Geoeconomics

Last updated
Edward Luttwak was among the first post-Cold War contributors to the idea that the future of geopolitical competition would extend into the economic sphere. Edward Luttwak.jpg
Edward Luttwak was among the first post-Cold War contributors to the idea that the future of geopolitical competition would extend into the economic sphere.

Geoeconomics (sometimes geo-economics) is the study of the spatial, temporal, and political aspects of economies and resources. Although there is no widely accepted singular definition, [1] the distinction of geoeconomics separately from geopolitics is often attributed to Edward Luttwak, an American strategist and military consultant, and Pascal Lorot, a French economist and political scientist. [2] [3]

Contents

The Singapore Economic Forum has emphasized the increasingly dynamic, complex aspects of leaders' decisions in the “Age of Geoeconomics”. Policy makers and CEOs alike have to "assess constantly techno-economic returns and legal-political risks on a combined geoeconomic plane." [4] Azerbaijani economist Vusal Gasimli defines geo-economics as the study of the interrelations of economics, geography and politics in the "infinite cone" rising from the center of the earth to outer space (including the economic analysis of planetary resources). [5]

In geopolitics, a common approach involves three levels of analysis. Geoeconomics can employ this three layers approach as well. [6] There is a policy layer, as in international political economy; an integration layer, as in economic geography and industrial organization; and a transaction layer, as in the transactions exemplified in financial economics.

"The logic of conflict in the grammar of commerce"

Luttwak argues that the same logic that underlies military conflict also pertains to international commerce:

Geoeconomics vs. geopolitics

There is not yet an authoritative definition of geoeconomics that is clearly distinct from geopolitics. The challenge of separating geopolitics and geoeconomics into separate spheres is due to their interdependence: interactions among nation-states as indivisible sovereign units exercising political power, and the predominance of neoclassical economics' "logic of commerce" that ostensibly separates market dynamics from political power. The following descriptions of geoeconomics indicate the challenge of distinguishing it from the field of geopolitics:

Moreover, the levels of analysis in geoeconomics (policy, integration, and transaction) are similarly entangled with national policy, which can range from tax incentives for particular industries to anti-money laundering laws or sanctions that constrain particular cross-border financial transactions.

Mercantilism

Geo-economics is not to be confused with mercantilism or neo-mercantilism. Under mercantilism, the goal of which was to maximize national gold stocks, when commercial quarrels evolved into political quarrels, which could then lead to military conflicts. Therefore, mercantilist competition was subordinate to military competition, as the former modality was governed by the ever-present possibility that the ‘loser’ in a commercial quarrel could then challenge the outcome militarily. For example:

"Spain might decree that all trade to and from its American colonies could only travel in Spanish bottoms through Spanish ports, but British and Dutch armed merchantmen could still convey profitable cargoes to disloyal colonists in defiance of Spanish sloops; and, with war declared, privateers could seize outright the even more profitable cargoes bound for Spain. Likewise, the Dutch sent their frigates into the Thames to reply to the mercantilist legislation of the British Parliament that prohibited their cabotage, just as much earlier the Portuguese had sunk Arab ships with which they could not compete in the India trade." [2]

In the new era of geo-economics, however, there is no superior modality: Both the causes and the instruments of conflict can be economic. When commercial disagreements do lead to international political clashes, the disputes must be resolved with the weapons of commerce.

The "weapons" of geoeconomics

States engage in geo-economic competition through both through assisting or directing domestic private entities, or through direct action opposing foreign commercial interests:

According to Luttwak, offensive weapons are more important in geo-economics, as they are in war. Moreover, state-sponsored research and development is the most important of these weapons.

"Just as in war the artillery conquers territory by fire, which the infantry can then occupy, the aim here is to conquer industries of the future by achieving technological superiority." [11]

The "infantry" in this analogy corresponds to commercial production, which can also be supported by the state through various forms of subsidies. Yet another geo-economic weapon is predatory finance. If operation subsidies are insufficient to allow domestic exporters to overcome strong competitors, states can offer loans at below-market interest rates. The United States’ Export-Import, for example, provides loan guarantees to finance exports, and equivalent institutions exist across all major industrial countries.

"Thus foreigners routinely pay lower interest rates than local borrowers, whose taxes pay for the very concessions that foreigners receive. That already amounts to hunting for exports with low-interest ammunition, but the accusation of predatory finance is reserved for cases where interest rates are suddenly reduced in the course of a fought-over sale. Naturally, the chief trading states have promised to each other that they will do no such thing. Naturally, they frequently break that promise." [11]

"Weaponized interdependence"

"Weaponized interdependence" is a term defined by Henry Farrell and Abraham L. Newman. [12] Farrell and Newman do not address geoeconomics directly, however, their article addresses core factors for how power is exercised in the framework of geoeconomics:

"Specifically, we show how the topography of the economic networks of interdependence intersects with domestic institutions and norms to shape coercive authority. Our account places networks such as financial communications, supply chains, and the internet, which have been largely neglected by international relations scholars, at the heart of a compelling new understanding of globalization and power."

The framework used by Farrell and Newman is based on network theory, and frames the structure of power as a network of asymmetric interrelationships that enable central actors to "weaponized the structural advantages for coercive ends." [12] States which obtain a sufficient structural advantage will be able to exercise either or both a "panopticon effect" and a "chokepoint effect". The panopticon effect is based upon Jeremy Bentham's Panopticon, which enables a few central actors to observe the activities of others due to the information access afforded by the network structure. The chokepoint effect is the ability of states with an advantageous position to limit or penalize the use of key information nodes (sometimes referred as "hubs") by others.

"The laws of geo-economic gravity"

M. Nicolas J. Firzli of the Singapore Economic Forum has argued that "adhering to the laws of geo-economic gravity" including the need for financial self-sufficiency and the existence of advanced, diversified energy and transportation infrastructure assets, are now essential to ensure the effective sovereignty of a state: "the government of Qatar is now paying an incommensurate price for having thought it could defy forever the laws of geo-economic gravity." [13]

From that perspective, investment attractiveness and the capacity to project soft power across considerable distance as China has done through its Belt and Road Initiative are also viewed as a key determinants of geo-economic strength. [14]

Here, large private sector asset owners such as pension funds are expected to play an increasingly important part, alongside US and Chinese state actors:

Even the self-absorbed, thrifty ‘America first’ policy makers in the White House eventually realized they couldn't ignore these fateful geo-economic developments. In November 2018, vice-president Mike Pence travelled to Asia to promote President Trump's ‘Indo-Pacific Vision’, an ambitious plan backed by tens of billions of dollars in new loans and credit-enhancement mechanisms to encourage "private investment in regional infrastructure assets", insisting that "business, not bureaucrats will facilitate our efforts". The new great game has just started, and pension investors will be courted assiduously by both Washington and Beijing in the coming years – not a bad position to be in in the ‘age of geoeconomics’. [15]

See also

Further reading

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Mercantilism</span> Economic policy emphasizing exports

Mercantilism is a nationalist economic policy that is designed to maximize the exports and minimize the imports for an economy. In other words, it seeks to maximize the accumulation of resources within the country and use those resources for one-sided trade.

Geopolitics is the study of the effects of Earth's geography on politics and international relations. While geopolitics usually refers to countries and relations between them, it may also focus on two other kinds of states: de facto independent states with limited international recognition and relations between sub-national geopolitical entities, such as the federated states that make up a federation, confederation, or a quasi-federal system.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Edward Luttwak</span> Romanian–American military strategist (born 1942)

Edward Nicolae Luttwak is an American author known for his works on grand strategy, military strategy, geoeconomics, military history, and international relations. He is best known for being the author of Coup d'État: A Practical Handbook. His book Strategy: The Logic of War and Peace, also published in Chinese, Russian and ten other languages, is widely used at war colleges around the world. His books are currently published in 29 languages besides English.

International political economy (IPE) is the study of how politics shapes the global economy and how the global economy shapes politics. A key focus in IPE is on the distributive consequences of global economic exchange. It has been described as the study of "the political battle between the winners and losers of global economic exchange."

Economic interdependence is the mutual dependence of the participants in an economic system who trade in order to obtain the products they cannot produce efficiently for themselves. Such trading relationships require that the behavior of a participant affects its trading partners and it would be costly to rupture their relationship. The subject was addressed by A. A. Cournot who wrote: "...but in reality the economic system is a whole in which all of the parts are connected and react on one another. An increase in the income of the producers of commodity A will affect the demands for commodities B, C, etc. and the incomes of their producers, and by its reaction will affect the demand for commodity A." Economic Interdependence is evidently a consequence of the division of labour.

Geostrategy, a subfield of geopolitics, is a type of foreign policy guided principally by geographical factors as they inform, constrain, or affect political and military planning. As with all strategies, geostrategy is concerned with matching means to ends Strategy is as intertwined with geography as geography is with nationhood, or as Colin S. Gray and Geoffrey Sloan state it, "[geography is] the mother of strategy."

In the humanities discipline of critical theory, critical geopolitics is an academic school of thought centered on the idea that intellectuals of statecraft construct ideas about places, that these ideas have influence and reinforce their political behaviors and policy choices, and that these ideas affect how people process their own notions of places and politics.

Robert Gilpin was an American political scientist. He was Professor of Politics and International Affairs at the Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affairs at Princeton University where he held the Eisenhower professorship.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Economic Coordination Committee (Pakistan)</span>

The Economic Coordination Committee, is a principle federal institution and a consultative forum used by the people-elected Prime Minister of Pakistan as its chairman, for concerning matters of state's economic security, geoeconomic, political economic and financial endowment issues. Although it is often chaired by the Finance Minister and the senior economic officials as its members on multiple occasions, the key executive authorization on key economic policies are made by the Prime Minister of Pakistan who reserves the right call upon and serves as the chairman of the ECC.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Complex interdependence</span>

Complex interdependence in international relations and international political economy is a concept put forth by Robert Keohane and Joseph Nye in the 1970s to describe the emerging nature of the global political economy. The concept entails that relations between states are becoming increasingly deep and complex. These increasingly complex webs of economic interdependence undermine state power and elevate the influence of transnational non-state actors. These complex relationships can be explored through both the liberal and realism lenses and can later explain the debate of power from complex interdependence.

Political risk is a type of risk faced by investors, corporations, and governments that political decisions, events, or conditions will significantly affect the profitability of a business actor or the expected value of a given economic action. Political risk can be understood and managed with reasoned foresight and investment.

Headquartered in the heart of Paris, France, Institut Choiseul for International Politics and Geoeconomics is an independent research center that analyzes international relations, economic and political strategies as well as international cultures.

Pascal Lorot is a French economist and geopolitician.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Carlo Pelanda</span> Italian economist and professor

Carlo A. Pelanda is an Italian professor of Political Science and Economics.

Infrastructure-based economic development, also called infrastructure-driven development, combines key policy characteristics inherited from the Rooseveltian progressive tradition and neo-Keynesian economics in the United States, France's Gaullist and neo-Colbertist centralized economic planning, Scandinavian social democracy as well as Singaporean and Chinese state capitalism: it holds that a substantial proportion of a nation’s resources must be systematically directed towards long term assets such as transportation, energy and social infrastructure in the name of long term economic efficiency and social equity.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Alexander Mirtchev</span> American economist

Alexander Mirtchev is an American business executive, academic, author, and philanthropist working in the areas of global economic security, political risk analysis, and geo-economics. He is a vice chair of the Atlantic Council of the United States, member of the executive and strategy committees and the advisory council of the Scowcroft Center for Strategy and Security. Mirtchev is also a founding council member of the Kissinger Institute on China and the United States at the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars, where he also served as a senior fellow and member of the Wilson National Cabinet. Mirtchev is also a distinguished visiting professor at George Mason University's Schar School of Government and Policy. He served as vice president of the Royal United Services Institute for Defense and Security Studies (RUSI), UK, as well as executive chairman of RUSI International. He is also the president and founder of Krull Corp., a macro-economic geopolitical consultancy. Mirtchev is a member of the James Madison Council of the Library of Congress. His new book, "The Prologue: The Alternative Energy Megatrend in the Age of Great Power Competition," is published in English, German, Spanish, and Russian.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">2010s oil glut</span> Oversupply of oil in the 2010s

The 2010s oil glut was a significant surplus of crude oil that started in 2014–2015 and accelerated in 2016, with multiple causes. They include general oversupply as unconventional US and Canadian tight oil production reached critical volumes, geopolitical rivalries among oil-producing nations, falling demand across commodities markets due to the deceleration of the Chinese economy, and possible restraint of long-term demand as environmental policy promotes fuel efficiency and steers an increasing share of energy consumption away from fossil fuels.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Jennifer M. Harris</span> American academic

Jennifer Michelle Harris is an academic, who studies United States foreign policy and economics.

Energy diplomacy is a form of diplomacy, and a subfield of international relations. It is closely related to its principal, foreign policy, and to overall national security, specifically energy security. Energy diplomacy began in the first half of the twentieth century and emerged as a term during the second oil crisis as a means of describing OPEC's actions. It has since mainly focused on the securitization of energy supplies, primarily fossil fuels, but also nuclear energy and increasingly sustainable energy, on a country or bloc basis.

Geopolitical economy is a contemporary Marxist approach to understanding the capitalist world historically. It was proposed by Radhika Desai in her Geopolitical Economy: After US Hegemony, Globalization and Empire as a critique of contemporary mainstream theories of International political economy (IPE) and International relations (IR). Geopolitical economy's critique rests on a rejection of orthodox views of the world economy as a seamless whole, united either by markets or by a single leading state, as in free market, free trade "globalization" and "hegemony" theories respectively. Instead, geopolitical economy emphasizes the interplay of political entities, namely, states, in the development of capitalism by going back to classical political economy and to the Marxist theories of imperialism, which geopolitical economy argues should be considered the first theories of international relations.

References

  1. 1 2 Petsinger, Marianne (July 23, 2020). "What is Geoeconomics?" (PDF). Chatham House. Archived from the original on July 23, 2020. Retrieved July 23, 2020.
  2. 1 2 3 Luttwak, Edward N. (1990). "From Geopolitics to Geo-Economics: Logic of Conflict, Grammar of Commerce". The National Interest (20): 17–23. JSTOR   42894676.
  3. ↑ Lorot, Pascal (1999). Introduction à la Géoéconomie. Paris : Institut européen de géoéconomie : Economica. p. 219. ISBN   2-7178-3962-3.
  4. ↑ David Weeks & Nicolas Firzli (20 February 2021). "Asset Allocation & Risk Management in a Fractured World". singaporeforum.org. Institutional Investment Research (IIR). SSRN   3793199 . Retrieved 25 February 2021.
  5. ↑ Gasimli, Vusal (2015). Geo-economics. Baku: Center for Strategic Studies. p. 11. ISBN   9789952274103.
  6. ↑ Singer, J. David (October 1961). "The Level-of-Analysis Problem in International Relations". World Politics. Cambridge University Press. 14 (1): 77–92. doi:10.2307/2009557. JSTOR   2009557. S2CID   12404896.
  7. ↑ Malmgren, Philippa "Pippa" (9 March 2015). Geopolitics for Investors (1 ed.). CFA Institute Research Foundation. p. 18. ISBN   978-1-934667-83-5.
  8. ↑ Merriam-Webster.com Dictionary. "Geo-economics". Merriam-Webster.com. Merriam-Webster. Retrieved 9 August 2020.
  9. ↑ Nixon, Richard (January 15, 1992). Seize the Moment: America's Challenge in a One-superpower World (First ed.). Simon & Schuster. p. 23. ISBN   9781476731865.
  10. ↑ Blackwill, Robert D.; Harris, Jennifer (2016). War By Other Means: Geoeconomics and Statecraft (1 ed.). Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press. p. 20. ISBN   9780674737211.
  11. 1 2 Edward., Luttwak (1999). Turbo-capitalism : winners and losers in the global economy (1st U.S. ed.). New York: HarperCollinsPublishers. ISBN   978-0060193300. OCLC   40767635.
  12. 1 2 Farrell, Henry; Newman, Abraham L. (July 29, 2019). "Weaponized Interdependence: How Global Economic Networks Shape State Coercion". International Security. 44 (1): 42–79. doi: 10.1162/isec_a_00351 . S2CID   198952367.
  13. ↑ Firzli, M. Nicolas J. (17 June 2017). "The Qatar Crisis and the Eastern Flank of the MENA Area". Al Sharq Al Awsat. Riyadh. Retrieved 16 August 2017.
  14. ↑ Firzli, M. Nicolas J. (7 July 2017). "G20 Nations Shifting the Trillions: Impact Investing, Green Infrastructure and Inclusive Growth". Revue Analyse Financière. Paris. SSRN   3077974.
  15. ↑ Nicolas Firzli, "Institutional Investment in the Age of Geoeconomics" Investment & Pensions Europe (IPE) 10 April, 2019
This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.