The evolving landscape of global economic and trade regulations has introduced significant challenges, including “decoupling and supply chain disruptions” in trade, “international capital relocation” in investment, “systemic financial risks,” and “technological blockades and containment.” These regulatory shifts have posed substantial obstacles to China’s efforts to establish a more advanced open economic system and to modernize its national governance framework.
In response, China must leverage its strengths in “understanding regulatory changes, adapting to regulatory shifts, and driving regulatory advancements” to transition from a “follower” and “runner-up” to a “leader” in shaping global economic and trade regulations. This transformation requires a strategic regulatory approach that emphasizes higher-level openness, broader regulatory alignment, and deeper engagement in global rule-making.
This study will be structured into three key sections: regulatory trends, domestic and international impacts, and strategic choices with path exploration. It will establish an analytical framework based on “one core regulatory theme, two research perspectives, three strategic imperatives, and four critical regulatory focus areas.” Through this framework, the research will provide a comprehensive assessment of the fundamental regulatory drivers and historical trajectory of global economic and trade rule changes. It will analyze the reciprocal interactions between evolving regulations and China’s high-level opening-up efforts from both domestic and international perspectives.
The study will emphasize three major strategic regulatory considerations—co-opetition, competition, and confrontation—and propose responsive strategies through four key regulatory policy directions:
- Advancing an international regulatory governance system with Chinese characteristics.
- Harmonizing domestic regulations with global trade and investment standards.
- Strengthening international regulatory cooperation and alignment.
- Developing regulatory expertise to enhance China’s global governance influence.
Furthermore, the research will focus on five critical regulatory domains: global value chains, digital economy regulations, multilateral investment frameworks, fair competition policies, and artificial intelligence governance.
By conducting an in-depth regulatory analysis of these dimensions, this study aims to enhance China’s regulatory resilience against external risks, ensure stability amid global regulatory shifts, and strengthen its institutional role in shaping international economic governance. Ultimately, it seeks to empower China’s role in global regulatory development while fostering a more inclusive and balanced international regulatory order that benefits both China and other developing nations.
1 Literature Review
1.1 The connotation and historical development of the global economic and trade system.
Common conceptual rules such as multilateral, plurilateral, regional and bilateral constitute the global economic and trade rules system (Wang Zhongmei, 2024). After World War II, in order to avoid falling into the super trade protectionism of “harming neighbors”, the international trade rules of goods trade liberalization based on “reciprocity” gradually took shape ( Gao Jiang and Sheng Bin, 2019; Shi Jingxia, 2021), but the rounds of negotiations on international trade rules were basically dominated by the United States (Li Xiangyang, 2020; Zhu Jiejin, 2020). With the gradual rise of emerging economies such as China, the status of emerging countries in international trade negotiations has gradually increased (Kong Qingjiang, 2023; Liu Jingdong, 2019). At the same time, the multilateral trade system is gradually declining, and super-large free trade agreements, border measures, digital trade, and service trade have gradually become the main features of the current international economic and trade negotiations (Zhang Monan, 2020), and the international economic and trade rules system has been reconstructed under the influence of the market and the country ( Zhu Caihua , 2019).
1.2 Driving factors of changes in global economic and trade rules.
The development of a multipolar world economy (Li Feng, 2023; Xu Xiujun, 2022), the advancement of digital technology (Sheng Bin and Gao Jiang, 2023; Ma Shuzhong, 2023; Meltzer, 2019), and the great power game between China and the United States (Zhang Yuyan, 2023; Zhu Caihua , 2022; Hoekman and Wolfe, 2021) are all core driving factors of changes in the global economic and trade rules system. The biggest change in the superstructure is that China and developing countries are demanding reforms in international rule-making and global governance (Pei Changhong, 2024; Ma Shuzhong, 2020). The so-called “rules-based international order” of the United States, the European Union and other countries is actually domestic law over international law, and regional international law over universal international law (Xu Chongli, 2022; Cai Congyan, 2023). China should take the initiative to connect with international economic and trade rules and actively lead international economic and trade rules (Wang Yuesheng, 2017; Zhao Beiwen, 2024), and continue to play a leading role in the development of the “Global South”, and jointly promote the institutional construction of multilateralism and international cooperation ( Men Honghua , 2024; Ghiselli, 2023).
1.3 The development trend of the global economic and trade rules system.
The global economic and trade rules system is becoming increasingly “politicized” (Shen Guobing, 2024; Xu Xiujun, 2022; Dugard, 2023), “conglomerated” (Wang Yuesheng, 2017; Liu Bin, 2023) and “fragmented” (Zhang Monan, 2020; Shen Guobing, 2024; Kong Qingjiang, 2023). International economic and trade rules are evolving from the stage of border measures to “deep integration” in the stage of eliminating policy barriers within borders (Quan Yi, 2023; Xu Xiujun, 2024). In terms of digital trade rules, the subjects in the game of digital trade rules are more diverse, and geopolitics makes it difficult to establish unified regulations for global digital trade governance (Sheng Bin, 2023; Yu Nanping, 2023; Azmeh S et al., 2020); competitive neutrality rules New constraints have been imposed on state-owned enterprises and designated monopolies, requiring member states to implement non-discrimination principles and limit non-commercial assistance (Sun Li et al., 2023; Capobianco and Christiansen, 2011). International economic organizations have played an important role in the process of restructuring multilateral economic and trade rules (Ma Shuzhong and Shen Yuting, 2023; Pierre and Peters, 2020), but they also have institutional flaws that need urgent reform (Li Ping, 2024). This topic first analyzes the institutional flaws of the global economic and trade system, starts with the phased performance of the latest changes, and focuses on the key trend characteristics. By studying the evolutionary logic and historical laws of the short-term change analysis rule system, it lays the theoretical foundation for subsequent sub-topic research. Practical basis.
1.4 The connotation and extension of high-level opening up to the outside world.
Scholars may compare systems such as “quality” to “quantity” (Wang Yuesheng et al., 2021), “latitude” to “longitude” (Shen Guobing, 2022), and “level” to “scope” (Weighing, 2018). The perspective of openness emphasizes further connecting with high-standard international rules, or from specific perspectives such as improving the status of the value chain (Liu Zhibiao, 2015), enhancing the stability of openness (Quan Yi, 2022), and transforming government functions (Sheng Bin and Li Feng, 2022). Emphasize the different characteristics of “high level”, open up to the outside world with a high level to smooth the dual cycle, promote domestic technological progress and industrial upgrading (Sang Baichuan, 2021), create a business environment with fair competition (Weighing, 2018), and move towards the global value chain The rise of high-end links and the promotion of RMB internationalization (Dong Zhiyong and Li Chengming, 2020). A high level of opening up is an inevitable requirement for high-quality development (Zhu Fulin, 2023) and can cultivate new advantages in international competition and cooperation (Zhang Yansheng, 2024). This topic clearly proposes that high-level opening up should “shift from passive opening to active opening” and “from learning and accepting international rules to participating in formulating and leading international rules”, further enriching the connotation of high-level opening up and highlighting high-level opening up in the new era. strategic significance.
1.5 Research on the impact of changes in the economic and trade rules system on China’s high-level opening up.
At this stage, China’s opening up has entered a new stage of high-level opening up (Dai Xiang, 2019), and has shifted from passive integration in the early stage to active leadership (Li Xiangyang and Huang Deyuan, 2019; Sang Baichuan, 2021). Against the background of changes in the global economic and trade rules system, China must not only maintain its determination to continue to open up at a high level, but also actively innovate its management model and clarify the boundaries between the government and the market (Li Guoxue and Dong Yan, 2020). In terms of system, it is necessary to promote deeper institutional innovation, benchmark against global high-standard economic and trade rules (Pei Changhong et al., 2023), and promote the modernization of the national governance system and governance capabilities (Yin Zhentao and Xu Xiujun, 2021); reduce intra-regional trade barriers and fully tap the potential of the domestic market (Poncet, 2003; Bao et al., 2015; Tong Jiadong et al., 2017), and actively respond to the reshaping of global economic and trade rules and the containment of institutional hegemony (Hu Zaiyong, 2023). In terms of opening up priorities, digital trade rules (Burri, 2020; Zhou Nianli and Zhang Monan, 2021; Sose, 2023; Bai Jie and Gao Lingyun, 2024) and artificial intelligence (Acemoglu, 2024; Lv Yue and Zhang Jie, 2023) have become important growth points for changing the global competitive advantages of various countries. Based on existing research, this project comprehensively analyzes the impact of changing trends on my country’s implementation of high-level opening up at the conceptual, institutional, and economic levels, and uses quantitative analysis methods to quantify the core impacts and conduct risk prediction and early warning.
1.6 High-level opening up can shape a more equitable and effective global governance system.
China actively advocates and leads new concepts of global governance, promotes new developments in global governance practices, and surpasses Western global governance theories and practical experiences (Pang Zhongying, 2014; Wu Zhicheng and Wu Yu, 2018). The idea of a community with a shared future for mankind, the three major global initiatives, and consultation, joint construction and sharing provide theoretical guidance for promoting the world pattern and global governance system to develop in a more just and reasonable direction ( Li Baogeng and Geng Kexin, 2022; Yin Wengui and Jiao Heng, 2024; Xu Xiujun, 2023). Changes in the economic and trade rules system are essentially a struggle for development interests, development models and development dominance ( Zhu Caihua and Liu Rangqun, 2021). Innovative cooperation mechanisms such as the Belt and Road Initiative and the BRICS cooperation mechanism provide international public products and international cooperation platforms with extensive influence for global governance (Lin Yueqin, 2024; Lan Qingxin, 2024; Li Xiangyang et al., 2023; Djankov S.Miner , 2016), and promoted the flattening of global governance (Qin Yaqing, 2021; Carvalho, 2018). This topic closely follows the international impact of the latest changes on the implementation of high-level opening up, accurately judges the direct and potential impacts of the latest changes on building an open world economy, reshaping the global governance system, and building a community with a shared future for mankind, and conducts quantitative analysis in the form of modeling.
1.7 Coordinate international and domestic rules to cope with changes in the global economic and trade rules system.
China urgently needs to break through the key rules of emerging issues and frontier areas to realize the rule dividend (Nie Xinwei, 2022). On the one hand, the rapid development of digital trade affects the reconstruction of the global value chain (Yin Feng and Dang Xiuyu , 2024; François et al., 2021; Marel and Ferracan, 2021). China should actively participate in the key issues of international digital trade rules and actively integrate into digital trade to promote the reconstruction of the global value chain (Jiang Xiaojuan and Huang Yingxuan, 2021; Xiong Hongru et al., 2021; Liu Hongkui, 2023). On the other hand, fair competition rules are overly biased towards “formal justice” at the international rule level and ignore the particularity of market entities (Du Yuqiong and Huang Zilin, 2023; Sun Jin, 2021). China urgently needs to establish a sound competition policy system (Han Wenlong and Liu Lu, 2021) to promote fair competition and regulatory reform (Sun Jin, 2022). Finally, as Chinese companies increasingly participate in international financial market transactions, China should not only strengthen international investment subsidy rules (Ding Ru, 2022), but also start to enhance its voice in rule-making (Wen Yang, 2023; Xing Liju and Zhao Jing, 2021). This topic proposes to coordinate international and domestic rules to cope with changes in the global economic and trade rules system, and selects five important rule areas, namely “global value chain rules”, “digital economy rules”, “fair competition rules”, “multilateral investment rules” and “artificial intelligence rules” as strategic choices for key breakthrough points.
1.8 Promote international regulatory cooperation to cope with changes in the global economic and trade rules system.
Regulatory differences have a negative impact on the development of global trade in goods and services ( Zdzislaw and Puslecki , 2013; Kong Qingjiang, 2023). At present, the guiding role of international regulation under the leadership of the World Trade Organization is becoming increasingly weakened (Liu Xinzhi and Zhang Pengfei, 2020), and regional trade agreements are showing politicization and club characteristics (Liu Hongsong and Cheng Haiye, 2020). International regulatory cooperation is an effective tool to reduce regulatory differences and market failures (Hoekman and Mavroidis , 2015). It is necessary to promote internationally accepted good regulatory practices, strengthen regulatory consistency (Kauffmann and Saffirio , 2021; Qi Yudong and Hao Yue, 2023), pay attention to the demands of stakeholders (Mitchell and Mishra, 2024), promote digital trade regulatory cooperation (Shao Jun and Yang Danhui, 2021) and cross-border data factor flow regulatory cooperation (Chen Yongmei and Zhang Jiao, 2017), strive to create a fair institutional environment (Dai Xiang, 2019), and establish international rules that are not written but generally accepted by the international community through regulatory cooperation (Xu Kangning, 2019), so as to increase the well-being of people all over the world (OECD, 2018). This topic proposes to focus on how to ensure the implementation of existing international rules, promote international regulatory cooperation with the help of various platforms, comprehensively analyze the role of international cooperation platforms such as the “Belt and Road” and the “BRICS Cooperation Mechanism”, and focus on studying the potential role of existing and innovative international organizations in implementing high-level opening up.
1.9 Explore the path to reconstruct the global economic and trade rules system.
With the influence of international geopolitics, regional economy and international interests, the global economic and trade order continues to be unbalanced (Li Yuanben and Chen Simeng, 2022), cross-border data flows increase, data-related security issues are gradually exposed (Ma Shuzhong and Shen Yuting, 2023), and investment protection issues at the multilateral level cannot be further promoted ( Bi Ying and Zu Wentian, 2023). At the same time, the general absence of free competition values has caused negative effects (Chen Genghua, 2021), and the anti-globalization wave has seriously hindered the development of the global value chain (Zhu Mingzhu and Sun Jing, 2020). Therefore, China needs to actively participate in the negotiation of international economic and trade rules (Wang Chunli and Feng Li, 2020), propose a memorandum of understanding on digital trade (Xia Rongbing and Yin Zhengping, 2023), accelerate the negotiation of bilateral and multilateral investment agreements among BRICS countries (Mei Guanqun, 2017), curb enterprises from disrupting the market competition order through emerging channels such as digital platforms (Liu Xinmiao and Ding Zhiguo, 2024), help competition law enforcement agencies in different countries make the same or convergent decisions on the same behavior of market entities (Yang Jijun and Ai Weiwei, 2023), and gain more institutional voice in the new round of global value chain reconstruction (Zhang Hui et al., 2022). This project takes on the four major strategies of China’s participation in promoting the reconstruction and innovation of the global economic and trade rules system, aiming to promote the development of international economic and trade rules in the direction of fairness and reciprocity, promote the steady progress of China’s high-level opening up, and safeguard the interests of the vast number of developing countries.
2. Unique Academic Value and Social Significance
2.1 Academic value.
First, based on the core contradictions and trends of changes in the global economic and trade rules system, a consulting report on the trends of changes in the global economic and trade rules system is formed. Secondly, from both international and domestic perspectives, an innovative analysis loop of “global economic and trade rules system-impact on high-level opening up-impact on global economic and trade rules system” is established, which expands the connotation and extension of high-level opening up. Thirdly, from the two dimensions of “coordinating international and domestic rules” and “promoting international regulatory cooperation”, China’s response strategy and path are explored. Finally, the selection of emerging rules in five key core areas as breakthrough points for participating in rule-making will help promote the construction of a more fair and reasonable new international economic and trade order.
2.2 Social significance.
This topic is based on the transformation of high-level opening-up from integrating into the global governance system to actively leading the transformation of the global governance system. It controls the impact of changes in the global economic and trade rules system on high-level opening-up from both domestic and international perspectives, and proposes China’s response plan from the two levels of rules and regulations. While ensuring a good external environment for China’s development and providing rules for international governance, it will help enhance the institutional power of participating in global governance. This topic attaches importance to the cultivation of innovative talents in international governance and provides talent guarantee for participating in global governance.