scholarly journals Competitive Liberalization and the ‘Global Europe’ Services and Investment Agenda: Locating the Commercial Drivers of the EU-ACP Economic Partnership Agreements*

2011 ◽  
Vol 50 (2) ◽  
pp. 250-266 ◽  
Author(s):  
TONY HERON ◽  
GABRIEL SILES-BRÜGGE
Keyword(s):  
Commercial Drivers ◽  
Economic Partnership ◽  
Competitive Liberalization ◽  
The Eu

Actorness and trade negotiating outcomes: West Africa and the SADC Group in negotiations for Economic Partnership Agreements

2017 ◽  
Vol 32 (1) ◽  
pp. 39-59 ◽  
Author(s):  
Merran Hulse
Keyword(s):  
West Africa ◽  
International Negotiations ◽  
Trade Negotiations ◽  
Power Asymmetry ◽  
Interregional Trade ◽  
African Caribbean ◽  
Interregional Cooperation ◽  
Economic Partnership ◽  
Collective Goals ◽  
The Eu

In 2014, the EU concluded Economic Partnership Agreements (EPAs) with several African, Caribbean and Pacific (ACP) regions. These EPAs represent some of the most advanced examples of interregional cooperation. Yet, the outcomes of EPA negotiations are not the same across all regions. This article investigates differences in negotiated outcomes and argues that regional actorness – the ability of regions to become identifiable, to aggregate the interests of member states, to formulate collective goals and to make and implement decisions – influences regions’ ability to navigate interregional trade negotiations. In a comparison of the actorness and negotiated outcomes of West Africa and the SADC EPA Group, the article shows that actorness matters for international negotiations: regions with higher levels of actorness can negotiate better outcomes even under conditions of stark power asymmetry.

Persuading the Giant? Explaining Eastern Partnership States’ (Unexpected) Negotiation Success in Relations with the European Union

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-33
Author(s):  
Giselle Bosse ◽  
Moritz Höpner ◽  
Alena Vieira
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Trade Agreement ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Eastern Partnership ◽  
Negotiation Strategies ◽  
Bilateral Relations ◽  
Economic Partnership ◽  
Partnership Agreement ◽  
Negotiation Success ◽  
The Eu

Abstract In bilateral relations and negotiations with the European Union (EU), smaller and economically weaker states are often unable to express their national preferences. Despite their limited bargaining power, however, some Eastern Partnership (EaP) countries obtained significant concessions from the EU. This article analyzes the factors that explain EaP states’ unexpected negotiation success in the context of the Deep and Comprehensive Free Trade Agreement (DCFTA) with Ukraine, the Comprehensive and Enhanced Partnership Agreement (CEPA) with Armenia, and enhanced economic partnership with Belarus. We identify negotiation strategies that are crucial to understanding of the puzzle.

Doing It Different

2014 ◽  
pp. 56-72
Author(s):  
Owais Hassan Shaikh ◽  
Yifat Nahmias
Keyword(s):  
Developing Countries ◽  
Intellectual Property ◽  
Knowledge Society ◽  
Direct Consequence ◽  
Developed Countries ◽  
Least Developed Countries ◽  
African Countries ◽  
Interregional Trade ◽  
Economic Partnership ◽  
The Eu

This chapter highlights the current developments in the area of intellectual property having direct consequence for the prospects of Africa's knowledge society. Even though African countries, especially the Least Developed Countries (LDCs), have not yet faced pressure from the EU, US, and EFTA for higher intellectual property standards, the situation may change soon with the imminent deadline for conclusion of Economic Partnership Agreements in 2014, the lapse of Africa Growth and Opportunities Act in 2015, and the expiry of the Cotonou Agreement in 2020. African countries will be well advised to decouple trade and intellectual property issues by promoting interregional trade or trade with other developing countries that do not demand TRIPS-Plus protection. They must also negotiate intellectual property within the ambit of the WTO.

The EU’s engagement with foreign powers on human rights

2020 ◽  
pp. 265-292
Author(s):  
Francisca Costa Reis ◽  
Weiyuan Gao ◽  
Vineet Hegde
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Lisbon Treaty ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Human Rights Protection ◽  
Rights Protection ◽  
Cohesive Group ◽  
The Difference ◽  
Economic Partnership ◽  
Set Up ◽  
The Eu

With a mandate under the Lisbon Treaty, the European Union (EU) has been engaging with foreign powers like Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa (BRICS) nations on human rights issues. Despite the common and shared goals, the BRICS set-up is not institutionalised, which prompts the EU to engage with each country on a bilateral basis. Such collaborations have occurred in bilateral dialogues, multilateral fora, through developmental assistance, and negotiations in economic partnership agreements. The scope and content of the discussions and cooperation vary due to the difference in the political structures of the countries. While the EU and the BRICS may share some common goals politically and economically, pursuing shared objectives related to democracy and human rights promotion remains challenging. These countries may believe in human rights protection, but the understandings and the approaches vary drastically, as visible when issues of sovereignty and non-intervention are raised to resist comprehensive discussions. Although the BRICS are emerging as an interconnected group and have begun to cooperate more closely in multilateral fora, the EU may also have to consider dealing with it in its institutional capacity. It could be more challenging to fulfill the mandate of the Lisbon Treaty for the EU while dealing with this cohesive group that has different understandings on human rights protection within their own states.

A 'Sustainability Impact Assessment' of the Economic Partnership Agreements: Challenging the Participatory Process

2010 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Clair Gammage
Keyword(s):  
Impact Assessment ◽  
Participatory Process ◽  
Country Ownership ◽  
African Caribbean ◽  
Economic Partnership ◽  
Participation Process ◽  
The Public Sphere ◽  
Trade Preferences ◽  
Sustainability Impact Assessment ◽  
The Eu

For the past decade the EU has been preparing to end its tradition of preferential and partially reciprocal trade with the African-Caribbean-Pacific (ACP) countries. With the expiry of trade preferences in 2007 under the Cotonou Agreement, these trade partners have agreed to negotiate Economic Partnership Agreements (EPA) and trade on reciprocal terms, in a bid to preserve their special relationship. A Sustainability Impact Assessment (SIA) was commissioned by the EU to engage stakeholders in discussion about the real and potential challenges of the new trade regime facing ACP countries. This paper examines the participatory process of the EPA negotiations, in particular the Sustainability Impact Assessment, through the lens of country ownership and deliberative democracy. Discussion of the participation process will be twofold: analysing whether the issues raised in the public sphere are reflected in the CARIFORUM-EC EPA, and the extent to which the SIA is legitimised through public participation.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document