The agricultural dimension of the ACP-EU economic partnership agreements
In: FAO commodities and trade technical paper 8
5550 Ergebnisse
Sortierung:
In: FAO commodities and trade technical paper 8
In: Journal of international development: the journal of the Development Studies Association, Band 25, Heft 5, S. 727-741
ISSN: 1099-1328
AbstractGlobal economic, demographic and geopolitical as well as internal developments since the signature of the Cotonou Partnership Agreement in 2000 have had a profound impact on relations between the European Union (EU) and the African, Caribbean and Pacific (ACP) Group. The paper analyses the process of adaptation in the areas of development cooperation and in the political and security context, reflected in two revisions in 2005 and 2010. It discusses the influence of the Lisbon Treaty on the objective of poverty reduction, and the role of EU values and security concerns. The negotiation of new trading arrangements compatible with the World Trade Organisation triggered a veritable storm in ACP–EU relations. The paper discusses factors, which proved to be major hurdles to the successful and timely conclusion of the Economic Partnership Agreements, as real trade between the two groups saw a reversal of the downward trend and the ACP recovered part of the previously lost market share of ACP goods in total EU imports. The exclusivity of the flagship partnership has started to crumble as the importance of new partners increased both on ACP and EU side. The author maintains that with the Cotonou Partnership Agreement's purpose defined as solely supporting the development of the ACP countries, it is not surprising that it does not count among the strategic partnerships from the EU perspective. Yet, it is too early to predict the future of the ACP–EU relationship beyond 2020, but both the EU and the ACP have an interest in starting off their discussions and negotiations on their future relationship on the right footing. Copyright © 2013 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
World Affairs Online
In: Australian journal of political science: journal of the Australasian Political Studies Association, Band 46, Heft 3, S. 389-406
ISSN: 1363-030X
The controversial Economic Partnership Agreements (EPAs) are currently back on the agenda, as several African, Caribbean and Pacific (ACP) states are again faced with a loss of market access if they do not ratify their EPAs by 1 October 2016. To complicate matters, Brexit has introduced an element of uncertainty and is causing some ACP states to reconsider their decision to sign EPAs. EPAs were introduced under the trade pillar of the Cotonou Partnership Agreement (CPA), which governs relations between the European Union (EU) and the ACP. EPAs represent a sea change in trade relations between the EU and the ACP: not only do they introduce reciprocity into trade preferences, they are organized on a regional basis, with the aim of promoting regional integration within the ACP. This Briefing Paper presents an update of the various EPA processes, and investigates the extent to which they have actually met the EU's stated aim of promoting regionalism in the ACP, as well as the EPAs alignment with the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), and the debate on the future of EU-ACP cooperation. EPAs have been only partially effective in facilitating regional integration in the ACP. EPA negotiations have resulted in the conclusion of region-wide deals that align with existing integration initiatives in only three regions: the Caribbean, the East African Community (EAC), and West Africa. EPAs have acted as a 'mid-wife' to deeper integration in these regions, however it is a possibility that the EAC and West African EPAs will not be signed by the October deadline. In the remaining regions – the Pacific, Central Africa, Eastern and Southern Africa (ESA), and the Southern African Development Community (SADC) – EPAs have made future prospects for regional integration more difficult, and in some cases may have contributed to a 'lock-in' of fragmented regionalism. Part of the reason for this mixed record is tension between the CPA's principles of 'regionalization', which recognizes the importance of regional integration for development; and 'differentiation', which advocates treating states differently based on their level of development. EPAs aimed to encourage groups of states to sign the agreements as regional blocs, but the EU's Everything But Arms (EBA) regime undermines regional EPAs by offering Least Developed Countries (LDCs) non-reciprocal trade preferences. This splits ACP regions into LDCs versus non-LDCs, making it difficult to conclude regional EPAs. Given the ongoing struggle to conclude regional EPAs, and the uncertainty of Brexit, the EU should consider extending the 1 October deadline, to allow ACP states more time to consider their positions and work on further harmonising regional relations. As regional integration is key for the economic development of ACP states, future cooperation should be aware of the need for alignment of EPAs, the SDGs, and the goal of regional integration.
BASE
In: The round table: the Commonwealth journal of international affairs, Band 109, Heft 5, S. 526-541
ISSN: 0035-8533
World Affairs Online
The Economic Partnership Agreements (EPAs) between the European Union and the African, Caribbean, and Pacific (ACP) nation-states are the most recent construct in a long history of developing countries' dependency and reliance on developed European countries. Even though Preferential Trade Agreements(PTAs) are widely used by countries party to the World Trade Organization (WTO), the European Union is hiding behind illusions of non-economic trade benefits, such as increased stability and health benefits, in their EPAs with ACP countries. The European Union has the economic bargaining power, creating an upper hand in the trade negotiations with the former colonial countries and other developing countries. The EPAs, like other PTAs, consistently have provisions that should be found to violate the most-favored nation (MFN) clause. Even though GATT Article XXIV allows for PTAs, in order for the WTO to achieve one of its initiatives to liberalize world trade, the MFN clause should penetrate throughout the EU-ACP agreements.
BASE
In: The round table: the Commonwealth journal of international affairs, Band 109, Heft 5, S. 526-541
ISSN: 1474-029X
World Affairs Online
In: Review of African political economy, Band 36, Heft 119
ISSN: 1740-1720
The WTO-sanctioned waiver for the extension of the Lomé system of preferences to the African, Caribbean Pacific (ACP) countries expired in December 2007. This deadline coincided with the scheduled conclusion of the EU–ACP Economic Partnership Agreement (EPA) negotiations, initiated in 2002. The origins of the EU–ACP relationship stretch back to the early days of the European Community, and were formalised in 1975 with the signing of the Georgetown Agreement. However, there has been a notable 'cooling' of the relationship since the signing of the Cotonou Partnership Agreement in 2000. For many, the new EPA framework is perceived as a diktat rather than a true partnership agreement. This article reviews the culmination of six years of talks between the two sides and the EU's apparent 'rationalisation' of a decades-old partnership.
In: European access: the current awareness bulletin to the policies and activities of the European Communities, Heft 4, S. 10
ISSN: 0264-7362, 1362-458X
In: Routledge studies in development economics 85
In: Review of African political economy, Band 36, Heft 119, S. 79-92
ISSN: 0305-6244
World Affairs Online
This book is a critical examination of Euro-Nigeria relations under the EU-ACP Economic Partnership agreements as well as the implications of the agreements on integration in Africa. Samuel O Oloruntoba is a Senior Lecturer at the Thabo Mbeki African Leadership Institute, University of South Africa, Pretoria, South Africa.
In: Third world thematics: a TWQ journal, Band 1, Heft 4, S. 490-507
ISSN: 2379-9978