Brexit and the External Trade Policy of the EU

2019 ◽  
Vol 6 (1-2019) ◽  
pp. 27-46
Author(s):  
Hubert Zimmermann
Keyword(s):  
Trade Policy ◽  
Foreign Trade Policy ◽  
External Trade ◽  
Eu Foreign Policy ◽  
The Core ◽  
Core Components ◽  
The Common ◽  
Material Power ◽  
Huge Challenge ◽  
The Eu

Brexit is a huge challenge with enormous consequences for future UK trade policy. But it will also have an impact on the common external trade policy of the EU, and, thus, on one of the core components of EU foreign policy. This contribution analyses Britain’s role in the formulation of EU trade policy and the likely repercussions of its departure, particularly regarding the effectiveness of the EU as trade negotiator and the preferences it represents internationally. I use three theoretical lenses to address these questions: the first lens focuses on likely changes in the material power and interests of the EU; the second looks at the institutional consequences of Brexit for the formulation of EU foreign trade policy, and the third addresses potential changes in external perceptions of the EU as a trade power. It will be argued that neither the effectiveness of the EU as global trade power, nor the substance of its interests, will change substantially.

The Common Commercial Policy

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Johan Adriaensen
Keyword(s):  
Foreign Policy ◽  
Trade Policy ◽  
International Political Economy ◽  
External Action ◽  
External Trade ◽  
Commercial Policy ◽  
Common External Tariff ◽  
Policy Domain ◽  
The Common ◽  
The Eu

In 1958, the European Economic Community was formed as a customs union with a common external tariff. From then on, the Common Commercial Policy—also known as the European Union’s (EU) trade policy—served as the interface between the increasingly integrated common market and its external trade partners. Like the creation of the single market, contemporary trade policy has long transcended discussions about tariffs and quotas at the border and has focused increasingly on the impediments to trade caused by regulatory divergences. Whether they concern agricultural subsidies or cultural protections, rules on public procurement or food standards, insofar as a regulation discriminates against exporters, it can potentially be part of a trade negotiation. The evolving nature of trade policy has triggered a redefinition of both the scope of the EU’s exclusive competencies as well as the procedures to govern this policy domain. The central actor in EU trade policy is the European Commission, which is the designated negotiator for external trade agreements. Whereas member states always played a crucial role in overseeing such negotiations in the Council, the European Parliament has only taken up a position of power since 2009. Beyond securing market access abroad and protecting domestic sectors at home, post-material values have come to feature more prominently in the balancing act of contemporary trade discussions. This has galvanized a far wider range of societal actors to lobby the EU institutions in order to tilt the balance in their favor. Complicating matters even further, the EU conducts a large part of its foreign policy through the Common Commercial Policy. Contrary to most other instruments of the EU’s external action, trade policy is an exclusive competency of the EU. Fostering development, promoting stability, providing humanitarian aid, and the promotion and enforcement of human rights and sustainable development commitments are but a few of the many objectives pursued via trade policy. However, there are clear limitations to the fungibility of the EU’s large market power for foreign policy objectives. It should therefore be clear that the literature on the Common Commercial Policy is extremely diverse. Situated at the nexus of international political economy, regulatory governance, and foreign policy, it has become a well-studied policy domain through a great variety of theoretical and disciplinary lenses. The prominence of trade scholarship in EU studies is unlikely to change soon as developments at the international level, where the Western liberal order is under increasing pressure, but also domestically, where the contestation of several trade negotiations and the position of trade policy within the EU’s broader external action, are set to animate future debates.

scholarly journals TRADE POLICY OF THE EUROPEAN UNION AND THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA UNDER THE COVID-19 PANDEMIC

2021 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
pp. 53-59
Author(s):  
Viktoriya Mashkara-Choknadiy ◽  
Yuriy Mayboroda
Keyword(s):  
Foreign Trade ◽  
Trade Policy ◽  
Social Life ◽  
The United States ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Foreign Trade Policy ◽  
The Us ◽  
The Usa ◽  
The Impact ◽  
The Eu

The pandemic of COVID-19 has influenced all sectors of social life, including the global economy and trade relations. The year of 2020 was marked with significant changes in internal and foreign economic policy of almost all nations. The purpose of the paper is to study the measures taken by the EU and the USA as the world's leading economies to regulate their foreign trade in the global crisis caused by the COVID-19 pandemic. The tasks of the study are to show the influence of the crisis on changes of global trade policy in front of the threat to national security. Methodology. The study is based on the results of statistical analysis of data provided the WTO and the UNCTAD. The authors show an analytical assessment of the foreign trade indicators of the EU and the USA. Methods of comparison and generalization were used to formulate conclusions on regulatory trends in foreign trade of the US and the EU. Results allowed identifying specific features and changes in the regulation of foreign trade of the EU and the US, assessing the impact of the pandemic on their foreign trade. It was found that both mentioned players of the world economy have actively introduced both deterrent and liberalization measures during 2020, which were aimed at providing the domestic market with scarce COVID-related goods. The study shows the transition from export restricting to import liberalizing measures in foreign trade policies from the start of pandemic to the late 2020. Practical implications. Understanding and predicting the possible actions of partners (the US and the EU in this case) in the field of foreign trade regulation is an important practical aspect, which has to be taken into account when developing Ukraine's foreign trade policy. Value/originality. The study of foreign trade policy of the world's leading countries allows us to understand the behavior of governments of the countries that are largely dependent on participation in international trade in their development, to draw conclusions about the most common instruments of foreign trade policy in the time of humanitarian and economic crises.

Japan-EEC/EU Relations, 1970-2005: Re-Emergence as Strategic Partners in Trade and Environment

2019 ◽  
Vol 25 (1) ◽  
pp. 23-36
Author(s):  
Hitoshi SUZUKI ◽  
Izuru MAKIHARA
Keyword(s):  
Cold War ◽  
Trade Agreement ◽  
Eastern European ◽  
Foreign Trade Policy ◽  
Business People ◽  
European Business ◽  
The Common ◽  
Eastern European Countries ◽  
The Cold War ◽  
The Eu

Negotiations on a Japan-EEC trade agreement faced a deadlock only three years after the launch of the common foreign trade policy in 1970. The European Commission adopted a step-by-step approach to change the climate. European business people were sent to Japan under the ETP-Japan. The Commission welcomed Japanese investments so that Japanese exports could be reduced. Japanese plants were launched in Britain. After the cold war ended, Japanese manufacturers headed towards the newly liberalised countries. Japan’s policy of commitment - via both aid and investments - was an extension of her relations with the Central and Eastern European countries during the cold war, namely towards the GDR. However, after 1991, Japan’s priority was not limited to her market share in Europe and gained a longer perspective to stabilise the region. Joint efforts made Japan and the EU claim themselves as global actors. Both shared fears on global warming and agreed upon the Kyoto Protocol of 1997.

scholarly journals Impact of Lithuanian EU Integration on External Trade in Agricultural Products

Ekonomika ◽  
2004 ◽  
Vol 65 ◽  
Author(s):  
Algirdas Miškinis
Keyword(s):  
Trade Policy ◽  
Terms Of Trade ◽  
Social Consequences ◽  
Agricultural Products ◽  
External Trade ◽  
The Third ◽  
Eu Integration ◽  
Eu Membership ◽  
The Impact ◽  
The Eu

The task of the study was to identify the impact of EU membership on Lithuanian trade in food products. The author has carried out an analysis of the inevitable and likely changes which will affect Lithuanian trade policy. terms of trade within the EU and the third countries, export and import volumes, and social consequences of these changes. The conclusions are based on a comparison of the existing Lithuanian and EU tariffs for key items of Lithuanian foodstuffs exports and imports.

scholarly journals The Common Foreign and Security Policy

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hylke Dijkstra ◽  
Sophie Vanhoonacker
Keyword(s):  
Foreign Policy ◽  
Security Policy ◽  
Policy Outcomes ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Member States ◽  
Eu Foreign Policy ◽  
Area Of Interest ◽  
Foreign And Security Policy ◽  
The Common ◽  
The Eu

The member states of the European Union (EU) coordinate, define, and implement foreign policy in the context of the Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP). This policy area, often referred to as EU foreign policy, has a broad scope covering all areas of foreign policy and all questions relating to security and defense. The CFSP is supported by a unique institutional framework, in which member states diplomats and officials from the EU institutions jointly make policy. It is led by the High Representative, who is the “face and voice” of EU foreign policy, and supported by the substantial European External Action Service and 140 EU delegations in other countries and international organizations. Because foreign policy is normally the business of sovereign states, the exceptional nature of the CFSP has long been a subject of inquiry. The CFSP has particularly puzzled advocates of the traditional theories of European integration and international relations, who have failed to appreciate what the EU does in the field of high politics. Given the absence of formal diplomatic recognition and a strong reliance on the resources of the member states, the EU is still not a full-fledged actor, yet it has a strong international presence nonetheless. Its presence and the gradual increase in “actorness” have also raised questions about whether the EU presents a different type of actor, a civilian or normative power, which derives its influence from non-traditional sources of power. Under the assumption that the EU has some actorness, the Europeanization of foreign policy has become an area of interest. Member states can act through the EU structure to achieve more impact internationally, can adjust national foreign policy on the basis of EU positions, and are socialized into greater European coordination. The relationship between national and EU foreign policy is thus a significant topic of debate. Finally, governance perspectives increasingly provide insight into the organization of the CFSP. How the member states and the EU institutions collectively coordinate, define, and implement EU foreign policy is not only an important question in itself but also matters for policy outcomes.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document