Through Bilateral Agreements

11. Vicard V. Determinants of successful regional trade agreements. Econ Lett. (2011) 111:188–90. doi: 10.1016/j.econlet.2011.02.010 Bilaterale Bildungsabkommen, die Griechenland mit Drittländern unterzeichnet hat, lauten wie folgt (das Datum in Klammern bezieht sich auf das Jahr, in dem die bilateralen Abkommen nach griechischem Recht gesetzlich ratifiziert wurden): Aserbaidschan (Aserbaidschan (1999), Ägypten (1957), Äthiopien (1955), Albanien (2000), Algerien (1991), Argentinien (1977), Armenien (1997), Australien (1981), Venezuela (1995), Vietnam (20 11) Brasilien (2004), Georgien (1997), Guinea (1981), Bosnien (2004), Vereinigte Arabische Emirate (1977), Vereinigte Staaten von Amerika (1991), Japan (1982), Indien (1962), Indonesien (2005), Jordanien (1979), Irak (1980), Iran (1968), Israel (1994), Kasachstan (2007), Kanada (2000), China (1979), Kolumbien (1993), S. Korea (1970), Kuba (1986), Kuwait (1985), Libanon (2003), Libyen (2007), Marokko (1996), Mauretanien (1979), Mexiko (1984), Mongolei (1993), Moldawien (2011) Bahrain (1977) , Burundi (1985), Norvège (1980) P. Africa (2009), Oman (1979), Uzbekistan (1998), Ukraine (1999), Uruguay (1963), Pakistan (1979), Palestine (2001), Panama (1998), Paraguay (2004), Peru (1993), Russia (1995), Senegal (198-199 5) 4), Serbia (1959), Seychelles (1986), Sudan (1985), Syria (1979), Thailand (2005), Turkey (2001), Tunisia (1991), Yemen (1993) Philippines (1998), Chile (1967), San Marino (2018). The Dominican Republic-Central America (CAFTA-DR) is a free trade agreement between the United States and the small central American economies. It is called El Salvador, Dominican Republic, Guatemala, Costa Rica, Nicaragua and Honduras. NAFTA replaced bilateral agreements with Canada and Mexico in 1994. The United States renegotiated NAFTA as part of the U.S.-Mexico agreement, which came into effect in 2020. BTA`s impact indices on U.S.

export ties with their partners highlight a possible focus on boosting their own exports during the negotiations. Although the importance of import links between contracting parties has also increased for the United States, a positive trend has been observed only for Australia, Central America and Jordan. However, this increase in the volume of trade is less important for U.S. partners than their market expansion vis-à-vis third countries. The fact that most U.S. partners reached significantly lower levels after the implementation of their respective BTAs shows that while the volume of bilateral trade is increasing, partner economies have become less dependent on the United States as trading partners. One possible reason for this observation would simply be to make other domestic markets more attractive to the trading partners concerned, who serve as alternative partners, for example. B, due to the general decline in labour costs in these third countries. Since policy decisions are generally based on individual considerations, national policies can only create a general economic environment, but will hardly be able to fully meet the challenge of international economic competition. 7.

Dai M, Yotov YV, Zylkin T. On the impact of free trade agreements on trade diversion. Econ Lett. (2014) 122:321-5. doi: 10.1016/j.econlet.2013.12.024 Figure 4. Trade profile for China. Ti china to its partners (above) and partner in China (below) within 5 years of the effective date of each BTA. The left and right zones show the results of export links (imports). China`s BTA partners include Chile (CHL), Hong Kong (HKG), New Zealand (NZL), Pakistan (HAP) and the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (AS).

The score values displayed in red (violet) z imply a higher (lower) IT level in the 5-year period after tf.