Trade watchers have had two important pieces of news this week. First, Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP) has enough members on board to bring the agreement into force on January 1, 2022. Note that the initial membership includes 10 of the 15 signatories: Australia, Brunei, Cambodia, China, Japan, Laos, New Zealand, Singapore, Thailand, and Vietnam. (The remaining members will become active participants 60 days after they have completed domestic level ratification procedures and submitted their letter to the ASEAN Secretariat.) Over all the years of negotiations and the time spent moving from substantial conclusion to signature to approval at the domestic level inside member governments, there has been repeated skepticism over whether or not RCEP would ever see the light of day. As a result, companies have been quite slow to get ready. With the actual launch less than 60 days away, it is time to focus. Firms should be rapidly preparing to use the agreement now. The second piece of trade news, however, was an even bigger bombshell. China officially asked to join the Digital Economy Partnership Agreement (DEPA). This agreement is only recently in force between the three members Chile, New Zealand and Singapore. DEPA was originally designed by these three small open economies as a way to build consistency in approaches to the digital economy. The idea was to create a series of “modules.” Each module covered a specific topic such as paperless trading or Artificial Intelligence (AI). Some modules, particularly those like paperless trading or non-discrimination against digital products, have become a more regular feature embedded in many different types of agreements, and have stronger, more legally binding language in DEPA. Other modules, especially those on new and evolving topics like AI or digital identities, were designed to encourage cooperation between members.
Designing Next Generation Trade Agreements for the Digital Economy
From a business perspective, getting an agreement on digital rules among the widest number of countries is best. Such a decision will create conditions for improved stability, lowered risk and reduced compliance costs in engaging in trade and business everywhere, with similar or identical rules and regulations in place. But there is a trade-off between getting an agreement with many parties and getting an agreement in a timeframe that businesses would view as helpful. While governments can operate in cycles of years, companies are concerned about results every quarter. This mismatch between expectations and timing is particularly acute in the digital world, where business developments are often made at light speed. Governments are sometimes struggling to even understand the ideas and principles of digital trade and are faced with particular challenges in crafting sensible regulations. Digital trade was largely unregulated, or lightly addressed, in most places up until a few short years ago. With few exceptions, firms were free to do whatever they wanted in the digital space, as long as they did not violate existing non-digital rules. Governments tried to adapt physical rules, in some instances, to the digital realm. This situation has grown increasingly untenable. The exponential growth rates of the digital economy means that governments cannot go on trying to shoehorn analogue rules to digital products and services. So how should governments manage the increasingly important digital world? There are at least four broad responses so far.
Unpacking the Digital Economy Partnership Agreement (DEPA)
The DEPA sits in the middle. It sets out a series of modules covering a range of topics of relevance to firms that trade digital services, ship goods across borders via e-commerce, or are otherwise involved in the digital and technology space. These modules are meant to be building blocks. Countries could opt to dock directly onto the DEPA, expanding the agreement with new members. Or governments could decide to pick up and use modules, in whole or in part, in various settings. These include slotting them directly into other trade agreements or opting to align domestic policies to DEPA. The significance of DEPA does not sit with the current three members, who have largely already agreed to uphold the same commitments and principles in the agreement under their Comprehensive and Progressive Trans-Pacific Partnership (CPTPP) membership. Instead, DEPA matters if and when more governments agree to use the modules or align domestic policy with its framework and structure. The spread of DEPA is key—if non-members who are considering problematic rules on the digital economy could be encouraged to join, the agreement will be seen as a critical turning point for policy on digital issues.