scholarly journals Impact of Russian Non-Tariff Measures on European Union Agricultural Exports

2016 ◽  
Vol 8 (5) ◽  
pp. 39 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ye Mingque ◽  
Alena Slisava

<p>Nowadays non-tariff measures become more and more widely used. Russia is one of world largest importers of agri-products. In order to protect domestic production different non-tariff measures (NTMs) are used, which create difficulties for the exporters because NTMs are strict, changeable and difficult to deal with. This article analyses Russian non-tariff measures and their influence on the European Union exports of agri-products by using gravity model. The results show that Russian trade resistance is weaker for EU agricultural products exporters than for the USA exporters but stronger than for Chinese agricultural products exporters. The results do not prove that Russia’s NTMs have bigger impact on the EU exports than on the other countries’ exports such as India, Kyrgyz Republic, and the Ukraine. The NTM of such countries as China and Mexico also have much greater influence on the EU exports of agri-products than Russian NTMs.</p>

2022 ◽  
pp. 001573252110579
Author(s):  
Phan Thanh Hoan ◽  
Duong Thi Dieu My

Vietnam is one of the top information and communication technologies (ICT) exporters globally, and the ICT products constitute nearly one-fifth of Vietnam’s total exports to the European Union (EU). This study empirically investigates the determinants of Vietnam’s ICT exports to the EU by applying the gravity model for trade with panel data from 2000 to 2019. Besides the traditional variables of the gravity model, we added gross capital formation, patent application and exchange rates as explanatory variables. The results show that among factors affecting Vietnam’s ICT export to the EU, market size, patent applications, and exchange rate are the most significant determinants. The article also suggests some policy implications for the development of ICT exports between the two parties. JEL Codes: F14, C2


2004 ◽  
Vol 37 (4) ◽  
pp. 509-522 ◽  
Author(s):  
Victor D. Bojkov

The article analyses the process of EU enlargement with reference to the progress that Bulgaria and Romania have made within it. It is argued that leaving them out of the wave of accession finalised in May 2004 for ten of the candidate states, has placed them in a situation of double exclusion. Firstly, their geographical belonging to the region of Southeast Europe has been rendered non-essential by their advanced position within the EU enlargement process. Secondly, their achievement in economic and political transition has been removed from the progress of the ten states, which joined the EU in May 2004 by delaying the time of their accession. As a result, any efforts in regional cooperation and integration between Bulgaria and Romania on one hand, and other Southeast European states on the other, have been effectively cancelled. Moreover, in current European politics, the two countries have come to serve the unenviable role of exemplifying on the part of the European Union how progress is being awarded and hesitation punished.


2021 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 79-91
Author(s):  
L. S. Voronkov

The paper is dedicated to the differences between the classical instruments for regulating interstate political and trade-economic relations from those used in the development of regional integration processes. Traditionally, the Eurasian Economic Union is compared with the European Union, considering the EU as a close example to follow in the development of integration processes. At the same time, there exist the other models of integration. The author proposes to pay attention to the other models of integration and based on the analysis of documents, reveals the experience of Northern Europe, which demonstrates effective cooperation without infringing on the sovereignty of the participants. The author examines the features of the integration experience of the Nordic countries in relation to the possibility of using its elements in the modern integration practice of the Eurasian Economic Union.


2016 ◽  
Vol 12 (5) ◽  
pp. 285
Author(s):  
Omer Ugur ◽  
Kadir Caner Dogan ◽  
Metin Aksoy

The European Union has grown up in terms of influence and size in international politics. The size of its economy and the ever-increasing membership, have seen its ambitions grow meaning that the EU now has an international presence it did not have at its formation. It is easy to say that with the EU being an ambitious actor in international politics, the rise into prominence of climate change naturally came in handy for the EU as it provided an opportunity for the EU to assert itself and prove both its capacity and presence. The 1992 Rio Earth Summit and the withdrawal of the USA from the obligations of the Kyoto came as a blessing in disguise for the Union as it seized the moment to assert itself. Thus, in trying to understand what role the EU has or is playing in international climate change politics, there is need to assess its leadership claims and what it has done to prove these claims. To get there, the paper will navigate through a part of the discipline of International Relations (IR) to understand how it provides for a basis to explain or understand the EU’s limitations and strengths on actorness.


Author(s):  
K. Voronov

Despite the crisis, the economy of the European Union remains to be the largest in the world. The economic mechanism of the EU is rather differentiated. It has a great historical experience and possesses sufficient evolutionary robustness. Currently, the former relationships between the EU and the USA undergo substantial changes and new forms emerge. For both of them the greatest challenge is presented by China which in recent decades shows the solid rates of GDP growth. Supposedly, Chines economy will become the world largest on in the new future. Under such conditions the Old World has to conduct a persistent search for new sources of its successful macroeconomic growth.


Author(s):  
Markus Patberg

This chapter presents an institutional proposal for how citizens could be enabled—in the dual role of European and national citizens—to exercise constituent power in the EU. To explain in abstract terms what an institutional solution would have to involve, it draws on the notion of a sluice system, according to which the particular value of representative bodies consists in their capacity to provide both transmission and filter functions for democratic processes. On this basis, the chapter critically discusses the proposal that the Conference of Parliamentary Committees for Union Affairs of Parliaments of the European Union (COSAC) should transform itself into an inter-parliamentary constitutional assembly. As this model allows constituted powers to continue to operate as the EU’s de facto constituent powers, it cannot be expected to deliver the functions of a sluice system. The chapter goes on to argue that a more convincing solution would be to turn the Convention of Article 48 of the Treaty on European Union into a permanent constitutional assembly composed of two chambers, one elected by EU citizens and the other by member state citizens. The chapter outlines the desirable features of such an assembly and defends the model against a number of possible objections.


Author(s):  
Federico Fabbrini

This chapter focuses on the European Union after Brexit and articulates the case for constitutional reforms. Reforms are necessary to address the substantive and institutional shortcomings that patently emerged in the context of Europe’s old and new crises. Moreover, reforms will be compelled by the exigencies of the post-Covid-19 EU recovery, which pushes the EU towards new horizons in terms of fiscal federalism and democratic governance. As a result, the chapter considers both obstacles and opportunities to reform the EU and make it more effective and legitimate. On the one hand, it underlines the difficulties connected to the EU treaty amendment procedure, owing to the requirement of unanimous approval of any treaty change, and the consequential problem of the veto. On the other hand, it emphasizes the increasing practice by Member States to use intergovernmental agreements outside the EU legal order and stresses that these have set new rules on their entry into force which overcome state veto, suggesting that this is now a precedent to consider.


2015 ◽  
Vol 10 (3) ◽  
pp. 147-157 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christian Năsulea ◽  
Beatrice Nicolle Crețu ◽  
Diana Florentina Spînu

Abstract Although new sanctions have been imposed, to varying degrees, on Russia since the debut of the Crimean crisis, few experts are taking the chance of publishing an assessment of the impact these sanctions will have on Russia or the European Union. On one hand, the complexity of the variables involved makes it extremely difficult to predict the outcome of said sanctions; on the other hand, an accurate assessment would make an invaluable tool in the hands of decision makers, no matter if their decisions are made with regards to foreign policy, public policy or the daily business of private companies. This article sets out to examine the context, some of the variables involved and some of the forecasts that have been put forward by various experts, while trying to provide a simplified model for assessing the impact of sanctions enacted by the EU on its own economy.


Author(s):  
Sharon Pardo

Israeli-European Union (EU) relations have consisted of a number of conflicting trends that have resulted in the emergence of a highly problematic and volatile relationship: one characterized by a strong and ever-increasing network of economic, cultural, and personal ties, yet marked, at the political level, by disappointment, bitterness, and anger. On the one hand, Israel has displayed a genuine desire to strengthen its ties with the EU and to be included as part of the European integration project. On the other hand, Israelis are deeply suspicious of the Union’s policies and are untrusting of the Union’s intentions toward the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and to the Middle East as a whole. As a result, Israel has been determined to minimize the EU’s role in the Middle East peace process (MEPP), and to deny it any direct involvement in the negotiations with the Palestinians. The article summarizes some key developments in Israeli-European Community (EC)/EU relations since 1957: the Israeli (re)turn to Europe in the late 1950s; EC-Israeli economic and trade relations; the 1980 Venice Declaration and the EC/EU involvement in the MEPP; EU-Israeli relations in a regional/Mediterranean context; the question of Israeli settlements’ products entering free of duty to the European Common Market; EU-Israeli relations in the age of the European Neighbourhood Policy (ENP); the failed attempt to upgrade EU-Israeli relations between the years 2007 and 2014; and the Union’s prohibition on EU funding to Israeli entities beyond the 1967 borders. By discussing the history of this uneasy relationship, the article further offers insights into how the EU is actually judged as a global-normative actor by Israelis.


2019 ◽  
Vol 30 (4) ◽  
pp. 1187-1220
Author(s):  
Francisco de Abreu Duarte

Abstract This article develops the concept of the monopoly of jurisdiction of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) through the analysis of the case study of the Investment Court System (ICS). By providing a general framework over the criteria that have been developed by the Court, the work sheds light on the controversial principle of autonomy of the European Union (EU) and its implications to the EU’s external action. The work intends to be both pragmatic and analytical. On the one hand, the criteria are extracted as operative tools from the jurisprudence of the CJEU and then used in the context of the validity of the ICS. This provides the reader with some definitive standards that can then be applied to future cases whenever a question concerning autonomy arises. On the other hand, the article questions the reasons behind the idea of the monopoly of jurisdiction of the CJEU, advancing a concept of autonomy of the EU as a claim for power and critiquing the legitimacy and coherence of its foundations. Both dimensions will hopefully help to provide some clarity over the meaning of autonomy and the monopoly of jurisdiction, while, at the same time, promoting a larger discussion on its impact on the external action of the EU.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document