Can trade agreements be used as a tool for improving the conditions under which people work? The evidence from this study suggests this is not the case, even if the country in question—in this instance South Korea—is a well-developed and democratic country. While over the past six years South Korea has taken part in a number of Free Trade Agreements containing labour provisions, the impact of these on enabling rights has been rather low. This would suggest that without the willingness to enforce these parts of the agreements, or without the willingness to implement them on the Korean side, the inclusion of such provisions remains a fairly symbolic undertaking.
Can trade agreements be used as a tool for improving the conditions under which people work? The evidence from this study suggests this is not the case, even if the country in question—in this instance South Korea—is a well-developed and democratic country. While over the past six years South Korea has taken part in a number of Free Trade Agreements containing labour provisions, the impact of these on enabling rights has been rather low. This would suggest that without the willingness to enforce these parts of the agreements, or without the willingness to implement them on the Korean side, the inclusion of such provisions remains a fairly symbolic undertaking.
The number of free trade agreements (FTAs) concluded by the United States of America (US) has grown vastly over the past two decades. While FTAs contribute to increased global competition and as such may also contribute to socially-undesirable practices in the area of working conditions and the environment, the proliferation in FTAs has paradoxically also augmented the potential for making free trade more fair as some of these agreements now include labour provisions. However, the question is whether these trade agreements have also actually diffused internationally recognised labour standards. This article studies the FTA the US signed in 2004 with a number of Central American countries and which, at a later stage, also included the Dominican Republic. This FTA is commonly referred to as CAFTA-DR and includes a chapter on labour standards. The article argues that the effects of the inclusion of labour standards in CAFTA-DR have been limited and therefore should be viewed as an unsuccessful attempt at policy transfer. This is illustrated by the case of Guatemala, a country known for its lack of respect for labour standards and which is currently the subject of a complaints procedure under the CAFTA-DR. It is maintained that this lack of effectiveness is the result of many factors. Among these is the weakness of the labour chapter of CAFTA-DR resulting from the fact that the chapter is the outcome of bargaining processes both within the US and between the US and Guatemala, where symbolic results were valued more highly than actual substance.
Labour standards have become an almost routine feature of trade agreements. However, we have little knowledge about whether this linkage is effective; both in absolute terms but also in comparison to other instruments that promote labour standards on a global level. Such alternative instruments include public-private agreements, value chain management and procurement policies. The articles in this thematic issue will provide insights that further the debate on the effectiveness of the connection between labour rights and international trade, looking at both 'traditional' trade agreements and 'alternative' instruments.
The importance of legitimacy to international arrangements is addressed, as are various approaches to the study of legitimacy. In so doing, attention is paid to important concepts that feature throughout the various contributions, namely legitimacy and illegitimacy, legitimation and delegitimation, audiences and consent, and the form and function of institutional change.
Legitimacy is essential for compliance. Agreements between the European Union and Ukraine contain a commitment to enhance labour standards. Certain audiences view this commitment as just symbolic and reflective of the low degree of legitimacy the commitment has. All this could now change following Ukraine's requested accession to the EU.
Reinalda, B.; Arts, B.; Noortmann, M.: Non-state actors in international relations: do they matter? - S. 1-8. Reinalda, B.: Private in form, public in purpose: NGOs in international relations theory. - S. 11-40. Arts, B.: International policy arrangements of state and non-state actors. - S. 41-58. Noortmann, M.: Non-state actors in international law. - S. 59-76. Weenink, A.: The relevance of being important or the importance of being relevant? State and non-state actors in international relations theory. - S. 79-92. Vollaard, H.: The de-territorialisation of political authority by the European Union. - S. 93-108. Esch, F.: Defining national preferences: the influence of international non-state actors. - S. 109-125. Verbeek, B.; Quarles van Ufford,, P.: Non-state actors in foreign policy making: a policy subsystem approach. - S. 127-144. Reinalda, B.; Verbeek, B.: Theorising power relations between NGOs, inter-governmental organisations and states. - S. 145-158. Roozendaal, G.: The influence of trade unions on the social clause controversy in the International Labour Organisation and its working party. - S. 161-176. Hogenboom, B.: Co-operation and discord: NGOs and the NAFTA. - S. 177-193. Arts, B.: The impact of environmental NGOs on international conventions. - S. 195-210. Kolk, A.: Multinational enterprises and international climate policy. - S. 211-225. Chabot, S.: Building transnational advocacy networks before 1965: diffusion from the Indian nationalist movement to the American civil rights movement. - S. 229-245. Biekart, K.: The impact of private aid agencies on civil society development. - S. 247-262. Bakker, E.: Early warning by NGOs in conflict areas. - S. 263-277. Weenink, A.: The Russian mafiya: a private actor in international relations? - S. 279-296. Noortmann, M.; Arts, B.; Reinalda, B.: The quest for unity in empirical and conceptual complexity. - S. 299-307
