Search

This paper proposes and probes the plausibility of a framework to explain how business associations position themselves politically as trade-related sustainability obligations get stronger. An analysis of the submissions of EU business associations during a consultation on trade and sustainability indicates that firm-level and organisational characteristics explain well trade associations' political cleavages. The paper can provide new insights to help understand a major development in the EU and beyond. The EU is passing through an unprecedented shift in its approach to trade and sustainability as it is likely to rely on legal sanctions to enforce sustainability commitments in trade agreements. Understanding the position of EU business interests in that process is relevant to project the consequences of such shift. Besides, as sustainability provisions in trade agreements get stronger, associations may play an ever-important role in promoting their members collectively or in shielding them from reputational costs. Understanding their political positioning is thus key to understanding the very politics of trade and sustainable development. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Against the backdrop of the current political developments in Central and Eastern European (CEE) countries, such as Ukraine, Poland, and Romania, the question arises as to the role played by economic transformation and the resulting innovation linkages in these countries over the last 20 years. The main purpose of this paper is to explore the impact of economic and institutional dimensions on the development of CEE countries, explicitly distinguishing between European Union (EU) members and non‐members, and thus reflecting the differences in institutions and path dependency. Furthermore, the paper contrasts the performance of CEE countries with that of Western European countries. To achieve these objectives, the impact of factors such as innovation, institutions, and political practices on the economic development of 37 European countries from 2000 until 2020 is followed using fixed effects regression and Ordinary least squares (OLS) regression. The results of the analysis show the importance of institutional factors such as low levels of corruption, political freedoms, and intellectual property. The effect of institutional variables was particularly pronounced in the case of non‐EU countries, which indicates the particular importance of the development of stable institutions for achieving higher levels of economic development for this category of countries. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper contributes to the literature on EU trade policy by introducing insights from the political economy literature on development to the study of how EU trade liberalisation affects development in trading partners. Drawing on a comparison of EU trade liberalisation with Moldova and Georgia, we argue that the type of coalition between public and private actors in partner countries' top export sectors determines which firms benefit from better market access to the EU, as indicated by their ability to increase their exports. We show that liberalised trade with the EU tends to contribute to achieving the EU's declared objective of inclusive development if the presence of inclusionary development coalitions ensures that a broad range of firms is enabled to increase their export capacities through a mechanism that we call 'inclusive empowerment'. Otherwise, trade liberalisation contributes to exclusive development, benefitting big, mostly foreign firms, or, at worse, consolidating rent-seeking practices. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Cambodia is undergoing profound change in its pursuit of economic development. Respect for human rights and democracy deteriorated in Cambodia post the 2018 General Election. In retaliation, the European Union (EU), Cambodia's second most important export destination, launched the procedure to withdraw Cambodia's preferential trade scheme, the Everything but Arms (EBA), in an attempt to generate economic pressure to encourage democratic reform and respect for human rights principles. In assessing whether this procedure has been successful or not, this paper finds that the EU has not been effective at promoting democracy and human rights in Cambodia through these measures. Not only is the EU's conditionality mechanism flawed, but the EU has also lost much of its leveraging power due to the growing presence of China and actions from the UK to boost trade with Cambodia. Ultimately, the EU's conditionality punishes the wrong groups, and so in effect is a contradiction of what the EU is trying to achieve in opening space for democracy and the improvement of human rights principles for the people of Cambodia. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]