Building on open economy politics to understand the stalled EU–India trade negotiations

Global trade governance is increasingly characterized by a growing fragility in multilateral institutions and a preference for bilateral negotiations. The literature on such negotiations focuses primarily on successful agreements. Academic research on unsuccessful or stalled bilateral talks is limited, although better understanding of such outcomes may provide lessons for future negotiations. This article contributes to such understanding by proposing a revised open economy politics (OEP) framework, adapted to ‘second generation’ OEP analysis. Our framework highlights the multidirectional linkages between the trinity of interests, institutions and international interactions within trade negotiations, while adding the role of power and ideas to the analysis. We leverage our revised framework to explore why the European Union–India Free Trade Agreement (EUIFTA) negotiations stalled, thus providing insights as negotiators seek to revive them. Drawing on 45 semi-structured interviews conducted over a seven-year period in the EU and India, we examine what impact these different factors had on the progress of talks. Our results suggest that our revised OEP approach provides a multi-layered and integrated framework which enables us to better understand negotiating outcomes. Furthermore, our findings suggest that the shifting balance between emerging economies and developed economies as a result of the geopolitical (power) shifts and ideational change will affect future trade negotiations.

Domestic Institutional Design and the National Interest in Trade Negotiations

How do different domestic institutional settings affect the formation of the national interest in trade negotiations? While current evidence suggests that institutions influence such a process even when societal groups dominate policymaking and international factors limit state choices, it remains unclear to what extent the domestic institutional design shape bureaucrats’ perceptions on both internal and foreign constraints. Building upon Brazil’s and India’s cases in World Trade Organization’s (WTO) Doha Round between 2003 and 2008, I address that question through process-tracing with the purpose of theory-building. I focus the analysis on the nodal bureaucracy, understood as the institution at the forefront of international bargaining. I argue that if such a bureaucracy is responsible for diplomacy in general, foreign factors prevail in decision-making. In turn, if the nodal bureaucracy is devoted only to trade-related issues, domestic economic factors dominate policymaking. I reach those conclusions through a paired-comparison between Brazil and India.

When actions do not match aspirations - comparison of the European Union policy claims against what has been negotiated for health services, trade and investment

Background Obligations arising from trade and investment agreements can affect how governments can regulate and organise health systems. The European Union has made explicit statements of safeguarding policy space for health systems. We assessed to what extent health systems were safeguarded in trade negotiations using the European Union (EU) negotiation proposals for the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) and the negotiated agreement for the EU-Canada Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement (CETA). Methods We assessed if and to what extent the European Union policy assurances were upheld in trade negotiations. Our assessment was made using three process tracing informed tests. The tests examined: i) what was covered in negotiation proposals of services and investment chapters, ii) if treatment of health services differed from treatment of another category of services (audiovisual services) with similar EU Treaty considerations, and iii) if other means of general exceptions, declarations or emphases on right to regulate could have resulted in the same outcome. Results Our analysis shows that the European Union had sought to secure policy space for publicly funded health services for services chapter, but not for investment and investment protection chapters. In comparison to audiovisual services, exceptions for health services fall short from those on audiovisual services. There is little evidence that the same outcome could have been achieved using other avenues. Conclusions The European Union has not achieved its own assurances of protection of regulatory policy space for health services in trade negotiations. The European Union trade negotiation priorities need to change to ensure that its negotiation practices comply with its own assurances for health services and sustainable financing of health systems.

North of Empire: essays on the cultural technologies of space

Jody Berland’s North of Empire is an astute, compelling retrospective of half a career’s thought on media spaces from a distinctly Canadian perspective.It is the best book in a generation to argue for the value of a Canadian approach to cultural studies, not just parochially but as a critical contribution to the contemporary study of culture anywhere. Given its substantive focus, it should be no surprise to learn that the Canadian Communication Association awarded North of Empire its 2009 Gertrude J. Robinson book prize (full disclosure: I served on the jury). Nonetheless, an anthology of previously published essays is not an obvious choice for a book award.Referring in her postscript to the heightened concern about protecting and nurturing Canadian culture amidst debates over free trade negotiations in the 1980s, Berland reminds us that “just because something is past does not mean it is not present” (p. 301). She could be explaining the continuing relevance, even spectral centrality, of her own concerns in this collection of essays. Although the chapters were originally published between 1988 and 2005, each is updated and thematically positioned out of chronological order to create a surprisingly cohesive monograph.

North of Empire: essays on the cultural technologies of space

Jody Berland’s North of Empire is an astute, compelling retrospective of half a career’s thought on media spaces from a distinctly Canadian perspective.It is the best book in a generation to argue for the value of a Canadian approach to cultural studies, not just parochially but as a critical contribution to the contemporary study of culture anywhere. Given its substantive focus, it should be no surprise to learn that the Canadian Communication Association awarded North of Empire its 2009 Gertrude J. Robinson book prize (full disclosure: I served on the jury). Nonetheless, an anthology of previously published essays is not an obvious choice for a book award.Referring in her postscript to the heightened concern about protecting and nurturing Canadian culture amidst debates over free trade negotiations in the 1980s, Berland reminds us that “just because something is past does not mean it is not present” (p. 301). She could be explaining the continuing relevance, even spectral centrality, of her own concerns in this collection of essays. Although the chapters were originally published between 1988 and 2005, each is updated and thematically positioned out of chronological order to create a surprisingly cohesive monograph.

Polarized we trade? Intraparty polarization and US trade policy

Research indicates that polarization has led to an increasing dispersion between moderate and more extreme voters within both parties. Intraparty polarization supposedly affects the nature of interparty competition as it creates political space for new political realignments and the rise of anti-establishment candidates. This article examines the extent and impact of intraparty polarization in Congress on US trade policy. Specifically, the article examines whether (and which) trade policy preferences are distributed within and between both parties, as well as how intraparty polarization has influenced the outcome of US trade negotiations. It is theorized that intraparty polarization causes crosscutting legislative coalitions around specific trade policies and political realignments around ideological factions, with consequences for the outcome of trade negotiations. By relying on a unique dataset of congressional letters and co-sponsorship legislation, the article first derives trade policy preferences from members of Congress and computes their ideological means. Two contemporary cases of US trade policy are examined: The Transpacific Partnership Agreement and the US–Mexico–Canada Agreement. Via a structured-focused comparison of both cases, the paper finally assesses under which combinations of preference-based and ideology-based intraparty polarization Congress manages to ratify trade agreements. Findings suggest that both parties are intrinsically polarized between free trade and fair trade preferences yet show variance in their degree of ideology-based intraparty polarization. These findings contribute to existing work on bipartisanship as well as factions in the foreign policy realm, as it shows under which circumstances legislators can build crosscutting coalitions around foreign policies.