Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership

2015 ◽  
pp. 14-22 ◽  
Author(s):  
P. Kadochnikov ◽  
M. Ptashkina
Keyword(s):  
Market Access ◽  
Trade Agreement ◽  
Government Procurement ◽  
Atlantic Trade ◽  
Bilateral Relations ◽  
The Us ◽  
The Future ◽  
High Standards ◽  
Set Up ◽  
Trade And Investment

The US and the EU are negotiating a comprehensive Trans-Atlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP). The main purposes of the agreement are to stimulate economic growth and employment, to facilitate trade and investment and raise competitiveness on both sides of the Atlantic. The US and EU are the biggest trade and investment partners for each other, as well as most important partners for a number of other countries. The Trans-Atlantic free trade agreement would not only facilitate bilateral cooperation, but has a potential to set up new, more advanced international trade and investment rules and practices. The agreement is aimed, among other point, at resolving some of the existing problems in bilateral relations, such as differences in regulatory practices, market access conditions, government procurement, intellectual property rights (IPR) and investor protection. However, some of these differences are deeply inherent in the regulatory systems and have become the reasons for numerous disputes. Despite the fact that the negotiations on TTIP are still in progress, it is already possible to identify and assess the underlying differences that would potentially hamper the creation of deep provisions in the future agreement. The paper aims at analyzing the most difficult areas of negotiations and giving predictions for the future provisions. Firstly, the paper gives an overview of the scope and structure of bilateral relations between the US and EU. Secondly, the authors give detailed analysis of the most important points of the negotiation’s agenda, making stress on the underlying differences in domestic regulation and assessing the depth of those differences. The conclusions are as follows. While some of the areas, such as tariffs, labor and environment, SMEs, state enterprises and others, are relatively easy to agree upon, as both economies are striving to achieve high standards, negotiations on other issues, such as government procurement, NTM regulation and IPR are less likely to achieve high standards.

Who Settles Disputes? Treaty Design and Trade Attitudes Toward the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP)

2019 ◽  
Vol 73 (4) ◽  
pp. 881-900 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hyeonho Hahm ◽  
Thomas König ◽  
Moritz Osnabrügge ◽  
Elena Frech
Keyword(s):  
Dispute Settlement ◽  
Market Access ◽  
Critical Role ◽  
Public Support ◽  
Trade Agreement ◽  
Dispute Settlement Mechanism ◽  
Design Elements ◽  
Transatlantic Trade ◽  
Nationally Representative ◽  
Trade And Investment

AbstractWhat type of trade agreement is the public willing to accept? Instead of focusing on individual concerns about market access and trade barriers, we argue that specific treaty design and, in particular, the characteristics of the dispute settlement mechanism, play a critical role in shaping public support for trade agreements. To examine this theoretical expectation, we conduct a conjoint experiment that varies diverse treaty-design elements and estimate preferences over multiple dimensions of the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) based on a nationally representative sample in Germany. We find that compared to other alternatives, private arbitration, known as investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS), generates strong opposition to the trade agreement. As the single most important factor, this effect of dispute settlement characteristic is strikingly large and consistent across individuals’ key attributes, including skill levels, information, and national sentiment, among others.

scholarly journals The Rise of Bilateralism in Trade and its Implications for Pakistan

2009 ◽  
Vol 14 (Special Edition) ◽  
pp. 111-133
Author(s):  
Irfan ul Haque Irfan ul Haque
Keyword(s):  
Free Trade Area ◽  
Trade Agreement ◽  
Most Favored Nation ◽  
Economic Interests ◽  
Trade Area ◽  
Bilateral Relations ◽  
The Us ◽  
Preferential Trading ◽  
Post War ◽  
Preferential Trading Arrangements

This paper examines and critiques the worldwide mushrooming of preferential trading arrangements and traces its implications for Pakistan. It points out that this development is fundamentally contrary to the principle of most-favored-nation (MFN) treatment, which was the cornerstone of the post-war multilateral trading system as embodied in the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) and by the World Trade Organization (WTO). The causes of the rise in bilateral and regional trading arrangements are discussed and it is shown that they pose a real threat to many relatively small economies, including Pakistan. The paper discusses the various preferential trade agreements Pakistan has already signed. It notes that, with the exception of its trade agreement with China, Pakistan has not succeeded in concluding preferential trading arrangements with any of the strategically and systemically more important countries, viz., the US, European Union, and Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC). The South Asia Free Trade Area (SAFTA) could potentially be of considerable importance for Pakistan’s long-term economic growth, but this potential might not be realized if India and Pakistan fail to overcome their mutual differences. Finally, the paper explores steps that might be taken to promote Pakistan’s economic interests in its bilateral relations.

The Effects of T-TIP Market Access Reform on EU Beef Import Demand

2017 ◽  
Vol 15 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Amanda M Countryman ◽  
Andrew Muhammad
Keyword(s):  
Market Access ◽  
Trade Agreement ◽  
The United States ◽  
Import Demand ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Transatlantic Trade ◽  
Beef Products ◽  
Production Practices ◽  
Trade And Investment ◽  
The Eu

AbstractImport policies in the European Union have greatly restricted beef imports from all sources. The presence of a binding tariff-rate quota (TRQ) on beef imports in tandem with sanitary and phytosanitary restrictions on biotechnological food products specifically inhibit beef imports from the United States and limit market access in the EU. Potential passage of the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership may lead to a loosening of non-tariff measures (NTM) that serve as technical barriers to trade and give rise to the coexistence of hormone and non-hormone beef products in the EU marketplace. This research assesses the potential changes in import demand for beef under a trade agreement that allows for imports of conventional beef as well as an expansion of the existing TRQ in the EU beef import market. Results confirm that EU imports of beef will increase from all sources with an expansion of the TRQ and that elimination of the NTM related to beef production practices leads to an increase in competiveness of U.S. and Australian beef in the EU import market.

scholarly journals Transatlantic Free Trade: The Viewpoint of Germany

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gabriel Felbermayr ◽  
Rahel Aichele
Keyword(s):  
Value Added ◽  
Trade Agreement ◽  
Theory Model ◽  
Export Market ◽  
Wide Spread ◽  
Trade Theory ◽  
Transatlantic Trade ◽  
The Us ◽  
Per Capita ◽  
Trade And Investment

Negotiations towards a Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) agreement between the EU and the US have proven extremely controversial in Germany. This is puzzling, because the US has been Germany’s largest export market for years, at least when measured in value added terms. However, realized trade flows substantially fall short from the friction-free benchmark. The simulation of a quantitative trade theory model, which assumes that a TTIP would be as effective as the average existing deep trade agreement, could lead to an increase in real per capita income by about 2.5% in both the US and Germany. Gains in Germany would be largely driven by higher value added in the automotive industry, while the agricultural and the chemicals sector would lose. However, resistance against TTIP has not been shaped by classical political economy motives along sectoral lines, but by wide-spread fears of a regulatory race-to-the-bottom.

scholarly journals Missing in Action? France and the Politicization of Trade and Investment Agreements

2020 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
pp. 312-324 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sophie Meunier ◽  
Christilla Roederer-Rynning
Keyword(s):  
Historical Analysis ◽  
Trade Agreement ◽  
The United States ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Transatlantic Trade ◽  
The Us ◽  
Missing In Action ◽  
Changing Attitudes ◽  
Investment Agreements ◽  
Trade And Investment

Negotiations for the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) between the European Union (EU) and the United States (US) and for the Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement (CETA) between the EU and Canada have provoked massive mobilization throughout Europe, both on the streets and online. Yet France, long at the epicenter of anti-globalization and anti-Americanism, has played a surprisingly modest role in the mobilization campaign against these agreements. This article asks why France did not contribute to anti-TTIP mobilization and, more broadly, how patterns of French mobilization over trade have changed over the past two decades. Using comparative-historical analysis, we explore to what extent this puzzling French reaction can be traced to changing attitudes towards the US, agenda-shaping by the French government, and transformations in the venues and techniques of social mobilization. We thus contribute to the growing literature on the politicization of trade agreements and offer insights into the links between domestic and international politics.

scholarly journals Potential effects of the T-TIP on Turkey's motor vehicles and parts sector

2019 ◽  
Vol 66 (4) ◽  
pp. 507-523
Author(s):  
Abdullah Akel ◽  
Aylin Ege
Keyword(s):  
Free Trade ◽  
Free Trade Agreement ◽  
Market Access ◽  
Trade Agreement ◽  
The United States ◽  
Motor Vehicles ◽  
Partial Equilibrium Model ◽  
The Us ◽  
Levels Of Integration ◽  
The Eu

The aim of this article is to quantify the possible effects of a potential T-TIP between the US and the EU on production and exports of Turkey?s motor vehicles and parts sector. A partial equilibrium model is used to this end under two scenarios, the first one assuming only T-TIP, whereas the second one supposing a simultaneous free trade agreement between the US and Turkey. The simulations are based on the reductions in tariffs and non-tariff barriers between the T-TIP partners in the first scenario, and between the US and Turkey, as well in the second scenario. The simulation results indicate that the prospective effects on the sector?s production and exports differ significantly depending on different levels of integration. The results also reflect decreasing net welfare for Turkey and that a free trade agreement with the United States does not offer a significant market access potential for Turkey because of its production structure.

scholarly journals Es gibt Alternativen zur ALCA

2006 ◽  
Vol 36 (142) ◽  
pp. 81-94
Author(s):  
Ana Garcia
Keyword(s):  
Social Movements ◽  
South America ◽  
Regional Integration ◽  
Trade Unions ◽  
Trade Agreement ◽  
Left Wing ◽  
Cooperation Agreement ◽  
The Us ◽  
Us Government ◽  
Set Up

The Free Trade Agreement of the Americas (FTAA) could not be set up in the way and time the US-Government firstly wanted. Among others, one of the main reasons was the wide spread network resistance that involved trade unions, social movements and grass roots organizations from North and South America, who worked together to pressure their governments to stop negotiations. A new space for action has emerged in the last few years with the election of left-wing Presidents in South America, converging interest of governments with demands from social movements to overcome neoliberal regional integration. A concrete alternative project against FTAA came up from the cooperation agreement between Venezuela und Cuba, but extended to other countries: The "bolivarian" Alternative for the Americas and Caribbean (ALBA) seeks to establish solidary ways of integration in Latin America.

scholarly journals Pulling back the curtain on 'behind the border' trade costs: The case of EU-US agri-food trade

2017 ◽  
Vol 15 (2) ◽  
pp. e0110 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ana I. Sanjuán ◽  
George Philippidis ◽  
Helena Resano
Keyword(s):  
Trade Costs ◽  
Predictive Capacity ◽  
Short Supply ◽  
Gravity Method ◽  
Atlantic Trade ◽  
Border Trade ◽  
The Us ◽  
Global Modelling ◽  
Agriculture And Food ◽  
Trade And Investment

With the rise of anti-free-trade sentiment on both sides of the Atlantic, there is a growing urgency by trade negotiators to conclude the Trans-Atlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) negotiations. The harmonisation of non-tariff restrictions is a key component of the talks, whilst global modelling databases typically lack a price compatible representation of these measures, which lends a degree of bias to ex-ante modelling assessments. In the gravity literature, there is (limited) evidence of non-tariff ad-valorem equivalent (AVE) estimates of agriculture and food, although disaggregated agri-food activities and/or bilateral EU-US route specific estimates are still in relatively short supply. Using panel data, this study consolidates both of these issues, whilst also proposing an ‘indirect’ gravity method as a basis upon which to provide econometric non-tariff AVE estimates compatible with the degree of sectoral concordance typically found in global modelling databases. On a general note, the results revealed the presence of significant behind the border trade costs on both sides of the Atlantic, which exceed their tariff counterparts. Using simple aggregated averages, our estimates are comparable with ‘direct’ gravity method studies. Furthermore, rigorous qualitative and quantitative comparisons on a sector-by-sector basis showed that a number of bilateral non-tariff AVEs are also found to be plausible, although in some cases, with recourse to relevant policy documents and expert opinion, it is debatable whether the EU or the US is more restrictive. Further work could focus on refining the sector specificity of each gravity equation to improve the model's predictive capacity.

scholarly journals European Union — Mexico: The Conclusion of a “New Generation” Trade Agreement

2019 ◽  
Vol 13 (4) ◽  
pp. 72-78
Author(s):  
T. V. Sidorenko
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Financial Services ◽  
Trade Agreement ◽  
Government Procurement ◽  
The European Union ◽  
European Business ◽  
Investment Facilitation ◽  
New Generation ◽  
Trade And Investment ◽  
The Eu

The article analyses the main innovations of the modernised free trade agreement between the European Union and Mexico, signed in April 2018. The author examined such aspects of the agreement as the liberalisation of trade in food, telecommunications, financial services, as well as e-commerce, providing access to the market of government procurement, protection of intellectual property rights, investment facilitation and other. Members of the EU emphasised that the conclusion of a “new generation” trade agreement with Mexico is in line with the updated foreign economic strategy of this integration association, aimed at promoting the commercial interests of the European business outside the EU. They also argue that Mexico is a desirable market for the European companies, given the size of its economy, its population, and its membership in NAFTA. Therefore, the entry into force of the modernised agreement will allow the intensification of the trade and investment relations between the partners. The latter should provide an additional incentive for their economic development, especially for Mexico.

scholarly journals Emerging Mega-FTAs: Rationale, Challenges, and Implications

2015 ◽  
Vol 14 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-27 ◽  
Author(s):  
Siow Yue Chia
Keyword(s):  
Free Trade Agreements ◽  
Trading System ◽  
Atlantic Trade ◽  
Recent Emergence ◽  
World Trading System ◽  
Technical Issues ◽  
Economic Partnership ◽  
High Standards ◽  
Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership ◽  
Trade And Investment

This paper examines the recent emergence of mega–free trade agreements, namely, the Asian-centric Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership, the Trans-Pacific Partnership, and the Trans-Atlantic Trade and Investment Partnership. In a comparative context it discusses the rationale for their emergence; their distinctive membership features, objectives, and negotiating agendas; their quantifiable benefits and dissenting voices; issues and challenges; and likely outcomes. Aspirations for “high standards” are unlikely to be met because their negotiating timelines are repeatedly missed as negotiators struggle with political, diplomatic, commercial, economic, regulatory, and technical issues. Although negotiations appear relatively simple at the outset, their complex and daunting hurdles will ultimately limit their impact on the world trading system.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document