Suchergebnisse

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.

The direct effects of EPAs on ACP countries arise from the requirement to eliminate tariffs on most imports from the EU. While consumers gain from cheaper imports, the government losses tariff revenue and producers face increased completion, implying adjustment costs. This paper estimates the consumer welfare and revenue impact for a sample of 34 ACP countries of eliminating tariffs on imports from the EU under an EPA, and discusses the associated adjustment costs. Although the ACP overall and on average experiences consumer welfare gains, the gains (or any losses) are small and associated with significant revenue losses and potential adjustment costs. As the gains are associated with increased imports from the EU, larger welfare gains tend to be associated with larger revenue losses and adjustment costs. There is scope for tax substitution to address revenue concerns, but addressing adjustment costs (especially employment) will be much more difficult. ACP countries can exclude up to 20% of imports from the EU from tariff elimination (sensitive products). The paper argues that regionally traded goods should be classified as sensitive and excluded from liberalization. Although this reduces consumer welfare gains (or increases welfare losses), these are likely to be more than offset by the benefits from lower revenue losses and trade effects that reduce adjustment costs. This also serves to encourage increased intra-regional trade: regional exporters gain from the preservation of their regional market share and in all countries domestic producers are likely to produce some regionally traded goods.

The article considers the changes that have taken place within the political economy of international trade over the last decade. The work begins by assessing briefly the dynamics of the last successful trade negotiations undertaken by the ACP Caribbean – the agreement on a single European banana market in 1993. Since then, however, the international political and economic climate has dramatically changed. The article evaluates recent developments, which have highlighted attention on the political acceptability of trade discrimination, particularly within the context of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade and the World Trade Organisation. In addition, there is an analysis of the reform process undertaken by the European Union, both in terms of its membership and policy agenda, which has seriously impacted on Caribbean economic interests. The article establishes that the actors representing the Caribbean were extremely successful in constructing strategic coalitions to defend their trading interests in the early 1990s, but the region must now appreciate that the international environment has changed so dramatically that former negotiating strategies are no longer appropriate. An awareness of the changed negotiating environment on the part of the Caribbean is vitally important if ongoing international trade negotiations are to be completed to the region's satisfaction. Resumen: Batallas bananeras y desafíos políticos: El grupo ACP del Caribe y la fragmentación de las coaliciones de interésEste trabajo considera los cambios ocurridos en la economía política del comercio internacional durante la última década. El artículo comienza con una breve evaluación de la dinámica de las últimas negociaciones comerciales satisfactorias del grupo ACP del Caribe: el acuerdo sobre un mercado único bananero europeo en 1993. Desde entonces, sin embargo, el clima político y económico internacional ha cambiado drásticamente. El artículo evalúa los recientes acontecimientos que han puesto de relieve la aceptabilidad política de la discriminación comercial, en particular en el contexto del Acuerdo General sobre Tarifas y Comercio y la Organización Mundial del Comercio. Además, se hace un análisis del proceso de reforma efectuado por la Unión Europea, tanto en términos de su ampliación como de su agenda política, los cuales han tenido un grave impacto en los intereses económicos caribeños. El artículo establece que a principios de los años 90 los representantes caribeños tuvieron gran éxito a la hora de desarrollar estrategias para defender sus intereses comerciales, pero en estos momentos la región debe tomar nota de que el ambiente internacional ha cambiado de forma tan radical que las antiguas estrategias de negociación no pueden considerarse ya como apropiadas. Para que la región pueda asegurar un resultado positivo de las actuales negociaciones, es de vital importancia que el Caribe tome conciencia del nuevo clima en que se desarrollan dichas negociaciones.

Since the signing of the Cotonou Agreement in 2000, the European Union (EU) has suspended development aid towards a number of African Caribbean and Pacific (ACP) countries in response to breaches of Human Rights and democratic principles by activating the so-called Human Rights clause (article 96). The present article analyses the use by the EU of aid suspensions as political tools and their efficacy in achieving the desired policy goals, in an attempt to identify and explain the determinants leading to the success of these measures. The investigation finds that the use of development aid suspensions is frequently effective. Classical sanctions theory appears to account largely for their success, given that most targets display a significant degree of dependence on the EU as a donor or a trading partner. However, and without refuting the explanatory power of that approach, a closer look at this practice unveils a number of factors that contribute to facilitate success. One of them is the selective use of the tool: suspensions are applied predominantly in cases of interruptions of the democratic process, while they are rarely used in situations of violent conflict. The specificities of the consultations mechanism, and especially the attitude of ACP neighbouring countries- often openly supportive-, largely determine the final outcome.

The Economic Partnership Agreements between the European Union and 77 African, Caribbean and Pacific (ACP) countries will not cause markets in the South to be swamped with European imports, as opponents suggest. But they will result in dramatic reductions in government revenues.

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 ...

"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.