Delhi
Concensus The International Conference on
‘Building a New Asia: Towards an Asian Economic Community’, held in New Delhi on
10-11 March 2003, had participation of eminent scholars, experts and policy makers from
China, India, Indonesia, Japan, Korea, Malaysia, the Philippines, Singapore, and Thailand.
The participants have been affiliated with premier think-tanks of Asia such as the Chinese
Academy of International Trade and Economic Cooperation, Korea Institute for International
Economic Policy, Centre for Strategic and International Studies, Jakarta, Malaysian
Institute of Economic Research, Institute of South East Asian Studies, Singapore, National
University of Singapore, Wee Kim Wee Centre Singapore, National Economic Action Council,
Malaysia, Chulalongkorn University, Thailand, International Institute for Trade and
Development, Bangkok, Reitaku University Japan, Tamagawa University Japan, Japan Centre
for International Finance, RIS India, Indian Institute of Foreign Trade, Asian Development
Bank, among a number of others, (Annex 1 for a list).
The Conference was inaugurated by Hon’ble Shri K.C. Pant, Deputy
Chairman, Planning Commission. Hon’ble Mr Koichi Kato delivered the keynote address
and Hon’ble Shri I.K. Gujral, the former Prime Minister of India, delivered the
Valedictory Address. Hon’ble Shri Yashwant Sinha, External Affairs Minister of India,
received a delegation of participants at the Foreign Office. This Note represents an agreed summary
record of the discussion at the Conference. There was a general consensus at the
Conference that the Asian Economic Community is an idea whose time has come. Voices for
more intensive economic cooperation among Asian countries are emanating from different
places. It is also evident from the importance that is being attached by different Asian
countries to regional economic integration at the bilateral or sub-regional levels.
Formation of a broader pan-Asian economic community could enable the region to resume its
rapid growth despite the uncertain global economic outlook and emerge as the centre of
gravity in the world economy. It could also do away with the need for concluding multiple
pairs of bilateral or sub-regional agreements. Regional trade liberalization accompanied
by freer movements of investment, technology and skills among the Asian countries would
generate substantial efficiency gains by enabling the participating countries to exploit
their complementarities to mutual advantage. Furthermore, regional Keynesianism based on
cooperation in finance and monetary policy including the Asian bonds has the potential to
help the region recover hundreds of billions of dollars of potential output lost due to
underutilization of capacity and pull the major economies such as Japan out of prolonged
recession besides helping the region in achieving the exchange rate stability. However, an
important precondition for the integration to be successful would be a common minimum
agenda of reforms undertaken in different economies. Asian countries could also benefit
from exchange of experiences with respect to reforms, financial restructuring and
corporate governance and strengthen their leverage in international negotiations by
greater coordination. In particular, agriculture is an area for a major interest for most
of the countries in the region. An ambitious programme of Asian
economic integration has to be implemented in a gradual or evolutionary manner. First of
all, there could be a phasing of the participation of countries, taking cue from the
experience of successful groupings of the world. A beginning could be made with a core
group combining the major economies that have already made some attempts at regional
economic integration such as ASEAN+3 and ASEAN+1. This core group of major economies viz.
Japan, ASEAN, China, India and Korea (JACIK) alone accounts for half of the world’s
population, a GDP larger than EU’s, exports larger than NAFTA’s and foreign
reserves larger than those of EU’s and NAFTA combined. Once the programmes of
economic integration have consolidated and have produced some results, other interested
countries in Asia could be admitted. Similarly a phasing of the areas of cooperation could
be advisable with cooperation in finance and money taking the lead and trade and
investment liberalization following it closely. The sectoral areas of cooperation need to
be identified. Some sectors that have a great deal of potential include joint R&D and
technology generation in new and high technologies, shipping and maritime cooperation,
tourism, among many other sectors. Technology including ICT is a strength of Asian
countries which could be a key to successful cooperation. Given the expanding demand of
oil and gas in the region, a consideration of cooperation in energy sector was also of
paramount importance. A study of
Asian history shows that in the pre-colonial period, a virtual Asian economic community
existed as evident by vibrant intra-regional exchanges of goods, cultures and values. One
should not underestimate the political, social and institutional challenges to getting an
ambitious programme such as this off-the-ground. Political or strategic implications of an
Asian Economic Community also need to be studied. The economic logic of cooperation could
overcome the challenges posed by reservations, if any, on political or strategic grounds. The
think-tank community of Asia has a critical role to play in realizing the dream of
building a New Asia by showing the way forward to the policy makers with specific
proposals for implementation. We agree to keep the informal network of think-tanks created
at this Conference alive and active as a springboard for generating new ideas. This
Network (or New Asia Network) should conduct research on different aspects of Asian
economic integration to follow-up and further refine the ideas generated at this
Conference. It should regularly exchange ideas among the participants and others
interested in the subject and launch a Newsletter to serve as a forum of exchange of views
and research. Having taken the initiative to organize the Conference and assemble these
think-tanks under one roof, RIS could serve as a nodal point of the New Asia Network and
coordinate its work until alternative arrangements are made. We strongly urge the Governments of the region to consider the recommendations made by the New Asia Network. We could meet again in fall 2004 at a location in Japan and again in New Delhi in 2005 and make presentations based on our work till then. At these Conferences, participation of representatives of the JACIK Governments would help in taking the ideas generated by the Network to their logical conclusion. |
|
|