scholarly journals Transatlantic trade and investment partnership: sectoral and macroeconomic perspectives for Germany, the EU and the US

2014 ◽  
Vol 11 (3) ◽  
pp. 293-328 ◽  
Author(s):  
Paul J. J. Welfens ◽  
Tony Irawan
Keyword(s):  
Transatlantic Trade ◽  
The Us ◽  
Trade And Investment ◽  
The Eu

ECJ ruling further dims EU-US data protection outlook

2015 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Data Storage ◽  
Data Protection ◽  
The United States ◽  
The Internet ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Transatlantic Trade ◽  
Data Flows ◽  
The Us ◽  
Trade And Investment ◽  
The Eu

Significance The ECJ ruling could add to potential disruptions to transatlantic commercial data flows arising from the EU's developing data protection regime that a study for the US Chamber of Commerce valued at 0.8-1.3% of EU GDP. The ruling weakens the United States in negotiations over the new EU regime, as well as over the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP). Impacts The ruling may bolster development of EU-based cloud facilities as EU users seek to avoid the risks of US-based data storage. This could reduce US firms' estimated 76% share of the EU cloud market. It would also lead to further fragmentation of the internet as a global resource.

EU-US TTIP talks are unlikely to progress

2016 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Trade Agreements ◽  
The United States ◽  
The Political ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Transatlantic Trade ◽  
The Us ◽  
Trade And Investment ◽  
The Eu ◽  
Public Opposition

Subject The prospects for finalising TTIP. Significance While the EU as a whole -- the European Commission, most member states and a majority of members of the European Parliament (EP) -- appears to remain committed to a wide-ranging agreement with the United States, there are growing indications that public opposition may render the proposed Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) agreement politically unviable. Impacts TTIP is estimated to raise the EU's GDP by 0.5%. European governments may decide that such a modest growth boost is not worth the political problems generated by the negotiations. If implemented, its terms could serve as a blueprint for future trade agreements between the EU and other countries. The deal's prospects will be diminished by the US election cycle's appeals to protectionist sentiment.

Assessing the Rules of Appointing Arbitrators under the EU’s Investment Court System

2019 ◽  
Vol 27 (02) ◽  
pp. 210-219
Author(s):  
Chi-Chung Kao
Keyword(s):  
Dispute Settlement ◽  
Unique Feature ◽  
Court System ◽  
New Approach ◽  
Transatlantic Trade ◽  
The Us ◽  
The Common ◽  
The Right ◽  
Trade And Investment ◽  
The Eu

In recent years investor–state arbitration has faced a number of criticisms, such as the pro-investor allegation, the lack of transparency and the regulatory chilling effect. In 2015, the EU proposed an Investment Court System (ICS) in the investment chapter of the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership negotiated between the EU and the US. This new mechanism is designed to improve the investor–state dispute settlement mechanisms, in particular the investor–state arbitration. A unique feature of the ICS is that it deprives the right of the disputing parties to appoint arbitrators. This is an apparent departure from the common practice of conventional investor–state arbitration, such as that conducted under the rules of the International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes. This new approach seems to formulate itself on the pro-investor hypothesis that asserts that the appointment of an arbitrator by an investor will lead to the appointee’s bias in favour of the investor. This paper assesses whether such methodology is justifiable and necessary by discussing the pro-investor allegation and rebutting it with empirical evidence. This paper considers the challenge procedure as the more appropriate and practical safeguard against an arbitrator’s bias.

scholarly journals Proving Their Worth? The Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership and the Members of the European Parliament

2019 ◽  
Vol 7 (3) ◽  
pp. 266-278 ◽  
Author(s):  
Guri Rosén
Keyword(s):  
European Parliament ◽  
Newspaper Coverage ◽  
The Public ◽  
Transatlantic Trade ◽  
The People ◽  
The Us ◽  
The Voice ◽  
Trade And Investment ◽  
Public Concerns ◽  
The Eu

Recent trade negotiations in the EU have provoked unprecedented levels of controversy, in particular the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) between the EU and the US. One crucial channel for public contestation is the European Parliament (EP) which, following the entry into force of the Lisbon Treaty, has to give consent to international agreements. Thus, this article sets out to answer the question: During the dispute over TTIP, did members of the EP (MEPs) engage in the public debate, and if so, how? If they engage in debates, what characterises their engagement: Do they engage with voter concerns, do they engage in a responsive manner, and do they contribute to politicisation as quite a few feared? Building on an analysis of newspaper coverage and plenary debates in the EP, the article shows that many supporters of TTIP attempted to de-politicise the debate, while opponents most frequently evoked ‘the voice of the people’ to politicise TTIP. Thus, MEPs do not only respond to politicisation, they also attempt to make politicisation happen by evoking public concerns. The article highlights the multifaceted relationship between responsiveness and politicisation, where claims responding to voter concerns, are used both to incite contestation and alleviate it.

Food Safety Regulation in TTIP: Much Ado About Nothing?

2016 ◽  
Vol 7 (2) ◽  
pp. 256-261
Author(s):  
Alan Matthews
Keyword(s):  
Food Safety ◽  
Trade Agreement ◽  
Safety Standards ◽  
Much Ado About Nothing ◽  
Transatlantic Trade ◽  
Food Standards ◽  
The Us ◽  
Food Safety Standards ◽  
Trade And Investment ◽  
The Eu

Disputes over food safety standards –what in the language of trade policy are called sanitary and phytosanitary standards (SPS) – have been at the heart of many transatlantic trade rows between the US and the EU. Examples include the EU bans on the import of hormone–treated beef, on pork treated with growth–promoting additives, or on poultry washed in antimicrobial rinses to reduce the amount of microbes on meat. As a result, the potential impact of the ongoing negotiations to reach a Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) free trade agreement between the US and EU on EU food standards has, rightly, attracted a lot of attention and no little anxiety. Opposition to “Chlorhühnchen” has become the rallying–call for anti–TTIP activists in many countries. NGOs argue that “TTIP will sacrifice food safety for faster trade”. Critics highlight possible procedural rules requiring transparency of decision–making and early warning mechanisms which would give interested parties (including of course business firms and lobby groups) the opportunity to comment on planned rule–making which it is argued are likely to lead to ‘regulatory chill’.

Negotiating 21st Century Rules on Energy: What Is at Stake for the European Union, the United States and the BRICS?

2018 ◽  
Vol 19 (3) ◽  
pp. 415-443 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ilaria Espa ◽  
Kateryna Holzer
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
European Union ◽  
Renewable Energy ◽  
The United States ◽  
Energy Market ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Transatlantic Trade ◽  
Energy Trade ◽  
Trade And Investment ◽  
The Eu

Abstract In the context of the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP), the European Union (EU) has taken the lead in promoting the inclusion of a specific chapter on energy trade and investment in order to enhance energy security and promote renewable energy. Irrespective of the success of the TTIP negotiations, the EU proposal can contribute to developing multilateral rules on energy trade and investment. This is especially important given the increased number of energy disputes filed by the EU and the United States against other leading energy market players, including the BRICS. This article provides a normative analysis of the new rules proposed by the EU and reflects on potential responses of BRICS energy regulators. It argues that, while these rules are unlikely to immediately affect BRICS energy practices, they may eventually be ‘imported’ in BRICS domestic jurisdictions in order to promote renewable energy and attract investment in energy infrastructure.

scholarly journals Transatlantic trade and investment partnership (TTIP) and the spill overs effects on the Gulf – cooperation council

2017 ◽  
Vol 59 (1) ◽  
pp. 35-51
Author(s):  
Nadia Naim
Keyword(s):  
Intellectual Property ◽  
Property Rights ◽  
Intellectual Property Rights ◽  
Trade Agreement ◽  
Global Trade ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Transatlantic Trade ◽  
The Usa ◽  
Trade And Investment ◽  
The Eu

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to examine the transatlantic trade and investment partnership (TTIP). The EU and the USA are negotiating the TTIP, a trade agreement that aims to remove trade barriers across different economic sectors to increase trade between the EU and the USA. The TTIP will have spill over effects on the MENA region, the GCC, Australia and the Asian sub-continent, as it raises key questions for intellectual property and international trade agreements. For instance, will the USA and EU be on an equal footing or will one triumph over the other, will third party countries like the GCC states be expected to adopt new standards. Design/methodology/approach The research design is a paper and online data collection method to find literature to date on intellectual property law development in the GCC states in relation to the three research objectives as set out above. The literature is the population, and this could prove problematic. Different databases have been used to cover all sources where data can be found. Findings As the EU-USA TTIP is aiming to conclude by the end of 2015, the GCC has an opportunity to reassess its relationship with both the EU and GCC. Up until now, the GCC was able to enter into negotiations with the EU and USA relatively independently. However, where the EU and USA can agree, there will be a harmonisation of regulations. This therefore has repercussions for the GCC. The TTIP has three main aims: to increase trade and investment through market access, increase employment and competitiveness and create a harmonised approach to global trade. To harmonise global trade, the EU and USA aim to harmonise their intellectual property rights through an intellectual property rights chapter that deals specifically with enhancing protection and recognition for geographical indications, build on TRIPS and patentability. Research limitations/implications This study is non-empirical. Originality/value The TTIP will have spill over effects for the GCC, as it has yet to finalise the EU-GCC free trade agreement and USA-GCC framework agreement. The power dynamics between the USA and EU will be a deciding factor on the intellectual property chapter in the TTIP in terms of what the provisions for intellectual property will look like and what powers will be available to investors to bring investor-state-dispute settlement claims against foreign countries.

European Parliament vote will raise more TTIP doubts

2015 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
The United States ◽  
European Parliament ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Transatlantic Trade ◽  
Eu Membership ◽  
Deep Integration ◽  
Economic Ties ◽  
Trade Deals ◽  
Trade And Investment ◽  
The Eu

Subject The European Parliament and the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership. Significance The last-minute decision of the European Parliament (EP) to postpone a June 10 debate and vote on the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) has exposed important divisions among its members (MEPs) over whether and how closer EU-US economic ties can be secured. While non-binding at this stage, the debate and vote would have provided important guidance to the European Commission on its priorities and room for manoeuvre as it engages in further negotiations with the United States. TTIP must ultimately be ratified by the EP, which has voted down international agreements in the past. Impacts The EP's difficulties in finalising its views could constrain the Commission in the TTIP negotiations. However, given the EP's ultimate veto over the deal, time spent now on hammering out an ISDS formula it could accept may not be wasted. Any rejection of TTIP, particularly over ISDS, could raise questions over future international trade deals premised on deep integration. TTIP rejection could even jeopardise concluded trade deals awaiting ratification, such as that between the EU and Canada. Progress on TTIP is among the measures sought by UK Prime Minister David Cameron before his EU membership referendum.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document