scholarly journals Russia - Latin America Economic Cooperation: Insights from EU - CELAC Sustainable Development Concept

2021 ◽  
Vol 21 (4) ◽  
pp. 785-802
Author(s):  
Alla Yu. Borzova ◽  
Arkadiy A. Eremin ◽  
Natalia V. Ivkina ◽  
Oleg K. Petrovich-Belkin
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Sustainable Development ◽  
Latin America ◽  
Latin American ◽  
Alternative Energy ◽  
Structural Changes ◽  
Green Economy ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Interregional Cooperation ◽  
Development Paradigm

The article considers cooperation patterns between the European Union (EU) and CELAC (Community of Latin America and the Caribbean) in the context of creatively applying this experience to a broader topic of Russia - Latin America multilevel cooperation. The concept of sustainable development, which implies interaction in accordance with its three main dimensions: environmental, social and economic, is adopted on the global level. The interaction between EU and CELAC contributes to the progress in achieving the goals of sustainable development, where a lot of attention is paid to the green economy, alternative energy, and social aspects, since the environmental aspects constraints are providing the most significant impetus to structural changes in the existing development paradigm. This in return is expected to create a model that ensures economic growth based on a green economy, alternative energy, with greater equality and social inclusiveness. At supranational level in the European Union an effective and systemic policy has been formed in the field of nature conservation and combating climate change, which without a doubt can be considered one of the most progressive ones in the world, which creates potential for sharing these experiences with less developed and fortunate nations. European programs for Latin American and Caribbean (LAC) countries have become an important factor in the development of interregional cooperation in environmental protection, biodiversity conservation, and countering natural disasters. The article also focuses on the most recent changes that have occurred in the sphere of interaction between CELAC and EU in the context of COVID-19 pandemic. Massive structural and conceptual changes that have seriously reshaped the priorities and funding of joint programmers between two organizations reflects new priorities for sustainable development in general when it comes to new world realities in post-pandemic world, and could be useful for Russian model for the relations with this region.

TERRITORIAL COHESION POLICY IN THE CONTEXT OF EU REGIONAL SECURITY

2019 ◽  
Vol 18 (Vol 18, No 4 (2019)) ◽  
pp. 439-453
Author(s):  
Ihor LISHCHYNSKYY
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Sustainable Development ◽  
Regional Security ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Cohesion Policy ◽  
Cross Border ◽  
Territorial Cohesion ◽  
Interregional Cooperation ◽  
The Eu

The article is devoted to the study of the implementation of territorial cohesion policy in the European Union in order to achieve a secure regional coexistence. In particular, the regulatory and institutional origins of territorial cohesion policy in the EU are considered. The evolution of ontological models of cohesion policy has been outlined. Specifically, the emphasis is placed on the key objective of political geography – effectively combining the need for "territorialization" and the growing importance of networking. The role of urbanization processes in the context of cohesion policy is highlighted. Cross-border dimensions of cohesion policy in the context of interregional cooperation are explored. Particular emphasis is placed on the features of integrated sustainable development strategies.

Refugee Rights Across Regions: A Comparative Overview of Legislative Good Practices in Latin America and the EU

2020 ◽  
Vol 39 (3) ◽  
pp. 321-362 ◽  
Author(s):  
Luisa Feline Freier ◽  
Jean-Pierre Gauci
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Latin America ◽  
Latin American ◽  
Vulnerable Groups ◽  
Average Score ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Good Practices ◽  
Procedural Safeguards ◽  
Latin American Countries ◽  
Scope Of Protection

Abstract The office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) has identified a number of legislative good practices in Latin American asylum and refugee laws. At the same time, academics and policy-makers have long called for cross-regional comparative analyses of policies and laws to allow different regions to learn from each other’s best practices. In this article, we compare refugee legislations of Latin American countries with European Union protection standards based on UNHCR’s legislative good practices across three areas: (i) Core Principles and Scope of Protection; (ii) Procedural Safeguards and Guarantees for Vulnerable Groups; and (iii) Integration. We find that six of 19 refugee laws in Latin America provide more expansive protection than the Common European Asylum System framework, whereas other Latin American countries fall behind. The gap between Latin American legislations and European Union protection standards is closer regarding procedural safeguards, the protection of vulnerable groups, and integration provisions. Finally, Latin American countries, on average, score significantly below the European Union regarding the core principles of asylum and the scope of protection. In the second part of the article, we engage in a qualitative discussion of these legislative good practices to allow for cross-fertilization, and deliver policy recommendations.

The second attempt to negotiate the association agreement

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Arantza Gomez Arana
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Latin America ◽  
Latin American ◽  
The European Union ◽  
International Crisis ◽  
Association Agreement ◽  
The Moment ◽  
The One ◽  
The Right ◽  
The Eu

From the moment the European Union and Mercosur stopped their negotiations there was not progress or a real intention to re-start the negotiations again until 2010. Officially the EU and Mercosur “continued” negotiating the Association Agreement but it is fair to say that after such a failure at the last minute in October 2004, both sides becoming cautious in their hopes for a successful agreement. Considering that the negotiations failed publicly it is understandable to expect some years of “healing” before considering a new attempt. One more time, the right momentum was necessary to facilitate the re-launching of the negotiations. The economic environment was completely different from 2004. At this moment Europe is the one recovering from a financial crisis and from a weak Eurozone, while in Latin America this international crisis did not have that much of an effect. However in 2004 Brazil and Argentina were recovering from the economic crisis of the late 1990s early 2000s. The negotiations between the EU and other Latin American regional groups or individual countries were being successful. At the same time a third major investor and trader became an important piece of the puzzle, China. To some extent this could be seen as a better scenario for a successful agreement between both regions. The facilitator of the re-launching of the negotiations was one more time the Spanish presidency of 2010. Since then, several meetings have taken place between the EU and Mercosur, the last one in mid June in Brussels 2015.

MERCOSUR and the European Union: Comparative Regionalism and Interregionalism

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrés Malamud
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Latin America ◽  
Latin American ◽  
Regional Integration ◽  
Role Model ◽  
Economies Of Scale ◽  
Central American ◽  
Trade Association ◽  
Political Scientist ◽  
The European Union

Integration attempts in Latin America have historically been linked to the European experience. Transatlantic influence has gone from policy learning through institutional mimicry to direct funding. Modern Latin American regionalism dates back to 1960, when the Central American Common Market and the Latin American Free Trade Association (LAFTA) were founded. Both associations were a response to the creation of the European Economic Community in 1957 and the fear that “Fortress Europe” would cut extra-regional markets off, so alternatives should be developed. The Latin American blocs aspired to overcome the small size of the national markets by fostering economies of scale. Shortly thereafter, European-born, U.S.-based political scientist Ernst Haas—jointly with Philippe Schmitter—put to the test the neofunctionalist theory he had developed for Europe to analyze Central American integration, correctly diagnosing the latter’s limitations and forecasting its setbacks. LAFTA also faltered and failed and, in 1980, the Latin American Integration Association (ALADI by its Spanish acronym) replaced it. A decade later, ALADI would become MERCOSUR’s umbrella organization. After the third wave of democratization, which in Latin America started in 1978, new attempts at regional integration took hold, and MERCOSUR was initially considered as the most successful. Successive leaders of the European Union (EU) nurtured big hopes and devoted a great deal of attention to EU–MERCOSUR relations, first assisting with integration technology, material resources, and intellectual guidance and, since 1995, conducting several rounds of negotiations to strike a trade deal. The path that had led to MERCOSUR resembled that of the EU, as it started in 1985 with functional and sectoral integration (wheat and oil prominently, in place of coal and steel) around the Argentina–Brazil axis. A few years later, in 1991, the binational association was opened up to Paraguay and Uruguay and transformed itself into a typical Balassa-like organization, prioritizing broader market integration over focused sectoral integration—just like the Treaty of Rome had done in Europe. Intra-regional trade tripled during the first seven years, but it later stagnated and never bounced back. As a result, the member states decided to up the rhetorical ante and broaden the areas encompassed by the organization rather than fostering economic interdependence or deepening the level of regional authority. An optional tribunal and a powerless parliament were established in 2002 and 2005 respectively. The outcome was grim: more institutions on paper did not enhance performance in practice. Having exhausted the internal agenda, the external agenda remained the only one where positive developments were still expected. In 2019, after twenty years of bumping negotiations, a political agreement on a comprehensive trade deal was reached with the European Union, MERCOSUR’s role model and largest trade partner. If this agreement is signed and ratified, it will become the largest interregional arrangement ever.

scholarly journals BIREGIONAL COOPERATION FOR ADVANCING GAMIFICATION IN TRANSPORT POLICIES AND INFRASTRUCTURE IN THE EUROPEAN UNION AND LATIN AMERICA AND THE CARIBBEAN

2020 ◽  
Vol 14 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Ioana Antoaneta DODI
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Latin America ◽  
Latin American ◽  
Public Transport ◽  
Best Practice ◽  
Energy Savings ◽  
Energy Transport ◽  
The European Union ◽  
The Caribbean ◽  
Heads Of State

The globalization process is constantly growing and actors in the international scene have to find ways to adapt to the changes that this makeover involves. Therefore, there has been an increased cooperation between the European Union and Latin America and the Caribbean in many policy areas, including transport, especially in terms of access, affordability and sustainability. The Vienna Declaration of the Fourth ALC-UE Summit of Heads of State and Government from 2006 mentions the encouragement towards European and Latin American and Caribbean financial institutions to support physical integration by means of interconnectivity, network infrastructures, notably in the fields of energy, transport, telecommunications and research. The Lima Declaration of the Fifth ALC-UE Summit of Heads of State and Government from 2008 moves a step forward and comprises the fact that the states from the two regions will develop bi-regional energy cooperation regarding improvement of energy services, inter alia, in the metropolitan public transport. Moreover, the Madrid Declaration of the Sixth ALC-UE Summit of Heads of State and Government from 2010 refers to energy savings in all sectors of the economies, including transports, meanwhile the Santiago Declaration of the First UE-CELAC Summit of Heads of State and Government from 2013 prioritises the improvement of policies and providing, among others, adequately resourced basic health services, water and sanitation, housing, education, public transport and energy, besides strengthening the Latin America Investment Facility, to improve integration, energy and transport infrastructures, energy efficiency, renewable energy. Therefore, this paper aims to analyse best practice cases from both regions in terms of gamification of transport policies and infrastructure, in order to highlight the the potential of the biregional consolidated cooperation for advancing gamification (in view of modern, sustainable, affordable, efficient transport policies, networks and infrastructure), the financial and political instruments that can be used in this sense and the mutual benefits that it would bring for the participant actors.

scholarly journals Political Shifts in Latin America and Problems of Relations of the Region with the European Union

2020 ◽  
pp. 162-172
Author(s):  
Zbiegnew Iwanowski ◽  
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Latin America ◽  
Latin American ◽  
Social Situation ◽  
Political Polarization ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Bilateral Relations ◽  
Unity In Diversity ◽  
The Right ◽  
The Eu

The article examines the deteriorating economic and social situation in Latin America after the "golden decade" (2003 – 2013) and political shifts in the region. During the last electoral cycle, there was a reformatting of the political landscape, including the "right drift" on one hand and the strengthening of the positions of the left forces on the other. At the same time, political polarization at the national and regional levels sharply increased, integration blocks have disintegrated or are in a state of crisis. As a result, the region is no longer a "unity in diversity". Based on an analysis of the latest sources and bibliography, the author shows the reasons for the intensification of European politics in Latin America. He comes to conclusion that the EU tries to play an independent role in the emerging new bipolarity. Although the economy remains a priority in interregional cooperation, political aspects are becoming increasingly important. Both regions actively cooperate in solving global problems, but the priorities of each of them differ significantly. The European Union cooperates with Latin America in strengthening multilateralism and improving global governance, both partners try to reform international institutions, reject protectionism and underline the priority of international law. In the absence of "unity in diversity" and the crisis of integration associations on the continent, the EU pays more attention to bilateral relations with Latin American countries.

The most productive years of EU–Mercosur relations

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Arantza Gomez Arana
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Latin America ◽  
Latin American ◽  
General Context ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Medium Level ◽  
Global Vision ◽  
High Level ◽  
New Framework ◽  
The Eu

This chapter covers a new stage in EU policy towards Mercosur and Latin America. This stage started with a new framework of policies within which agreements between the European Union and Latin American countries, including the Mercosur countries, were made. By explaining EU-Mercosur agreements within the general context of EU-LA relations it is possible to bring some clarity to the EU level of engagement with Mercosur in relative terms so it is neither over nor underestimated. In doing so it will show how EU-Mercosur relations were the most important ones within the EU-LA framework. As has been established before, the level of engagement will be explained by discussing two aspects of it, “ambition” and “commitment”. This chapter shows that there is a medium level of “ambition” and a high level of “commitment” which helps to explain the outcome of a medium level of engagement. In relation to this stage, in the literature it has been accepted that, in 1990, the EU’s means of dealing with Latin America changed (Aldecoa Luzarraga 1995; Bizzozero 1995; Laporte Galli 1996; Birochi 1999). Detailed explanations for this have not yet been offered. Some indicate that these changes were due to wider changes in the international arena. With the end of Cold War, the EU was given a chance to develop a global vision and a space in which to do it (Aldecoa Luzarraga 1995; Birochi 1999). The internal changes in the European Union, especially its increased integration, have also been mentioned in this regard (Aldecoa Luzarraga 1995).

The Banana Regime of the European Union, the Caribbean, and Latin America

1997 ◽  
Vol 39 (2) ◽  
pp. 5-36 ◽  
Author(s):  
Paul Sutton
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Latin America ◽  
Latin American ◽  
Relative Size ◽  
The European Union ◽  
The Future ◽  
The Caribbean ◽  
The Eu

The tone of European-Latin American relations in recent years has been strongly influenced by the issue of bananas. At stake has been the future of the banana trade between the European Union (EU) and Latin America, which, even if small in relative size (constituting less than 5% of Latin America’s exports to the EU), has loomed large in international political calculations. This article seeks to make sense of a very complex, and still developing, situation by identifying the interests of the various parties directly concerned. The first part examines the background, the problem, and the solution to this issue as set out in the adoption of a new banana regime (NBR) in the EU.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document