Suchergebnisse

"The African, Caribbean, and Pacific (ACP) Group of States: From the Lomé Convention to the Cotonou Agreement and Beyond" published on by Oxford University Press.

The European Union (EU) is one of the biggest traders of agricultural products. In 2017, extra-EU agricultural trade accounted for 7.4% of the total EU international trade. Furthermore, Europe is the main destination for agricultural goods arriving from African, Caribbean and Pacific (ACP) trading partners. The paper analyses the effect of geographical proximity, cultural similarity, free trade agreements on bilateral agricultural trade as well as intra-industry trade between EU member states and its trading partners (intra and extra EU trade), employing gravity model for a period of 1996–2017. Regression results suggest that EU countries export more agricultural products to their common markets. In addition, the export costs of agricultural products are lower if the EU and its external trading partners are culturally similar; have the same religion or both have regional trade agreements. We found a moderate intra-industry trade between the EU and ACP countries at 18%. The results indicate rather inter-industry trade between EU and non-EU members, with a lower index level for ACP countries. A higher positive impact is revealed on the agricultural import between ACP-EU countries than export. ; info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion

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.

Following the adoption of the Rome Treaty, the European Union (EU) developed a formal and privileged cooperation framework for its relationship with countries in Africa, the Caribbean and Pacific (ACP). Since 2000 cooperation between the EU and the ACP is governed through the Cotonou Partnership Agreement (CPA), which encompasses three complementary dimensions: political dialogue, economic and trade cooperation, and development cooperation. The changing global context, along with institutional, political and socioeconomic developments in the EU and the ACP, raise questions about whether this approach to cooperation has sufficiently delivered on its objectives, and which evolutions – or revolutions – may be necessary for these regions' future cooperation. This paper seeks to complement existing evidence with the findings of a detailed review of the literature and the perceptions of past, present and future ACP–EU cooperation gathered from a wide range of stakeholders in ten ACP countries.

Can small "weak" countries shape the outcomes of asymmetric trade negotiations and, if so, how? I scrutinise ten episodes of trade negotiations involving powerful European states and small developing countries from Africa, the Caribbean and Pacific (ACP) since the 1960s. I draw on legal agreements, public documents, interviews with and the written memoirs of key negotiators, media reports and the secondary literature. I show that ACP countries influenced outcomes in important ways. For each negotiation I establish the variation between European preferences and the final negotiated outcome and show that in four of the ten negotiations there was a substantial gap between what European countries wanted and the final outcome. Close examination and comparison of these ten negotiations suggests that when three conditions hold, small developing countries can exert substantial influence even in a profoundly asymmetric encounter: First, the small state must be able to "walk away" from the negotiation at no cost. Second, where the small state is considered to be highly strategic by the large state, it can use this as a source of leverage. Third, the small state must have the political leadership and technical skills to deploy an astute negotiating strategy.

Cotonou agreement, signed in June 2000, between the EU and African, Caribbean and Pacific (ACP) Countries, is characterized by the respect of Human Rights, Democratic standards and Rule of Law in one side, and the quest for compliance with the standards principles of World trade Organization (WTO) in the other side. Since then the development policy implemented by Europe for ACP Countries was created with the Treaty of Rome which established European Development Funds, in favor of these countries. For many years, this partnership, mainly economic, has given huge benefits to ACP countries to ensure their development. For almost two decades that the political standards rules were introduced into this partnership, no doubt to notice that some countries, including Togo, are still reluctant to introduce real democratic reforms to ensure effective political changes. Despite sanctions here and there from the European Union, these countries find support from China who treats with African countries, a specific partnership excluding any Civil Society. ; L'Accord de Cotonou, signé en juin 2000 entre l'Union européenne et les États d'Afrique, des Caraïbes et du Pacifique (ACP), se caractérise par un respect des droits de l'homme, des normes démocratiques et de l'État de droit d'une part, et la quête d'une conformité des normes aux principes de l'Organisation mondiale du commerce (OMC), d'autre part. En effet, la politique de développement mise en place par l'Europe au profit des États ACP a vu le jour avec le Traité de Rome et la création du Fonds européen de développement au profit des ces pays. Pendant longtemps, le partenariat, essentiellement économique, a octroyé d'énormes avantages aux pays ACP en vue d'assurer leur développement. Depuis bientôt deux décennies que les normes politiques ont été insérées dans ce partenariat, force est de constater que quelques pays, dont le Togo, demeurent toujours réticents quant à l'instauration de réelles réformes démocratiques en vue d'assurer une véritable alternance politique. En ...

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.

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.

With the Cotonou Agreement due to expire in 2020, formal negotiations towards a new partnership agreement between the EU and African, Caribbean and Pacific (ACP) states began in September 2018. Based on the acceptance of the EU's negotiating mandate, the new arrangement will be primarily organised via three specific regional protocols with each of the ACP regions. Meanwhile, the Joint Africa-EU Strategy (JAES) launched in 2007, has seen the African Union (AU) gain increased prominence as an institutional partner of the EU. Given its ambitious pan-African agenda, it adopted an alternative 'African' vision for future EU-ACP relations, to the mandate agreed by the ACP states and expressed a willingness to become directly involved in the negotiations. This article contributes an important new case-study to the existing literature on 'African agency' in international politics by considering the scope for Africa to exert agency within the post-Cotonou negotiations, given the negotiation of a specific regional compact with Africa. It adopts a structurally embedded view of agency, based on Cox's understanding of historical structures, as a fit between institutions, ideas and material relations. The central argument is that, in comparison to the negotiation of the Cotonou Agreement two decades ago, there is greater scope for African agency. However, both the ideational and material aspects of Africa's relationship with the EU, condition the limits to how effective such agency might be. Moreover, tensions at the institutional level between the ACP and AU further undermine the potential for effective African agency.

The EU is currently negotiating a successor to its Cotonou Agreement of year 2000 with the African, Caribbean and Pacific (ACP) states. The political and economic con­text has changed enormously over the past two decades, with trade relations between the EU and the more developed ACP countries now largely regulated by bilateral and regional Economic Partnership Agreements. Since 2015, in line with international sustainability targets, social and environmental aspects must be taken into account in international treaties, while in 2018 the African Union (AU) agreed to establish an African Continental Free Trade Area. A successor to Cotonou offers an opportunity to modernise the rules on issues including investment, services and migration. This could also generate greater interest in the talks in Germany and the EU. But the cooperation need to be placed on a new foundation and the African states will have to decide whether they want to negotiate together, as a continent.