Blog Post

China’s interest in the Juncker Plan: not so strange after all

China has recently started to express interest in the Juncker plan. There have been rumours that China would like to initially invest between €5 and €10 billion. However no clarity exists yet as to how China will invest.

By: Date: October 7, 2015 Topic: European Macroeconomics & Governance

Right after being nominated in 2014, European Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker announced a grandiose investment plan, which plans to pump €315 billion ($361 billion) into long-term projects, and the financing of SMEs and mid-caps during the next three years (2015-17).

One of the most common criticisms of the Juncker plan is that there are no new sources of public funds, and that it is just the same money being recycled (see Grégory Claeys’ recent blog).  In the same vein, there is scepticism about whether the private sector will be willing to provide so much funding. So far there is seed capital of €21 billion, and national development banks have pledged €42.5 billion, which is far from the total target of €315 billion.  Attempts by European officials to attract private money, especially outside Europe, have been futile.

Only recently has China started to express interest in the programme. After Li Keqiang’s comments at the Europe-China Summit on June 29 in Brussels, there have been rumours that China would like to initially invest between €5 and €10 billion. However no clarity exists yet as to how China will invest. The latter point, which could look simply operational, may well go beyond that: the more of a say that China has on the kind of project it will finance, the more eager it will be to participate. Existing investment vehicles under the Juncker plan offer financial returns but no direct stake on individual projects, meaning that at most China can choose the sector in which to invest.

The way that China has always dealt with such issues has been to include them in a broad negotiation package with Europe. In that regard, one could argue that Europe has the advantage in bilateral negotiations, after its unconditional support for the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB).

At the same time, Europe is negotiating an investment agreement with China, following in the footsteps of the US. The lack of progress on the US side –noticeable during Xi Jinping’s recent visit to the White House – makes it strategically important for China to close a deal with Europe. In addition, although China has clearly stepped up its investment in Europe (up to $55 billion last year according to some estimates), stock is still limited compared to Japan or the US.

Finally, China has also developed its own kind of Juncker plan, the ‘One Belt One Road Initiative’, aiming to revive the ancient trading route between Asia and Europe. With an investment plan of $40 billion through the Silk Road Infrastructure Fund, and potentially more capital from AIIB in the North and South routes of the New Silk Road, Europe has become more relevant for China’s geopolitical ambitions. One example of this trend is the recently signed memorandum of understanding on the EU-China Connectivity Platform to enhance links between China’s One Belt and Road Initiative and EU initiatives such as the Trans-European Transport Network policy.

All in all, the Chinese have enough good reasons to put some of their reserves into the Juncker Plan. They may still prefer to bargain further, by pushing to have more control on the sectoral choice of their investment and access to the technology embedded in the investment. We would hope that European officials can stand those pressures and keep to the rules as they have been designed. Furthermore, compared to the actual target, the amount that China has committed so far is peanuts:  even less of a reason to give in.


Republishing and referencing

Bruegel considers itself a public good and takes no institutional standpoint. Anyone is free to republish and/or quote this post without prior consent. Please provide a full reference, clearly stating Bruegel and the relevant author as the source, and include a prominent hyperlink to the original post.

Read about event More on this topic
 

Past Event

Past Event

CANCELLED: India-EU Partnership: New Vistas for the Next Decade

Policymakers, academics and private sector actors from the EU and India come together to work on common issues and explore further areas of cooperation.

Speakers: Yamini Aiyar, Suman Bery, Navroz K Dubash, Alicia García-Herrero, Rajat Kathuria, Partha Mukhopadhyay, Ananth Padmanabhan, Georgios Petropoulos, André Sapir, Shyam Saran, Simone Tagliapietra and Marc Vanheukelen Topic: Global Economics & Governance Location: India International Centre, Lodhi Gardens, Lodhi Estate, New Delhi, Delhi, India Date: March 12, 2020
Read article More on this topic More by this author
 

Opinion

Uncoordinated policies behind market collapse

Underlying issues, and not just the coronavirus panic, fed the recent meltdown

By: Alicia García-Herrero Topic: Global Economics & Governance Date: March 10, 2020
Read article More on this topic
 

Blog Post

Gerard Masllorens headshot

The cost of coronavirus in terms of interrupted global value chains

The coronavirus is slowly morphing itself into an important shock. While the extent and cost of this pandemic are unknown, we do know that global supply chains that link Europe to China will be seriously disturbed. We take a look at the numbers based on input-output models. The industry that will be the most affected is Computers and Electronics, followed by textiles.

By: Maria Demertzis and Gerard Masllorens Topic: Global Economics & Governance Date: March 9, 2020
Read article More on this topic
 

Blog Post

What can the EU learn from the China-Switzerland free trade agreement?

The US-China trade war has placed EU trade relations with China under the microscope. Should the EU challenge China’s trade practices and employ trade defence measures? Or should they be diplomatic and embark on negotiations, perhaps paving the way to a Free Trade Agreement? Close examination of the 2013 agreement between China and Switzerland suggests much will have to change for trade negotiations between China and the EU to succeed.

By: Uri Dadush and Marta Domínguez-Jiménez Topic: Global Economics & Governance Date: March 3, 2020
Read article More on this topic More by this author
 

Opinion

Companies must move supply chains further from China

Virus shows Southeast Asian factories too dependent on imported production inputs

By: Alicia García-Herrero Topic: Global Economics & Governance Date: February 28, 2020
Read article More on this topic More by this author
 

Opinion

Why the US Trade Agreement will slow China’s economy

The response of the global financial markets to the trade agreement reached between the United States and China has been very positive, probably excessively so given the relatively limited size of the agreement reached.

By: Alicia García-Herrero Topic: Global Economics & Governance Date: February 20, 2020
Read article More on this topic More by this author
 

Opinion

Epidemic tests China’s supply chain dominance

Much has been written on the Wuhan coronavirus that causes the respiratory disease Covid-19, but very little is known yet about its impact on the global economy and, in particular, the global value chain. Still, one thing is clear: The shock is bigger than that caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS), for the simple reason that China is much more important for the global economy than it was then.

By: Alicia García-Herrero Topic: Global Economics & Governance Date: February 17, 2020
Read article More on this topic More by this author
 

Opinion

China’s Coronavirus will not lead to recession but to stimulus and even more debt

The coronavirus outbreak will not lead to recession but the costs of ensuring growth targets will be high

By: Alicia García-Herrero Topic: Global Economics & Governance Date: February 6, 2020
Read article Download PDF More on this topic More by this author
 

External Publication

From globalization to deglobalization: Zooming into trade

This article shows some evidence of the decrease in merchandise, capital and, to a lesser extent people to people flows.

By: Alicia García-Herrero Topic: Global Economics & Governance Date: February 3, 2020
Read article More on this topic More by this author
 

Opinion

The US-China trade agreement will not put an end to geopolitical risks

The agreement between the US and China should not be read so positively in Europe, especially in Germany

By: Alicia García-Herrero Topic: Global Economics & Governance Date: January 31, 2020
Read article More on this topic
 

Opinion

Stability remains key to China

The most concerning aspect for the Chinese economy will still be to hold up domestic demand. The rapidly rising household debt will put further breaks of the households' ability to purchase durable goods

By: Alicia García-Herrero and Jianwei Xu Topic: Global Economics & Governance Date: January 15, 2020
Read article More on this topic
 

Blog Post

Lessons from the China-US trade truce

The tentatively agreed deal between China and the United States temporarily stops a dangerous dynamic, yet it falls far short of the negotiating objectives of both sides. US trade policy has become a dominion of the executive branch guided principally by the President’s electoral interests. Meanwhile, China demonstrates its capacity to resist pressure: it will enact structural reforms at its own pace in line with its interests. Sadly, the deal confirms that the United States no longer feels obligated to follow WTO rules, and can induce others to do the same.

By: Uri Dadush and Marta Domínguez-Jiménez Topic: Global Economics & Governance Date: December 19, 2019
Load more posts