The governance structures of the 21st century are becoming increasingly intricate, characterized by complexity, multilayered authority, and the participation of a wide range of actors beyond the traditional nation-state. This evolution marks a shift away from the classical Westphalian notion of centralized, state-based sovereignty, toward a more fragmented and interdependent global order. One of the most illustrative domains where this transformation is unfolding is in the field of international economic governance, particularly through large-scale regional trade and cooperation frameworks
Within this changing landscape, the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP)—an agreement signed by 15 Asia-Pacific countries and entering into force in 2020—stands out not merely as a free trade arrangement but as a deeper institutional structure with far-reaching governance implications. While RCEP’s primary stated goal is to reduce trade barriers and enhance economic integration across its member states, its actual structure, mechanisms, and scope reveal a much more complex and dynamic reality.
RCEP operates not just as a trade bloc, but as a regulatory platform that facilitates coordination across various sectors, from digital commerce and intellectual property rights to dispute resolution and investment protection. It includes mechanisms for harmonizing standards, enabling cross-border data flows, and managing supply chains that extend well beyond the borders of individual states. These functions are not confined to intergovernmental negotiations alone; they also bring into play a wide variety of non-state actors such as multinational corporations, logistics conglomerates, fintech innovators, and digital infrastructure providers. Consequently, RCEP functions through a multi-actor governance ecosystem that distributes authority horizontally across state and non-state actors alike.
In this sense, RCEP exemplifies a new kind of governance architecture that resonates with the concept of neo-medievalism, first theorized by Hedley Bull. Neo-medievalism challenges the assumption that political authority is vertically ordered and monopolized by the nation-state. Instead, it envisions a world where authority is fragmented, overlapping, and negotiated among diverse entities operating at different levels of governance. Applying this lens to RCEP allows for a more nuanced understanding of how global trade, regulation, and sovereignty interact in the current era.
Moreover, the multi-layered nature of RCEP reflects broader trends in the global political economy, where decision-making is increasingly outsourced or delegated to specialized agencies, arbitration panels, and private regulatory frameworks. These structures often operate autonomously from national governments and are shaped by transnational norms, market forces, and digital technologies. Thus, RCEP is not simply about economic liberalization; it is also about the redistribution of regulatory authority in ways that challenge the traditional boundaries of state sovereignty.
In addition, the role of digital platforms and data governance in RCEP points to an even more radical shift in how governance is conceived and executed. By enabling seamless cross-border data exchange and facilitating e-commerce frameworks, RCEP institutionalizes a form of data-driven governance that is increasingly detached from territorial control. This is especially significant in a region where digital infrastructure and technology companies are not merely service providers but also agenda-setters and norm producers in their own right.
Given all these dimensions, it becomes analytically plausible—indeed necessary—to interpret RCEP not merely as a technical trade agreement but as a prototype of neo-medieval governance. Its operational logic undermines the traditional monopoly of the state over regulatory power and embeds economic, digital, and institutional networks that function according to a logic of shared authority. In this context, sovereignty becomes a flexible and negotiable asset, rather than a fixed and exclusive right.
In summary, RCEP exemplifies a broader shift in global governance—one that emphasizes pluralism, decentralization, and fluidity over hierarchy, centralization, and state dominance. Viewing RCEP through the lens of neo-medievalism thus offers valuable insights into how international cooperation and authority are being reshaped in the 21st century.
The concept of neo-medievalism was first introduced into international relations literature by Hedley Bull in his seminal work The Anarchical Society (1977). Bull argued that the absolutist understanding of Westphalian sovereignty was eroding and that a global order characterized by multiple layers and actors was emerging. In this order, the state is no longer the sole sovereign actor; instead, authority is shared with multinational corporations, regional organizations, transnational digital networks, and even private military firms. In essence, sovereignty becomes fragmented and dispersed across various domains.
The structural nature of RCEP aligns closely with this neo-medieval framework. While RCEP is formally a free trade agreement negotiated and signed by nation-states, its operational logic and the actors involved challenge the traditional understanding of state sovereignty. RCEP is not merely a mechanism for tariff reduction; rather, it is a multi-dimensional integration scheme that includes transnational supply chains, digital trade infrastructures, data governance provisions, and investment protection mechanisms. This complexity moves beyond the scope of classical “intergovernmental cooperation.”
The actors functioning within the RCEP framework extend far beyond the state. Multinational corporations such as Samsung, Alibaba, and Toyota; digital platform providers like Tencent and Grab; global logistics networks including Maersk, COSCO, and DHL; and financial institutions such as the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank and regional fintech companies—all play significant roles in shaping the norms and practices that govern RCEP’s implementation. These actors are not only economic stakeholders but also key contributors to the production of regulatory frameworks and normative standards within the regional economic ecosystem.
The digital trade provisions of RCEP most clearly exemplify the neo-medieval logic of governance. These rules facilitate cross-border data flows and expand the operational freedoms of digital service providers, platform economies, and cloud-based infrastructures. As a result, the classical concept of “data sovereignty” is weakened, and control over data increasingly shifts into the hands of private actors. Compared to China’s strict digital sovereignty doctrine, RCEP is considerably more liberal, decentralized, and actor-diverse in its approach.
RCEP’s supply chain systems have also evolved into mechanisms of strategic importance. In countries like Japan, South Korea, and Vietnam, production hubs are emerging as alternatives to China’s economic dominance, thereby rebalancing regional supply dynamics. These supply chains have developed the capacity to influence national political decisions, thus limiting the unilateral policy space traditionally reserved for sovereign states. In this sense, economic infrastructure becomes a constraint on sovereign autonomy and a source of external influence.
Such dynamics reflect a governance architecture characterized by multiple levels of authority and coordination. Within RCEP, decision-making is not limited to state actors; it includes business forums, sectoral councils, digital platforms, arbitration institutions, and in some cases, AI-driven trade solutions. This setup challenges the classical notion of sovereignty and signals a transition toward a decentralized, horizontal, and network-based form of global governance. In this regard, RCEP embodies the essential features of the neo-medieval paradigm.
From Hedley Bull’s theoretical perspective, RCEP offers a concrete case study for understanding a “post-Westphalian” world order. Its fragmented sovereignty structure, multi-centered norm production, and diverse actor engagement demonstrate that the state no longer monopolizes authority in international relations. Instead, it is co-constructed through the interactions of states, corporations, platforms, and institutions operating across borders and sectors.
In conclusion, RCEP should not be interpreted merely as a free trade agreement. On the contrary, its governance structure reveals a new logic in global economic-political relations, where state sovereignty is redefined, and governance is exercised through layered and networked mechanisms. RCEP stands as a prototype of this neo-medieval governance model, where multiple non-state actors co-determine the regulatory landscape, sovereignty is disaggregated, and authority is shared. It is a symbol of a new era in international relations—one in which global governance no longer revolves solely around states but is shaped by a constellation of interconnected forces and institutions.
