Argentina’s Geoeconomic Risk as a Food Exporter: An Assessment Using the Product-Level Geoeconomic Risk Exposure Index (IEGP)
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.14409/rdee.2025.2.e0070Keywords:
Geoeconomic Risk, Geoeconomic Fragmentation, International Insertion, Argentina, ExportsAbstract
The paper analyzes the geoeconomic vulnerability of Argentina’s export basket in the context of increasing global geoeconomic fragmentation. To this end, it proposes and applies the “Product-Level Geoeconomic Risk Exposure Index” (IEGP), an original tool that combines economic variables—such as market relevance and concentration—with political-institutional variables concerning Argentina’s main trading partners and the key features of their bilateral relationships. The index is built on the premise that the use of trade policy for strategic purposes, and thus the likelihood of geopolitical disruption to trade flows, tends to arise when low bilateral institutionalization, high levels of ideological divergence, and a record of coercive behavior coincide. When these conditions occur in products that are both relevant and concentrated in a small number of markets, they generate significant vulnerability for international insertion. Applied to Argentina’s 2023 export basket, the IEGP helps identify 26 products with economic vulnerability, six of which present a high level of geoeconomic risk. The results show that Argentina’s specialization in food and agricultural products entails risks that go beyond the economic sphere, carrying direct geopolitical implications. The proposed approach allows for an integrated consideration of economic and foreign policy dimensions in designing the country’s international insertion strategy, providing an empirical basis for the anticipation and mitigation of risks in an increasingly unstable global environment.
References
Aggarwal, V. K., & Reddie, A. W. (2025). New economic statecraft and global technology conflicts: The dilemma for middle powers. Business and Politics, 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1017/bap.2025.10011
Aiyar, S., Presbitero, A., & Ruta, M. (2023). Geoeconomic Fragmentation The Economic Risks from a Fractured World Economy. IMF & CEPR Press.
Bauer, M., du Roy, O., & Sharma, V. (2023). A forward-thinking approach to open strategic autonomy: Navigating EU trade dependencies and risk mitigation (ECIPE Policy Brief No. 13/2023). European Centre for International Political Economy.
Bauerle Danzman, S., & Meunier, S. (2024). The EU’s Geoeconomic Turn: From Policy Laggard to Institutional Innovator. JCMS: Journal of Common Market Studies, 62(4), 1097–1115. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcms.13599
Blanga-Gubbay, M., & Rubínová, S. (2023). Is the global economy fragmenting? World Trade Organization Economic Research and Statistics Division, Staff Working Paper ERSD-2023-10. https://www.wto.org/english/res_e/reser_e/ersd202310_e.pdf
Busso, A. (2025). Orden internacional en la tercera década del siglo XXI y política exterior argentina. Reflexiones iniciales. Colección Documentos de Trabajo - Editorial CEA, 9(19), 1–26.
Davis, C. L., & Meunier, S. (2011). Business as Usual? Economic Responses to Political Tensions: BUSINESS AS USUAL? American Journal of Political Science, 55(3), 628–646. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5907.2010.00507.x
Economist Intelligence. (2025). Democracy Index 2024. The Economist Intelligence Unit Limited. https://www.eiu.com/n/campaigns/democracy-index-2024/
Evenett, S., Fiorini, M., Fritz, J., Hoekman, B., Lukaszuk, P., Rocha, N., Ruta, M., Santi, F., & Shingal, A. (2022). Trade policy responses to the COVID-19 pandemic crisis: Evidence from a new data set. The World Economy, 45(2), 342–364. https://doi.org/10.1111/twec.13119
Evenett, S., Jakubik, A., Martín, F., & Ruta, M. (2024). The return of industrial policy in data. The World Economy, 47(7), 2762–2788. https://doi.org/10.1111/twec.13608
Farrell, H., & Newman, A. L. (2019). Weaponized Interdependence: How Global Economic Networks Shape State Coercion. International Security, 44(1), 42–79. https://doi.org/10.1162/isec_a_00351
FMI. (2023). Trade Integration and Implications of Global Fragmentation for Latin America and the Caribbean. https://www.imf.org/-/media/Files/Publications/REO/WHD/2023/October/English/background-paper-2-en.ashx
Gopinath, G., Gourinchas, P.-O., Presbitero, A., & Topalova, P. (2024). Changing Global Linkages: A New Cold War? (IMF Working Paper No. 2024/76). https://www.imf.org/en/Publications/WP/Issues/2024/04/05/Changing-Global-Linkages-A-New-Cold-War-547357
Government of Canada, S. C. (2017, December 11). Measuring Canadian export diversification. https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/pub/13-605-x/2017001/article/54890-eng.htm
Gras, C. (2023). Geopolitical crisis and changing global commodity markets: Responses by agribusiness and the state in Argentina. The Journal of Peasant Studies, 50(5), 1687–1708. https://doi.org/10.1080/03066150.2023.2219204
Hallak, J. C. (2023). La necesidad de una orientación pro-exportadora de políticas en Argentina. Serie Documentos de Trabajo Del IIEP, 85, 1–51.
Hoekman, B. M., & Mavroidis, P. C. (2015). World Trade Organization (WTO): Law, Economics, and Politics (2nd ed.). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315742212
Kastner, S. L. (2007). When Do Conflicting Political Relations Affect International Trade? Journal of Conflict Resolution, 51(4), 664–688. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022002707302804
Mayer, J. (2009). Policy Space: What, for What, and Where? Development Policy Review, 27, 373–395. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-7679.2009.00452.x
Merino, G. E., & Haro Sly, M. J. (2023). Argentina en el sistema mundial desde el quiebre de los 70’sa la actualidad: Política exterior, proyectos en pugna y punto de bifurcación. Relaciones Internacionales, 32(65), 255–284.
Moravcsik, A. (1997). Taking Preferences Seriously: A Liberal Theory of International Politics. International Organization, 51(4), 513–553. https://doi.org/10.1162/002081897550447
Naldi, M., & Flamini, M. (2014). The CR4 Index and the Interval Estimation of the Herfindahl-Hirschman Index: An Empirical Comparison. SSRN Electronic Journal. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2448656
Nazir, S., Sohag, K., & Mariev, O. (2025). Geopolitical Risk and Trade Reorientation Dynamics: A Comparative Study. Emerging Markets Finance and Trade, 0(0), 1–22. https://doi.org/10.1080/1540496X.2025.2451188
OECD, European Union, & Joint Research Centre - European Commission. (2008). Handbook on Constructing Composite Indicators: Methodology and User Guide. OECD. https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264043466-en
Oneal, J. R., & Russett, B. (1999). The Kantian Peace: The Pacific Benefits of Democracy, Interdependence, and International Organizations, 1885–1992. World Politics, 52(1), 1–37. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0043887100020013
Organización Mundial del Comercio. (2025). Finalidad y conceptos básicos—Trato de la nación más favorecida. https://www.wto.org/spanish/tratop_s/serv_s/cbt_course_s/c1s6p1_s.htm
Piñeiro, M., Illescas, N., & Vicentin Masaro, J. (2024). El comercio agropecuario argentino: Respuestas estratégicas frente a los nuevos riesgos geopolíticos.
Qiu, H., Xia, D., & Yetman, J. (2024). Deconstructing global trade: The role of geopolitical alignment. BIS Quaterly Review, Sept-2024. https://www.bis.org/publ/qtrpdf/r_qt2409c.pdf
Quah, D. (2026). Correlated Trade and Geopolitics Driving a Fractured World Order. In The New Global Economic Order (pp. 54–66). Routledge. https://library.oapen.org/bitstream/handle/20.500.12657/104259/1/9781040400159.pdf#page=39
Reuveny, R., & Kang, H. (1998). Bilateral Trade and Political Conflict/Cooperation: Do Goods Matter? Journal of Peace Research, 35(5), 581–602. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022343398035005003
Roberts, A., Choer Moraes, H., & Ferguson, V. (2019). Toward a Geoeconomic Order in International Trade and Investment. Journal of International Economic Law, 22(4), 655–676. https://doi.org/10.1093/jiel/jgz036
Roberts, A., & Lamp, N. (2021). Six Faces of Globalization: Who Wins, Who Loses, and Why It Matters. Harvard University Press.
Singh, V., Correa da Cunha, H., & Mangal, S. (2024). Do Geopolitical Risks Impact Trade Patterns in Latin America? Defence and Peace Economics, 35(8), 1102–1119. https://doi.org/10.1080/10242694.2023.2299072
Turner, C. (2023). Global Business Analysis: Understanding the Role of Systemic Risk in International Business. Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-27769-6
U.S. Department of Justice & Federal Trade Commission. (2010). Horizontal Merger Guidelines (08/19/2010).
Vicard, V. (2012). Trade, conflict, and political integration: Explaining the heterogeneity of regional trade agreements. European Economic Review, 56(1), 54–71. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.euroecorev.2011.06.003
Voeten, E., Strezhnev, A., & Bailey, M. (2024). United Nations General Assembly Voting Data (Version 34.0) [Dataset]. Harvard Dataverse. https://doi.org/10.7910/DVN/LEJUQZ
World Trade Organization. (2025). WTO Trade Monitoring Update: Latest Trends. https://www.wto.org/english/news_e/news25_e/trdev_03jul25_e.pdf
Yalcin, E., Felbermayr, G., Kariem, H., Kirilakha, A., Kwon, O., Syropoulos, C., & Yotov, Y. (2025). The Global Sanctions Data Base - Release 4: The Heterogeneous Effects of the Sanctions on Russia. Working Papers, Article 2025002. https://ideas.repec.org//p/drx/wpaper/2025002.html
Zelicovich, J. (2023). Las lógicas de la diplomacia económica instrumental en las relaciones internacionales contemporáneas (2017-2022). Revista de Ciencia Política, 43(1), Article 1. https://doi.org/10.4067/s0718-090x2023005000103
Zelicovich, J. (2025). How Does Trade Policy Respond to the Polycrisis: Analysis of the Argentinean Case. The World Economy. https://doi.org/10.1111/twec.13717
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Julieta Zelicovich, Nicolás Sidicaro

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.












