Search

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. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Strategic Review / Przeglad Strategiczny is the property of Faculty of Political Science & Journalism, Adam Mickiewicz University and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

This article traces the formation of Africa's position in view of the negotiations with the European Union for a successor to the Cotonou Agreement set to expire in February 2020, providing some explanations for the failure of the ACP Group and the African Union to achieve a consolidated position. By examining official discourses and the role of different actors, it demonstrates that the ACP Group and the AU manifested alternative views on the EU-ACP cooperation model and on the part that each wished to play in the negotiation and implementation of the future agreement. Moreover, it shows how, in spite of previous frictions, the ACP Secretariat and ACP Committee of Ambassadors on the one hand and the AU Commission and the AU Permanent Representatives Committee on the other formed two separate common fronts to defend their territories and preserve (or increase) their role as the EU's legitimate interlocutors. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The importance of Africa for Europe was highlighted in the 1950 Schuman Declaration. Although the overarching framework for relations between the European Union and Africa is embedded in the 2000 Cotonou Agreement, cooperation between the European Union and Africa became increasingly institutionalized through the European Union–Africa Summits of 2000, 2007, 2010 and 2014, during which political leaders from both sides made strong rhetorical commitments to a strategic partnership. Yet, for the wider public, the relationship between the European Union and Africa appears to be both obscure and complex. The fifth European Union–Africa Summit is scheduled to take place in Ivory Coast in November 2017. This article will provide an overview of the development of European Union–Africa relations that coincided with the emergence of the African Union, the successor of the Organisation of African Unity. The so-called ‘strategic partnership’ between the European Union and the African Union represents the most comprehensive partnership the African Union has with any non-African actor. By highlighting current challenges affecting both, such as irregular migration, this article will, however, demonstrate that cooperation between the two is limited and somewhat lacking in strategic direction. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

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. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

West African elites have successfully argued for an Economic Partnership Agreement Development Programme (EPADP) as part of free trade negotiations with the European Commission. ECOWAS officials state that the EPADP is necessary to realise the ‘development dimension’ of trade. In particular, they have (re)articulated Europe's own narratives relating to Aid for Trade and private sector development – insisting that the European Commission delivers on its promises. Accordingly, European negotiators have conceded the principle of the EPADP, stating that around €6·5 billion will be delivered. This article, however, examines the likely (in)capacity of the EPADP to meaningfully marry trade and development in the context of premature liberalisation under Economic Partnership Agreements (EPAs). Crucially, it argues that West African extraversion in terms of EPADP resources may entrench predatory elites while locking-in ECOWAS states into inequitable trade structures that re-embed poverty in the region. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

This study examines the effectiveness of political conditionality by looking at the European Union's suspension of development cooperation with three African, Caribbean and Pacific (ACP) states (Zimbabwe, Ivory Coast and Niger) perceived to have violated the principles of human rights and democratic principles as laid out in the Cotonou Partnership Agreement adopted in 2000. Analyzing the effectiveness of democracy promotion activities raises the question about its impact upon political processes in the recipient countries. This task is complicated, and it is beyond the aim and capacity of this paper to find a complete answer. Therefore, our conclusions will be cautiously assessed since other factors could intervene and undermine or contribute to the changes in the political system of a given country. Our findings reveal that, in most of the cases, political dialogue and appropriate measures have a modest effect on each country's performance on democratic principles. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article focuses on the challenges faced by the Africa, the Caribbean and the Pacific (ACP) Group of States with its future perspectives. It discusses the seventh summit of Heads of State and Government of the Africa, ACP Group of States, which was held in Malabo, Equatorial Guinea on December 13?14, 2012 and led to the adoption of the Sipopo Declaration. It also reflects on the partnership of ACP Group of States with the European Union (EU).

Since 2000 the cooperation between the European Union (EU) and the African, Caribbean and Pacific (ACP) states has been governed through the Cotonou Partnership Agreement. This article complements existing research that focuses on Brussels-based stakeholders with an analysis drawing on the existing literature and on stakeholders' perceptions of ACP–EU cooperation and ACP institutions gathered via interviews in nine ACP countries. The findings presented observe a social disconnect between, on the one hand, the Cotonou Partnership Agreement's institutions and Brussels-based representatives, and, on the other hand, the broad-based and multistakeholder partnership they are tasked to promote. The article points to low levels of support in ACP countries, particularly in Africa, to continued ACP–EU cooperation in its present form, and stresses the need for an open and participatory process of reviewing and reshaping ACP–EU relations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Via partnership agreements like the Cotonou Partnership Agreement, the EU provides African countries with access to its markets and asks for compliance with a given set of good governance norms and procedures. While the EU markets are significant for African countries, African markets are not significant for the EU. This asymmetric relationship should give the EU the power to "convince" the African countries to adopt better governance practices. Results from panel data regression analyses indicate that for 34 African countries, an increase in the intensity of trade and imports from the EU over the period of 1984-2009 reduced the level of corruption, but not always the intensity of exports to the EU. These findings do not provide strong evidence in favor of the idea that the EU has effectively used its asymmetric trade relationship in convincing African countries to adopt better governance practices, but they consistently support alternative-rival-hypotheses, namely trade openness and imports-as-market discipline hypotheses. Further research needs to takes into account the increasing influence of China. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article charts an aspect of contemporary necro-ontology and necro-economics as a theory and practice. It begins with a discussion of governmentality and subsequently engages Blaney and Inyatullah's recent intervention in International Political Economy. I am particularly interested in their discussion of Hegel. By drawing on the idea of “direct theory” I bring into conversation social movement theorizing with academic theory to trace the chains of savagery that weave the fabric of Hegel's necro-ontology and its continuities in the European Union's Economic Partnership Agreements (EPAs), and much trade policy more generally. The second section offers an exploration of the European Commission's Economic Partnership Agreements (EPAs) from the vantage point of governmentality. I contend that governmentality is at work in two interrelated senses. On the one hand, there is an attempt to constitute individualist rationalist maximizers. On the other, there is an attempt to constitute African Caribbean and Pacific (ACP) states as neoliberal market subjects. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

The 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. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This 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. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Global 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. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article discusses rising investment issues with regard to replacement of existing trade agreement that governs trading relations between the European Union and African, Caribbean and Pacific Group of Countries (ACP). It discusses new framework of trading agreements to be called Economic Partnership Agreements (EPAs). It mentions that EPAs complies with the World Trade Organization (WTO) principle of reciprocity.

The article offers information on the Africa-Caribbean-Pacific (ACP) European Union (EU) Joint Parliamentary Assembly. It states that the Cotonou Agreement has created a partnership between EU and its Member States, and 78 countries of ACP. It mentions that parliamentary dimensions have grown in importance within the framework of EU-ACP.

Since the year 2001, Kenya’s copyright regime has extensively been shaped by Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) agreement; World Intellectual Property Organization Copyright Treaty; Africa Growth Opportunity Act (AGOA); and The Cotonou Agreement, which have advocated for effective copyright administration and management structures in addition to stiffer penalties for those who violate copyright laws. Despite better administrative structures being put in place, copyright infringement in Kenya has persisted. Being able to balance the needs of rights owners and information consumers becomes a critical role librarians have to play. Knowledge about copyright, thus, becomes critical. Despite the fact that librarians in Kenya are not a homogenous group, how knowledgeable the different librarian cadres are concerning copyright issues is least understood. The raison d’être for this study is to find out whether different cadres of librarians based on academic qualifications differ in the level of knowledge on copyright issues. A questionnaire was used to collect data. Results indicate no statistically significant difference in self-reported knowledge of copyright among the five librarian cadres based on their education level and neither is there a statistically significant difference based on librarians’ years of service. Statistically significant differences among the five librarian cadres exist when we compare “tested knowledge” of copyright issues. Evidence of insufficient mastery of provisions in the Kenyan copyright law does exist. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

The article reports on the development cooperation of African, Caribbean and Pacific (ACP)-European Union (EU) Partnership Agreement (Cotonou Agreement (CA). It notes that the partnership is to build relations and also to reconstruct the EU's external relations under Lisbon Treaty and the establishment of the European External Action Service (EEAS). It mentions that the revision of the CA has been signed in June 2010.

The article examines EU' s relationship with the Pacific subgroup of the African, Caribbean and Pacific Group of States from the signing of the Cotonou Agreement in 2000 to the Lisbon Treaty's coming into force in 2009. The analysis has been structured on the basis of a distinction stemming from the national role conceptions theory, i.e. between the declarative aspect and actual conduct of EU' s involvement in the South Pacific. Thus, the first step was to identify the goals the EU declares it wants to pursue in the region, which have been contained in various documents governing its relationship with the South Pacific. These declarations include strengthening political cooperation, support for socio -economic development, eradication of poverty, promoting democratic values and standards, rule of law and human rights, facilitating transition of the South Pacific Island States to the liberalized global economy as well as developing their contacts with other actors. Subsequently these objectives were confronted with particular policies, such as trade and development policies, which are intended to enable the UE to achieve its goals. The comparison of the two proved that the UE faces serious difficulties in actualizing its declarations. They are far-fetched, whilst the relationship with the South Pacific Island States is of low intensity and standing amongst all external action priorities. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The Cotonou Partnership between the states of Africa, the Caribbean and the Pacific (ACP) and the European Union (EU) provides a case in which the human rights approach to development is being put into practice. This article uses the partnership to address broader questions regarding the effectiveness of the new approach to development. The EU-ACP partnership is innovative because it reflects the changing international consensus on development, but it is not clear if the norms used in the Cotonou Agreement have achieved the consensus needed to comprise any real shift in development policy. Moreover, it can be argued that what diminishes the efficacy of the human rights approach in the EU-ACP relationship is political conditionality as this mechanism may lead to interventions that are counterproductive to the establishment of stable democracy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article examines the legal issue regarding the inclusion of Most Favoured Nation (MFN) clauses in the Caribbean Forum-European Communities (CARIFORUM-EC) Economic Partnership Agreement (EPA). It discusses the distinction between law and policy in order to assess the value of MFN clauses in the EPA. It also notes the structured paradigm for assessing such clauses in other North-South Free Trade Agreements (FTAs).

For almost 40 years, relations between the European Union and African, Caribbean and Pacific (ACP) countries centred on trade and development policy. The partnership survived various challenges and evolved into an institutionalised model for North-South relations. In reaction to internal and external forces of change, in the Cotonou Agreement (2000) the EU introduced to its relations with the developing world a new trade-development paradigm to be implemented via Economic Partnership Agreements. The latter are intended to be innovative foreign policy instruments, functioning as development tools and trade liberalisation mechanisms. Against the background of current internal restructuring of EU foreign policy and an increasingly politicised development agenda, this article undertakes an enquiry into the nature of the trade-development nexus in EU-Pacific Island countries (PICs) relations. The analysis is based on a theoretical framework which employs assumptions and findings related to IR theory, referring in particular to realism and dependency theory. A critical examination of EU policies shaping the trade-development nexus reveals that it is a rather flexible foreign policy tool, equipped with an auto-adjustment mechanism to ensure the balance of EU trade and development objectives. From PICs' perspective, its predictability and therefore developmental value, may, however, be diminished. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In this article we present a new proposal for the measurement of development, applied to the Pacific Countries of the African, Caribbean and Pacific Group (ACP), conditional on their insularity, and with privileged relations with the European Union. Our index has been constructed attending to the criteria defined in the Goals of the Millennium Declaration. For this purpose we will use the P distance method for the year 2007, the last year for which data are available. This index integrates socio-economic variables that permit a territorial ordering of the Pacific ACPs, in terms of those partial indicators. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The European Development Consensus 2005 contains a broad policy re-statement of the EU's world view vis-a-vis its internal and external relations. It places poverty eradication and sustainable development at the heart of its policy. The context within which poverty eradication is pursued is an increasingly globalised and interdependent world that constantly creates new opportunities and challenges. Combating global poverty is seen by both parties not only as a moral obligation; rather as a building block for a more stable, peaceful, prosperous and equitable world, reflecting the interdependency of its richer and poorer countries. The EU has in its relations with the African, Pacific and Caribbean countries, past and present, pursued a development agenda via successive aid and development cooperation arrangements starting with the Yaounde I convention, through Lome to the Cotonou Partnership Agreement (CPA). In this article I reflect on the CPA, based on a corpus of shared objectives, principles and the Lome 'acquis' in relation to Malawi non-state actors (NSAs). I reflect on the opportunities and challenges it presents and how contemplated social dialogue between government and NSAs on the one hand and the EU can translate into poverty reduction, sustainable development and integration of the local economy to the global economy. I conclude that unlike its predecessors, Yaounde and Lome conventions, the CPA acknowledges the complementary role of NSAs in the development process, however NSAs in Malawi face constraints in terms of organisation and capacity building that affects their participation. What I do not do is to offer a discussion of the CPA as a whole, for that is outside the scope of this article, but rather have focused on the governance aspect vis-a-vis NSAs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article focuses on the economic partnership agreement (EPA) between the European Union (EU) and the Pacific Islands consisting of African, Caribbean, and Pacific (ACP) countries. It mentions that partial EPAs has been initialled in Papua New Guinea (PNG) and Fiji, with no agreements have been made in the remaining Pacific Island countries. It explains the reasons on the possible misunderstanding of the role conceptions and negotiation goals between EU and EPA.

Distinguishing between '(good) governance' as a process and an outcome, this article examines both the processes and outcomes of governance in the context of the EU's relationship with ACP states since the adoption of the Cotonou Agreement. The article discusses and assesses a variety of governance mechanisms, including the European Commission's use of the governance concept, Economic Partnership Agreements, manifestations of partner preferences, the European Development Fund, the revision of the Cotonou Agreement, and Fisheries Partnership Agreements. Specific examples of the wielding of each mechanism are assessed based upon two criteria: the extent to which the wielding of the mechanism by the EU is a manifestation of 'good governance', and the extent to which the mechanisms have resulted, or are likely to result, in the sustainable development of and reduction of poverty in ACP countries. The examples are chosen to illustrate contradictions between rhetoric and practice and the consequential negative (actual and potential) impact upon development in ACP states. The article ends with some suggestions for improving the EU's governance processes and their outcomes for development. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Revue d'Economie Politique is the property of Editions Dalloz Sirrey and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

This article examines the impact of the EU's ‘Everything But Arms’ initiative. Starting from the observations that the effects in terms of trade flows have been modest and that EBA nevertheless sparked fierce debate within the EU, we argue that it has had broader ramifications beyond exports of least-developed countries. Subsequently, we analyse the influence of EBA on three interrelated areas: reforming EU agricultural policy (internal), restructuring EU–ACP relations (regional) and forging a WTO round (global). We conclude that EBA has played a catalysing role in these issues, in line with the globalist-liberal preferences which have become dominant in the EU. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The Economic Partnership Agreements are far apart from the original development-focused agreements aimed at strengthening regional integration as envisaged by the ACP countries and the EU in the context of the Cotonon Agreement. This paper aims to articulate strategies that should guide West Africa's development-focused EPA negotiations and to highlight Nigeria's role as a key player in the region. Noting that the current global economic crisis will further increase ECOWAS countries' vulnerability in an anti-development EPA regime, this paper underlines the En's neglect of the development dimensions and the negative impact on the regional integration process resulting from the Agreement. Furthermore, this paper discusses key issues in the EPA negotations, and analyses the critical implications of the EU-mandate that ECOWAS countries need to be conscious of. Finally, the paper suggests negotiating strategies for ensuring that the ECOWAS integration process is strengthened and that Nigeria (and West Africa) would get development benefits from the EPA. The conculsion is that ECOWAS must aim for an innovative EPA, which ties reciprocity to the achievement of basic development thresholds in member countries, and that individual countries ' supply-response capacities need to be developed ahead of the Agreements. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of UNISCI Discussion Papers is the property of Unidad de Investigaciones Sobre Seguridad y Cooperacion International (UNISCI) and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

The article explores the weaknesses of political conditionality in the Article 96 of the Cotonou Agreement between the European Union (EU) and Africa, Caribbean and Pacific (ACP) states in the case of Zimbabwe. Author Elena Fierro says that political conditionality promotes sanctions that affect diplomatic relations and dialogue. Developing countries contend that it is based on the concept of Western countries on human rights, multipartyism and free market. It examines the impact of EU sanctions under the article on the economy of Zimbabwe.

The article examines the implications of the Economic Partnership Agreements (EPAs) for regional integration in Southern Africa, which is envisaged in the Cotonou Agreement. It mentions that EPA negotiations affect the existing regional economic bodies across Africa. The author emphasized that European Commission (EC) and EPA negotiating bodies should give importance to the objective of EPA of promoting of regional integration.

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. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The formation of the CARIFORUM-EU Economic Partnership Agreement (EPA) honours the commitment made by all African, Caribbean and Pacific (ACP) nations via Article 36 of the Cotonou Agreement to conclude an agreement that is compatible with the rules and law of the World Trade Organisation (WTO). It is a comprehensive agreement that covers not just goods but services, investment, and trade related issues such as innovation and intellectual property. This article posits that now that negotiations have ceased and an agreement has been signed, it is necessary to focus attention on effective implementation of the agreement. Further, this paper suggests that the development of innovation and industrial policies is a salient part of the implementation process. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The changes made to the Cotonou Agreement in its first formal Review in 2005 are considered. Although some of these, to the political dimensions chapter of Cotonou, may appear to fundamentally alter the EU-ACP relationship, the author argues that it is the changes to the management of the EDF that are likely to have the more important long-term impact on implementation. These occurred partly in the 2005 Review, but also in revisions made in the same period to the financial regulations governing the use of the EDF. The Review allowed the EU to update Cotonou to reflect recent international thinking on development policy and also to cater for the funding needs of its increasingly close relationship with the African Union. This latter relationship is in fact starting to outshine that with the ACP Group that the Agreement actually covers, which suggests that further, perhaps more radical, adjustments can be expected during the next review in 2010. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The Cotonou Partnership Agreement, signed in Benin in 2000 between the European Union (EU) and its African-Caribbean-Pacific (ACP) partners, constitutes the basis for much of the EU's interaction with developing countries. The Agreement stresses the need to prioritize poverty alleviation and sustainable development as part of the overall development process. While an all-embracing approach to tackling problems of poverty and the environment ostensibly fulfils a number of social and political requirements where the EU's moral obligation towards the South is currently concerned, Cotonou's flagship provisions invite closer scrutiny. This paper considers the EU's attempt to marry poverty alleviation and sustainable development within its pro-poor strategy and assesses the likely efficacy of this approach in achieving Cotonou's stated aims.Journal of International Relations and Development (2008) 11, 55–74. doi:10.1057/jird.2008.1 [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article examines two limited forms of preferential trade arrangements: the African Growth and Opportunities Act of 2000 (AGOA) enacted by the U.S. Congress, and the Cotonou Agreement between the European Union and the African, Caribbean and Pacific Countries (ACP). Both of these regimes are motivated by the belief that allowing trade status for developing economies will accelerate their economic growth and development.

Focuses on the forces impacting the longstanding relationship between the European Union and African Caribbean and Pacific (ACP) states that are altering the fundamental nature of the relationship. Signing of the ACP-EU Partnership Agreement in Cotonou in 2000; Exogenous and endogenous forces of change; Effectiveness of the Lomé model; Differences between the contents of the Lomé and Cotonou agreements; Experiences with the fundamental changes and their impact on cooperation between the countries involved; Superiority of the Cotonou agreement over the Lomé Conventions.

The Cotonou Agreement, signed on 23 June 2000, defines the new relationship between the European Union (EU) and the African, Caribbean and Pacific (ACP) states. It was the result of 18 months of negotiations to decide the future of EU-ACP relations after the Lomé Convention's expiry on 29 February 2000. This article highlights the significant changes represented by the Cotonou Agreement and emphasises some of the dangers that may result for the ACP states. In doing so, the article adopts a neo-Gramscian perspective showing how the nature of the new EU-ACP agreement has significantly shifted the relationship further from one of co-operation to one of coercion. The new approach taken by the EU can be understood within the context of the hegemonic dominance of neoliberalism within political elites. This is most explicitly demonstrated by the EU's major justification for the proposed changes: the need to comply with the core principles and rules of the World Trade Organization (WTO). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]