Western European Union v. Siedler; General Secretariat of the ACP Group v. Lutchmaya; General Secretariat of the ACP Group v. B.D
In: American journal of international law: AJIL, Band 105, Heft 3, S. 560-567
ISSN: 2161-7953
233 Ergebnisse
Sortierung:
In: American journal of international law: AJIL, Band 105, Heft 3, S. 560-567
ISSN: 2161-7953
In: Geopolitics, Band 12, Heft 4, S. 635-655
ISSN: 1557-3028
In: Journal of European integration, Band 42, Heft 6, S. 783-798
ISSN: 0703-6337
World Affairs Online
In: Journal of European integration: Revue d'intégration européenne, Band 42, Heft 6, S. 783-798
ISSN: 1477-2280
In: Third world thematics: a TWQ journal, Band 1, Heft 4, S. 508-525
ISSN: 2379-9978
In: American journal of international law, Band 105, Heft 3, S. 560-568
ISSN: 0002-9300
In: Journal of international development: the journal of the Development Studies Association, Band 25, Heft 5, S. 714-726
ISSN: 1099-1328
AbstractThe African, Caribbean and Pacific (ACP) Group of States and the European Union (EU) have engaged in what is known as a 'special privileged', legally binding contractual agreement on trade cooperation, development assistance and political dialogue since 1975. Currently expressed in the Cotonou Partnership Agreement for a 20‐year period from 2000, the agreement faces its final 5‐year review in 2015, which is proving conducive for an extensive debate between development practitioners on what future can be envisaged for ACP–EU relations in a world drastically different from the neocolonial era of the 1970s and offering new opportunities as well as challenges to trade, commerce and development assistance. From the perspective of a diplomatic representative of an ACP member state, a critique is offered of issues and instances in which the contested interests of the asymmetrical relationship can be interpreted in relation to the overarching objective of 'reducing and eventually eradicating poverty' as stated in the Cotonou Partnership Agreement. The author argues that the ACP Group, as the unique, transcontinental coalition of developing countries can be a significant partner with the EU and 'new actors', through south‐south and triangular cooperations to challenge traditional thinking and practice on development assistance by a thoroughly refashioned paradigm, in which equality, sustainability, inclusive growth and structural transformation of ACP economies must be pre‐eminent. Copyright © 2013 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
In: Journal of international development: the journal of the Development Studies Association, Band 14, Heft 6, S. 899-910
ISSN: 1099-1328
AbstractThis article reviews and assesses the recent Cotonou Partnership Agreement between the ACP group of developing countries and the EU. It places the Agreement in the context of the EU's commitment to refocusing its development policy and reforming its aid administration. It emphasises the innovative elements of the Agreement that set it apart from its Lome predecessors—the intention to move to reciprocal regional free trade agreements; the emphasis upon good governance; the rule of law and human rights; the enhanced role for non‐State actors and the private sector and the adoption of a rolling programme of aid provision. Copyright © 2002 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
In: Journal of international development: the journal of the Development Studies Association, Band 25, Heft 5, S. 742-756
ISSN: 1099-1328
AbstractThis Policy Arena has two main objectives. First, it seeks to unravel how the partnership between the European Union (EU) and the African, Caribbean and Pacific (ACP) Group has evolved since the adoption of the Cotonou Agreement in 2000, including its 2005 and 2010 reviews and the implementation of its three key pillars (development cooperation, trade and political dialogue). Second, it explores the prospects of EU‐ACP relations in the medium to long term. In particular, it discusses whether the ACP‐EU cooperation framework is still relevant in the light of a number of global changes and, more specifically, whether the ACP configuration is still useful to its members. To address these issues, both the EU and the ACP Group have established two working groups. Within the ACP, voices are critical of the EU‐ACP partnership, but there appears to be more willingness to reform and renew it. Within the EU, the record of the Cotonou Agreement is seen more positively, but there seems to be less willingness to preserve it. The third review of the Cotonou Agreement to be finalised by 2015, and more generally its expiration in 2020, provides an opportunity – to which this Policy Arena seeks to contribute – to rethink the EU‐ACP cooperation model. Copyright © 2013 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
In: The courier: the magazine of Africa, Caribbean, Pacific & European Union Cooperation and Relations, Heft 85, S. 60-101
ISSN: 1784-682X, 1606-2000, 1784-6803
Kurzbeiträge, Überblicke, Interviews zur Bedeutung und Entwicklung der Fischerei, u.a. in Gabun
World Affairs Online
In: European foreign affairs review, Band 17, Heft 1, S. 1-25
ISSN: 1875-8223
The article presents the second Revision of the African, Caribbean and Pacific (ACP)-European Union (EU) Partnership Agreement (Cotonou Agreement (CA)) and contains an outlook on the future of the relations between the EU and the ACP Group of States, taking also into account the restructuring of the EU's external relations under the Lisbon Treaty and the establishment of the new European External Action Service (EEAS). The second Revision of the CA was signed in June 2010.Ten years after the conclusion of the CA, its second revision sought to find a balance between the increasing trend towards differentiation within the ACP Group and the unity of the ACP Group of States. The EU side felt that developments in the regional dimension had to be addressed, such as the relations with the African Union as a key interlocutor for peace and security in the pan-African dimension and the conclusion of (interim) Economic Partnership Agreements (EPAs). Moreover, the 2010 Revision coincided with the entry into force of the Lisbon Treaty on 1 December 2009. The restructuring of the EU's external relations under the Lisbon Treaty and its impact on the relations between the EU and ACP also influenced the 2010 Revision, as the ACP were concerned about the loss of their special status under the new treaty regime. In addition, at the administrative level, the bilateral relations with the ACP countries will be dealt with by the EEAS and not by the former Commission's Directorate-General for development, which means a potential loss of exclusivity for the ACP Group.
In: European foreign affairs review, Band 17, Heft 1, S. 1-25
ISSN: 1384-6299
World Affairs Online
In: Le courrier: Communauté Européenne, Afrique-Carai͏̈bes-Pacifique, Heft 167, S. 12-15
ISSN: 0378-4401, 1013-7343, 1026-2350
World Affairs Online
In: The courier: the magazine of Africa, Caribbean, Pacific & European Union Cooperation and Relations, Band 102, S. 70-100
ISSN: 1784-682X, 1606-2000, 1784-6803
World Affairs Online
In: The courier: the magazine of Africa, Caribbean, Pacific & European Union Cooperation and Relations, S. 64-94
ISSN: 1784-682X, 1606-2000, 1784-6803
World Affairs Online