Duterte’s Foreign Policy Pivot and Its Impact on Philippine Trade and Investments: An International Political Economy Perspective
In: Philippine Political Science JournalSearch for other papers by Jenny D. Balboa in
Current site
Google Scholar
Abstract
Since the Philippines elected President Rodrigo Duterte in 2016, the country’s foreign policy seems to have become more uncertain. President Duterte’s mercurial personality and antagonistic tirades against the country’s traditional Western allies, including the United States (US) and the European Union (EU), and his statements of building closer ties with China and Russia, had changed the political and diplomatic tone of the Philippines overall. Certainly, the political relationship between the Philippines and the West has been changed by Duterte’s strong remarks against the US and EU. Has this change spilled over to the economy? The paper presents an international political economy framework in examining the impact of Duterte’s foreign policy pivot to the country’s foreign economic relations, focusing on trade and investment. The paper argues that Duterte’s foreign policy shift is mainly shaped by Duterte’s “politics of survival”. Not firmly anchored in any idea, norms, or interest that can clearly benefit the country, Duterte is unable to provide coherent guidance and leadership on the foreign policy pivot, particularly on the economy. Duterte’s lack of guidance provided the technocrats with the policy space to continue the policies from the previous administration and not to divert radically from previous economic policies. The stability of the economic institutions provided a refuge in the period of uncertainty. As a result, the foreign economic relations of the Philippines has not radically shifted. The trade and investment situation of the Philippines remained stable, and economic relations with traditional partners are maintained.
Purchase
Buy instant access (PDF download and unlimited online access):
Institutional Login
Log in with Open Athens, Shibboleth, or your institutional credentials
Personal login
Log in with your brill.com account
-
Arugay, Aries. 2018. “When Populists Perform Foreign Policy: Duterte and the Asia-Pacific Regional Order.” SWP Working Paper. German Institute for International and Security Affairs. https://www.swp-berlin.org/fileadmin/contents/products/projekt_papiere/Arugay_BCAS_Philippines.pdf
-
Balboa, Jenny. 2018. “Policy Innovation Under Democratic Leadership in a Weak State: Trade Liberalization and AFTA Implementation in the Philippines.” PhD diss., Tokyo: National Graduate Institute for Policy Studies. https://www.grips.ac.jp/jp/dtds3/balboa_jenny_de_asis/
-
Baviera, Aileen. 2011. “The Influence of Domestic Politics on Philippine Foreign Policy: The Case of Philippines-China Relations since 2004.” RSIS Working Paper No. 241.
-
Baviera, Aileen. 2016. “President Duterte’s Foreign Policy Challenges.” Contemporary Southeast Asia 38 (2): 202–208.
-
Baviera, Aileen. 2017. “Duterte’s China Policy Shift: Strategy or Serendipity?” East Asia Forum. https://www.eastasiaforum.org/2017/08/13/dutertes-china-policy-shift-strategy-or-serendipity/
-
Business Europe Economic Outlook. 2019. “EU economy weakens as trade tensions continue”. Economic Outlook 2019. https://www.businesseurope.eu/publications/businesseurope-economic-outlook-autumn-2019-eu-economy-weakens-trade-tensions-continue
-
Curato, Nicole and Ong, Jonathan Corpus. 2018. “Who Laughs at a Rape Joke? Illiberal Responsiveness in Rodrigo Duterte’s Philippines”. Ethical Responsiveness and the Politics of Difference. 65. Retrieved from https://scholarworks.umass.edu/communication_faculty_pubs/65
-
Davis, Christina; Fuchs, Andreas; Johnson, Kristina. 2014. “State Control and the Effects of Foreign Relations on Bilateral Trade”. Discussion Paper Series, No. 576, University of Heidelberg, Department of Economics, Heidelberg, http://dx.doi.org/10.11588/heidok.00017673
-
De Castro, Renato. 2016. “The Duterte Administration’s Foreign Policy: Unravelling the Aquino Administration’s Balancing Agenda on an Emergent China”. Journal of Current Southeast Asian Affairs, 35, 3, 139–159. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/186810341603500307
-
De Castro, Renato. 2018. “Explaining the Duterte Administration’s Appeasement Policy on China: The Power of Fear.” Asian Affairs: An American Review, 45:3–4, 165–191, DOI: 10.1080/00927678.2019.1589664 https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/186810341603500307
-
De Castro, Renato. 2019. “From Appeasement to Soft Balancing: The Duterte Administration’s Shifting Policy on the South China Sea Imbroglio.” SWP Working Paper German Institute for International and Security Affairs.https://www.swp-berlin.org/fileadmin/contents/products/projekt_papiere/BCAS_2019_CruzDeCastro_Duterte.pdf
-
Erkekoglu, H. and Kilicarslan, Z. 2016. “Do Political Risks Affect the Foreign Direct Investment Inflows to Host Countries?” Journal of Business Economics and Finance, volume 5, issue 2. DergiPark Akademik.
-
Frieden, Jeffrey and Lake, David. 2003. “International Politics and Economics.” In International Political Economy 2nd Edition (Ed C. Roe Goddard, Patrick Cronin, and Kishore Dash). Boulder: Lynne Rienner Publishers, Inc.
-
Frieden, Jeffry, and Lisa Martin. “International Political Economy: Global and Domestic Interactions”. Political Science: The State of the Discipline. Ed. Ira Katznelson & Helen V Milner. New York: W.W. Norton, 2003. Print. Copy at https://j.mp/2oowxQo
-
Frieden, Jeffry. “Actors and Preferences in International Relations”. Strategic Choice and International Relations. Ed. David A Lake & Robert Powell. Princeton University Press, 1999. Web.
-
Gowa, Joanne. 1994. Allies, Adversaries, and International Trade. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
-
Hayakama, K. Kimura, F. and Lee, H-H. 2011. “How Does Country Risk Matter for Foreign Direct Investment?” The Developing Economies 51 (1). March.
-
Holland, Ben and Cedric Sam. 2019. “A $600 Billion Bill: Counting the Global Cost of the US-China Trade War.” Bloomberg, May 28. https://www.bloomberg.com/graphics/2019-us-china-trade-war-economic-fallout/
-
Hudson, Valerie. 2007. Foreign Policy Analysis: Classic and Contemporary Theory. Maryland: Rowman and Littlefield Publishers, Inc.
-
Ibarra, Edcel John. 2017. “The Philippines’ “Pivot” to China: A Review of Perspectives.” Center for International Relations and Strategic Studies. CIRSS Commentaries. vol. IV, No. 9, May.
-
International Monetary Fund. 2020. “Philippines Selected Issues.” IMF Country Report No. 20/37, February.
-
Katzenstein, Peter J. 1978. Between Power and Plenty: Foreign economic policies of advanced industrial states. Madison: The University of Wisconsin Press.
-
Katzenstein, Peter J. 1996. The Culture of National Security. New York: Columbia University Press.
-
Keshk, Omar, Rafael Reuveny and Brian Pollins, 2004. “Trade Still Follows the Flag: The Primacy of Politics in a Simultaneous Model of Interdependence and Armed Conflict.” Journal of Politics 66(4):1155–1179.
-
Lee, H-H and Rajan, R.S. 2009. “Cross-border investment linkages among APEC economies: the case of Foreign Direct Investment”. APEC Policy Support Unit.
-
Mizuho Economic Outlook & Analysis. “Japan’s FDI trends in Asia. 2018.” November 2, 2018. https://www.mizuho-ri.co.jp/publication/research/pdf/eo/MEA181218.pdf
-
North, D. 1990. Institutions, Institutional Change and Economic Performance. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
-
Oxford Business Group. “Philippines.” https://oxfordbusinessgroup.com/overview/diversified-market-manufacturing-drive-continued-expansion-amid-uncertainty-surrounding-egulatory
-
Puddington, Arch. 2017. “Authoritarian Internationalism for the 21st Century.” In Will Human Rights Survive Democracy. Ed. A Muis and L. Van Troost . Strategic Studies, Amnesty International Netherlands.
-
Radin, Andrew and Raphael Cohen. 2019. “Russia’s Soft Strategy to Hostile Measures in Europe.” Rand Blog, February. https://www.rand.org/blog/2019/02/russias-soft-strategy-to-hostile-measures-in-europe.html
-
Smith-Hilmon, A.V. and Omar, M. 2005. “FDI, international business and regulation: The behavior of UK multinational corporations.” Emerald Insight Open Access Journal.
-
> Stent. Angela. 2020. Why are US-Russia Relations so Challenging? Brookings, April 27. https://www.brookings.edu/policy2020/votervital/why-are-us-russia-relations-so-challenging/
-
US State Department. 2019. “2019 Investment Climate Statements.” https://www.state.gov/reports/2019-investment-climate-statements/philippines__trashed/
| All Time | Past 365 days | Past 30 Days | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Abstract Views | 14610 | 1977 | 115 |
| Full Text Views | 1382 | 41 | 4 |
| PDF Views & Downloads | 11040 | 101 | 10 |
Duterte’s Foreign Policy Pivot and Its Impact on Philippine Trade and Investments: An International Political Economy Perspective
In: Philippine Political Science JournalSearch for other papers by Jenny D. Balboa in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Abstract
Since the Philippines elected President Rodrigo Duterte in 2016, the country’s foreign policy seems to have become more uncertain. President Duterte’s mercurial personality and antagonistic tirades against the country’s traditional Western allies, including the United States (US) and the European Union (EU), and his statements of building closer ties with China and Russia, had changed the political and diplomatic tone of the Philippines overall. Certainly, the political relationship between the Philippines and the West has been changed by Duterte’s strong remarks against the US and EU. Has this change spilled over to the economy? The paper presents an international political economy framework in examining the impact of Duterte’s foreign policy pivot to the country’s foreign economic relations, focusing on trade and investment. The paper argues that Duterte’s foreign policy shift is mainly shaped by Duterte’s “politics of survival”. Not firmly anchored in any idea, norms, or interest that can clearly benefit the country, Duterte is unable to provide coherent guidance and leadership on the foreign policy pivot, particularly on the economy. Duterte’s lack of guidance provided the technocrats with the policy space to continue the policies from the previous administration and not to divert radically from previous economic policies. The stability of the economic institutions provided a refuge in the period of uncertainty. As a result, the foreign economic relations of the Philippines has not radically shifted. The trade and investment situation of the Philippines remained stable, and economic relations with traditional partners are maintained.
| All Time | Past 365 days | Past 30 Days | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Abstract Views | 14610 | 1977 | 115 |
| Full Text Views | 1382 | 41 | 4 |
| PDF Views & Downloads | 11040 | 101 | 10 |