multiconceptual World: Special Report, 2020.