Dispute Settlement Mechanism in a Mixed-Mixed Agreement: Some Loose Ends. The Economic Partnership Agreement EU–ECOWAS–WAEMU

2020 ◽  
Vol 11 (2) ◽  
pp. 319-334
Author(s):  
Gloria Fernández Arribas

Abstract The EU has developed an important practice regarding partnership agreements that has reached a new stage with mixed-mixed partnership agreements, in which the EU and its Member States are party to an agreement with another international organization and its Member States. Many issues may arise from these kinds of agreements, but this article focuses on the dispute settlement mechanism included in the Economic Partnership Agreement among the EU, Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS), West African Economic and Monetary Union (WAEMU) and their Member States. The agreement establishes different options for dispute settlement and determining and implementing these dispute settlement mechanisms may give rise to conflicts of law, the overlapping of courts’ competences, and conflicts of competences between the organizations and their Member States or among the Member States. The EU already has a practice in place for resolving these problems, but such a mechanism is lacking in the practices of the ECOWAS and WAEMU.

Author(s):  
Rumiana Górska

AbstractThis paper assesses the economic impact of the Japan-EU Economic Partnership Agreement (JEEPA) on all EU member states as well as Japan. The novelty of this study is that it refers to all EU countries and provides an overview of the expected output effects of JEEPA for all member states in a detailed sectoral breakdown. This impact is investigated using the Computable General Equilibrium (CGE) framework. Calculations revealed that economic returns from JEEPA vary among the EU countries. Some of the more highly developed EU countries will experience beneficial effects from tariff reductions to a greater extent than others, while some of the newer, less-developed EU members will experience losses, caused by the lower competitiveness of these countries. Beneficial effects in the EU countries are expected mainly in the primary sector industries like meat and animal products, leather, grains, and crops; while in Japan, economic gains are expected in the motor vehicle and transport equipment industries. Despite the overall optimism accompanying the signing of the JEEPA, it is worth paying attention to the sectors that are expected to shrink as a result.


2015 ◽  
Vol 53 (3) ◽  
pp. 263-287 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mark Langan ◽  
Sophia Price

ABSTRACTWest African elites have successfully argued for an Economic Partnership Agreement Development Programme (EPADP) as part of free trade negotiations with the European Commission. ECOWAS officials state that the EPADP is necessary to realise the ‘development dimension’ of trade. In particular, they have (re)articulated Europe's own narratives relating to Aid for Trade and private sector development – insisting that the European Commission delivers on its promises. Accordingly, European negotiators have conceded the principle of the EPADP, stating that around €6·5 billion will be delivered. This article, however, examines the likely (in)capacity of the EPADP to meaningfully marry trade and development in the context of premature liberalisation under Economic Partnership Agreements (EPAs). Crucially, it argues that West Africanextraversionin terms of EPADP resources may entrench predatory elites while locking-in ECOWAS states into inequitable trade structures that re-embed poverty in the region.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document