European Union andChinaare very important economic entities in the world. Trade between them has quite a long history and affects the world trade enormously. The appearance of economic integration in the worldwide influences international trade largely and the influence is becoming bigger and bigger. The integration ofEuropeaffects trade between these two big entities, too. As there’re a few researches about this topic, this paper is going to study what may happen to trade betweenChinaand EU under the influence of economic integration ofEurope. Firstly, I show the history between these two entities to make the background clear. Secondly, I represent some important theories about international trade. Then by using Krugman’s new trade theory, I analyze current situation of trade between them. After that, I introduce economic integration in detail. At last, with the help of Panel Cointegration and Vector Error Correction Model built by Zhang Bin and Yang Yong, I get my conclusion about the future of trade between China and EU: Economic integration of Europe has a negative influence on trade between China and EU, but the influence is not strong enough to change the pattern of today’s trade. Trade pattern betweenChinaand EU will go on developing.

<p>China has been the second largest trading partner of EU in goods and the forth largest</p><p>in services since it joined the WTO in 2001. For its part, the European Union has been</p><p>China’s largest trading partner since 2004. Despite this, there are a range of issues at</p><p>stake between the EU and China who are not only involved into economica l disputes,</p><p>but are also at odds on politica l matters . In this paper the authors conduct the study</p><p>based on trade hindrances instead of trade achievements with the approaches of IPE</p><p>based on the assumption: the tenser of trade-ties, the deeper the politica l dimension</p><p>involved and the more delica te the relationship between Economy and Politics</p><p>projected to be. Considering the limitation of time and space, the paper focuses</p><p>prima rily on the trade issues regarded from three different angles: the internal issues</p><p>related to trade (e.g. trade deficit, IPR infringement); the external issues related to</p><p>trade (e.g. huma n rights); the ultimate issues rela ted to trade (e.g. technology). Instead</p><p>of putting forth feasible resolution to these issues, the ma in feature of this paper lies in</p><p>the analysis of trade issues in combination with the approaches of Internationa l</p><p>politica l economy. It’s interesting and far-reaching to research EU (trade) from the</p><p>perspective of IPE because as Michael Smith argued “The EU’s place in the IPE is</p><p>challenging not only in the empirica l sense, but also in the conceptual sense, for</p><p>simple reason that (on the one hand) it is not a state and that (on the other hand) it</p><p>performs a number of vital state functions in the IPE” (Michael Smith 2006, p.527).</p>

<p>China has been the second largest trading partner of EU in goods and the forth largest in services since it joined the WTO in 2001. For its part, the European Union has been China’s largest trading partner since 2004. Despite this, there are a range of issues at stake between the EU and China who are not only involved into economical disputes, but are also at odds on political matters. In this paper the authors conduct the study based on trade hindrances instead of trade achievements with the approaches of IPE based on the assumption: the tenser of trade-ties, the deeper the political dimension involved and the more delicate the relationship between Economy and Politics projected to be. Considering the limitation of time and space, the paper focuses primarily on the trade issues regarded from three different angles: the internal issues related to trade (e.g. trade deficit, IPR infringement); the external issues related to trade (e.g. human rights); the ultimate issues related to trade (e.g. technology). Instead of putting forth feasible resolution to these issues, the main feature of this paper lies in the analysis of trade issues in combination with the approaches of International political economy. It’s interesting and far-reaching to research EU (trade) from the perspective of IPE because as Michael Smith argued “The EU’s place in the IPE is challenging not only in the empirical sense, but also in the conceptual sense, for simple reason that (on the one hand) it is not a state and that (on the other hand) it performs a number of vital state functions in the IPE” (Michael Smith 2006, p.527).</p>

The aim of this thesis it to offer a complex overview of the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP). This international agreement is being negotiated between the United States and the European Union. The main goal of this agreement is to create the largest free trade area to date. I wish to claim that the TTIP does not merely concern trade, but there is a clear geopolitical underlining for it too. When the communist world collapsed, the United States became the sole remaining superpower. Nowadays, the West is facing a different world that fosters new challenges as well as opportunities. The rise of China and Russia puts pressure on the West again. The TTIP seeks to reflect new challenges in world politics. A successful agreement would clearly demonstrate that countries across the Atlantic are still the closest partners. In this thesis I aim to find a causal link between this agreement and the current situation ushering in a shifting balance of power in world politics. I intend to employ two main branches of theories of international relations to verify my hypotheses. The first theory, realism, is equipped to answer questions about power and national interests. The second branch of theories, liberalism, is well applicable so as to indicate different actors and their participation in...

China has been the second largest trading partner of EU in goods and the forth largest in services since it joined the WTO in 2001. For its part, the European Union has been China’s largest trading partner since 2004. Despite this, there are a range of issues at stake between the EU and China who are not only involved into economica l disputes, but are also at odds on politica l matters . In this paper the authors conduct the study based on trade hindrances instead of trade achievements with the approaches of IPE based on the assumption: the tenser of trade-ties, the deeper the politica l dimension involved and the more delica te the relationship between Economy and Politics projected to be. Considering the limitation of time and space, the paper focuses prima rily on the trade issues regarded from three different angles: the internal issues related to trade (e.g. trade deficit, IPR infringement); the external issues related to trade (e.g. huma n rights); the ultimate issues rela ted to trade (e.g. technology). Instead of putting forth feasible resolution to these issues, the ma in feature of this paper lies in the analysis of trade issues in combination with the approaches of Internationa l politica l economy. It’s interesting and far-reaching to research EU (trade) from the perspective of IPE because as Michael Smith argued “The EU’s place in the IPE is challenging not only in the empirica l sense, but also in the conceptual sense, for simple reason that (on the one hand) it is not a state and that (on the other hand) it performs a number of vital state functions in the IPE” (Michael Smith 2006, p.527).

China has been the second largest trading partner of EU in goods and the forth largest in services since it joined the WTO in 2001. For its part, the European Union has been China’s largest trading partner since 2004. Despite this, there are a range of issues at stake between the EU and China who are not only involved into economical disputes, but are also at odds on political matters. In this paper the authors conduct the study based on trade hindrances instead of trade achievements with the approaches of IPE based on the assumption: the tenser of trade-ties, the deeper the political dimension involved and the more delicate the relationship between Economy and Politics projected to be. Considering the limitation of time and space, the paper focuses primarily on the trade issues regarded from three different angles: the internal issues related to trade (e.g. trade deficit, IPR infringement); the external issues related to trade (e.g. human rights); the ultimate issues related to trade (e.g. technology). Instead of putting forth feasible resolution to these issues, the main feature of this paper lies in the analysis of trade issues in combination with the approaches of International political economy. It’s interesting and far-reaching to research EU (trade) from the perspective of IPE because as Michael Smith argued “The EU’s place in the IPE is challenging not only in the empirical sense, but also in the conceptual sense, for simple reason that (on the one hand) it is not a state and that (on the other hand) it performs a number of vital state functions in the IPE” (Michael Smith 2006, p.527).