Search

The article problematises the EU’s approach to trade, development and migration (TD&M) in the context of Africa-EU relations and the push for free trade deals under Economic Partnership Agreements (EPAs). According to EU policymakers there is harmony between trade policies, development goals and migration objectives. EU officials state that EPAs are a development friendly tool for job creation in Africa, and this in turn will address the 'root causes of irregular migration' between the continents. There is significant cause for concern, however, relating to the negative consequences of EPAs for jobs in the continent, particularly in labour intensive import-competing agricultural sectors. Free trade deals may therefore stimulate migration from Africa to Europe. This apparent paradox is underscored by recent fieldwork conducted in Ghana’s poultry sector which highlights business stakeholders’ deep concerns about EPAs stoking unemployment and migration.

Given the importance of the African Continental Free Trade Agreement (AfCFTA), it is critical to examine its potential success, or failure, particularly in the context of the Regional Economic Comm...

To what extent has the regional exclusion list under the EPA shaped national industrial policy in countries within the ECOWAS region? The Economic Partnership Agreements (EPAs) are a series of bila...

Regional organisations in Africa have not managed to form coherent coalitions while negotiating about Economic Partnership Agreements (EPAs) with the European Union (EU). Either the membership of EPA groups is not congruent with the membership of existing regional organisations, or crucial member states refuse to sign the EPAs and put their regions’ unity at risk. We argue that these problems are due to the differentiated trade rules of the EU, which privilege some trade partners and some commodity exports over others. Large African countries, which enjoy privileged access to the European market, do not have incentives to implement the unpopular EPAs, which are based on reciprocal trade liberalisation. As a result, they obstruct the negotiation process or refuse to implement the EPAs. This mechanism is illustrated at the examples of the East African Community (EAC), the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS) and the Southern African Development Community (SADC).

Purpose: The article aims to present the benefits and costs for ACP countries of the conclusion of Economic Partnership Agreements (EPAs) and of the implementation of trade liberalisation thereunder, in the light of their trade relations with the European Union Member States. Design/Methodology/Approach: The article employs an analytical and descriptive method. Empirical (indirect observation and description) and general methods, including deduction and induction, were used to achieve the aim of the study. It draws on sources from the national and international literature, secondary legislation of the European Union in the form of regulations as well as on EUROSTAT statistics. Findings: The analysis produced no unambiguous results, but they do indicate that the answer to the above question depends on the economic situation (status) of the country concerned (in this regard, the group of ACP Countries is very diversified). As regards LDCs, the ‘no EPA’ option seems to be the most favourable, whereas non-LDCs would benefit from an EPA due to the fact that if EPA is not signed, the EU “makes a threat” of suspending preferences, and this means worse EU market access conditions for these countries. Practical Implications: Practical implications for entities involved in trade with the African, Caribbean and Pacific countries and initiating further research to examine the situation of the ACP countries, the progress of EPA negotiations and their consequences. Originality/value: Performing a critical analysis of provisions contained in economic partnership agreements made by the European Union with the ACP countries and demonstrating that such agreements serve mainly the purpose of defending the EU’s interests, but not the interests of the ACP countries, moreover, identifying weaknesses, opportunities and threats concerning the agreements in question (a SWOT analysis)., peer-reviewed

This chapter contains the second part of exemplary EPA critique related to the content of the treaties. All relevant economic aspects and clauses of the trade-in-goods agreements are critically examined, including the market access offer, quantitative restrictions, trade remedies, export duties and subsidies, national treatment and procurement, and rules of origin. The agreed and proposed clauses are submitted to scrutiny of whether the remaining policy space still allows sensible infant industry protection in Africa. The analysis concludes that some policy space is left for targeted developmental efforts by African governments but is made very difficult in the practical management of the new trade rules. The chapter contains two case studies on global poultry and cashew trade. The overall result of the EPA examination with regard to partnership, development orientation and sustainability is a mixed picture at best.

For decades, Japanese outward foreign direct investment has exceeded the flow of foreign capital into the country. Policies and regulations restricted inward investment, while the foreign earnings of Japanese companies were recycled into investment abroad. Today, official policy has reversed to try to encourage greater inflows, but Japan does not attract much FDI. Following an overview of the trends of Japanese FDI, this chapter surveys the considerable official efforts to protect the interests of Japanese multinational firms abroad, particularly in the form of investment chapters in trade agreements and free-standing international investment agreements. It then analyzes recent attempts at reducing barriers to inward investment in Japan under Abenomics. Much suggests that these efforts do not spur on significant inflows. The conundrum of the Japanese government may be that the policy regime cannot by itself counter the diminishing economic attractiveness of Japan for foreign firms.

This study provides early ex-post empirical evidence on the effects of provisionally applied Economic Partnership Agreements (EPAs) on two-way trade flows between the European Union (EU) and the African, Caribbean and Pacific Group of States (ACP). Employing the gravity model of trade, we do not find a general EPA effect on total exports from ACP countries to the EU nor on total exports from the EU to ACP countries. We do, however, find heterogeneous effects when focusing on specific agreements and economic sectors. While the agreement between the EU and the Caribbean Forum (CARIFORUM), which concluded several years ahead of the other EPAs in 2008, if anything, reduced imports from the EU overall, the provisional application of the other EPAs seems to have at least partly led to increased imports from the EU to some partner countries. More specifically, the estimation results suggest an increase in the total imports from the EU only in the Southern Africa Development Community (SADC) EPA partner countries. On the sectoral level, by comparison, we find increases in the EU’s agricultural exports to SADC, Eastern and Southern Africa (ESA) and the Pacific. Lastly, in the area of manufactures trade, we find decreases of exports of the ESA and SADC countries to the EU, but increases in imports from the EU into SADC countries. While this early assessment of the EPA effects merits attention given the importance of monitoring future implications of these agreements, it is still too early for a final verdict on the EPAs’ effects and future research is needed to investigate the mid- and long-term consequences of these agreements., Discussion Paper

The United Kingdom officially left the European Union (EU) in January 2020. While the nature of its future relations with the rest of the EU Members is unclear, it is by now certain that the UK will cease to be part of several agreements concluded by the EU in the areas common commercial policy. This is the case for Economic Partnership Agreements (EPAs) concluded between the EU and its Members with African, Caribbean and Pacific (ACP) countries. This paper studies the consequences of Brexit on these EPAs. It explores whether, and to what extent, ACP countries may invoke fundamental change of circumstances to seek termination of their respective EPAs because Brexit was an event that they could not have contemplated when negotiating these agreements. Likewise, could the threat of termination provide any leverage to ACP countries to induce renegotiation of the terms of EPAs considering frustration of their legitimate expectations?

The article discusses current aspects of the development of relations between the Eurasian Economic Union and neighboring countries, primarily with CIS countries that are not members of the EAEU. Such relationships are reinforced by mutual economic interests, but at the same time they are complicated by strong foreign and foreign economic policies pluralism of CIS states as well as high activity and growing presence of non-regional players (especiallyChina, the EU,Turkey) in the post-Soviet space. The fragile balance of centripetal and centrifugal tendencies in the development of post-Soviet integration still persists, however additional measures are needed to ensure economic cooperation between the EAEU and the CIS countries outside the EAEU and also in the CIS contour as a whole. The concept of the Eurasian Neighborhood Policy is proposed as a framework platform for the implementation of such measures, leading to stronger integrity and connectivity of the post-Soviet space, realization of joint cooperation programmes and projects. The instruments of the neighborhood policy may include extended economic partnership agreements between the EAEU and interested CIS and other neighboring countries, sectoral agreements between them (for instance, regarding technical regulation issues) with expected fast practical effects, deeper conjugation of the EAEU and CIS formats.

We analyze eight of the 15 existing Japanese economic partnership agreements (EPAs) from 1997 to 2012. First, we construct bilateral measures of trade barriers for Japan and its partners using inpu...

The paper studies major frameworks of regionalism in «larger East Asia», including its recent developments and trends. It reveals an essential progress of regionalism in the part of the world in the 21st century as well as difficulties on its way. ASEAN, «ASEAN+1», «ASEAN+3», «ASEAN+6» and APEC are the major regional frameworks. Some potentially influential regional projects are in process of ratification, negotiation or discussion. The regional integration has occurred mostly in economic sphere in the form of free trade agreements (FTAs) and reaching their consistency. The only exceptions are ASEAN Community in three spheres, and mutual security mechanisms in financial sphere within «ASEAN+3» framework. Different regional projects are competitive, for example, «ASEAN+3» and «ASEAN+6» frameworks, Transpacific Partnership and Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership agreements, and East Asian Community and «free and open Indo-Pacific region» concepts. Besides bolstering trade and investments, regionalism in «larger East Asia» is an instrument of great powers’ rivalry for regional influence, and middle and small powers’ hedging against potential risks.

In 2014, the EU concluded Economic Partnership Agreements (EPAs) with several African, Caribbean and Pacific (ACP) regions. These EPAs represent some of the most advanced examples of interregional cooperation. Yet, the outcomes of EPA negotiations are not the same across all regions. This article investigates differences in negotiated outcomes and argues that regional actorness – the ability of regions to become identifiable, to aggregate the interests of member states, to formulate collective goals and to make and implement decisions – influences regions’ ability to navigate interregional trade negotiations. In a comparison of the actorness and negotiated outcomes of West Africa and the SADC EPA Group, the article shows that actorness matters for international negotiations: regions with higher levels of actorness can negotiate better outcomes even under conditions of stark power asymmetry.

Several African, Caribbean and Pacific countries are currently negotiating World Trade Organization (WTO)-compatible reciprocal economic partnership agreements (EPAs) with the European Unio...

The European Union has been negotiating regional Economic Partnership Agreements (EPAs) with 79 African, Caribbean and Pacific (ACP) Group of States since 2002 with different outcomes. For instance, while the negotiation with the Caribbean Forum concluded as envisaged in 2007, those with the Economic Community of West African States and other ACP countries have extended for nearly a decade after the initial deadline. This study discusses the rationale behind these different outcomes. The study concludes that for the European Union to have effective trade negotiations with the ACP countries, it needs to look beyond its market size attraction and policy to promote the idea of free trade. Moreover, it should analyse alternative trade options available to those regions and develop appropriate negotiation positions and strategies.

This essay assesses and evaluates the extent to which the African Growth and Opportunity Act (AGOA) increased imports from AGOA eligible countries to the United States from 2001 to 2015. The essay then examines how African countries can make the most of the preferences granted under AGOA, arguing that AGOA national utilization strategies have proven successful. In the final part, the essay explores options for future U.S.-Africa trade relations after the AGOA expires in 2025, proposing approaches that would best support African development. In this regard, this essay argues that, since Congress is unlikely to renew AGOA in its current form and since AGOA will likely be replaced with an arrangement requiring some degree of reciprocity, it will be very important for (1) the African Union's Continental Free Trade Area (CFTA) to be implemented before any new U.S.-Africa trading arrangement comes into force and (2) for negotiations for any future U.S.-Africa trading arrangement not to mimic the negotiations conducted for the Economic Partnership Agreements with the European Union.

This article critically interrogates claims that a British exit from the European Union (EU) (Brexit) will create opportunities for the UK to escape the EU’s apparent protectionism and cumbersome internal politics in order to pursue a more liberal and globalist trade agenda based on the Commonwealth. Taking a historical view of UK and EU trade relations with the Commonwealth in Africa, the author highlights the way in which the incorporation of the majority of Commonwealth states into the EU’s preferential trading relationships has reconfigured ties between the UK and its former colonies over time. Further, the author suggests that the EU’s recent attempts to realise a vision for an ambitious set of free trade agreements in Africa—the Economic Partnership Agreements—was disrupted not by EU protectionism or internal politics but rather by African resistance to the EU’s liberal agenda for reciprocal tariff liberalisation and regulatory harmonisation. The UK therefore faces a complex challenge if it ...

The European Union (EU) has in recent years adopted the International Labour Organisation’s Decent Work Agenda in its external trade and development policy. It is portrayed as a way to mitigate any negative impacts on labour. However, African trade unions have campaigned against the EU’s Economic Partnership Agreements (EPAs). It is argued that their stance highlights the limitations of incorporating the Decent Work Agenda into trade agreements, which, instead, are seen as central to the process of entrenching economic liberalisation. As a result, the article considers the prospects for transnational labour solidarity to resist EPAs.

This article compares Taiwan's guest worker program and Japan's Economic Partnership Agreements (EPAs) program to examine how intimate labor and affective labor are culturally defined and institutionally regulated in different ways. Facing the similar problems of population aging and care deficit, Taiwan and Japan have nevertheless adopted divergent approaches to recruiting and training migrant care workers (“deferential surrogates” vs. “professional others”). This comparison demonstrates national diversity in the intersecting formation of care regime and migration regime. It also shows that cultural values and social practices associated with care, such as familism and gendered division of care work, are subject to transformation under the influence of state intervention and transnational outsourcing.

How will Brexit impact on Africa? This paper looks at the available empirical evidence and carries out a Computable General Equilibrium simulation, focusing particularly on the prospects for the East African Community (EAC). The paper makes three main points. First, while the direct impacts through investment, trade and remittances are likely to be relatively small, African countries may benefit from the creation of new export opportunities. However, these are mainly in resource-intensive sectors that are not considered a priority for the development agendas of most African countries. Second, indirect consequences, through Brexit's impact on the global economy, its influence on the Economic Partnership Agreements (EPAs) with the European Union, or a potential reduction in UK development cooperation, are likely to be equally important over the longer run. Finally, one overlooked consequence of Brexit for Africa is that it could undermine confidence in ‘deep’ regional integration processes like the EAC. The paper concludes that the correct response at such a time is not to falter but to redouble efforts towards regional integration through the implementation of the recently-signed African Continental Free Trade Area, while learning the pertinent lessons from Europe.

Chapter 19 argues that the events of 2016, especially Brexit, the crisis of confidence around regional integration in Europe, the controversial economic partnership agreements (EPAs), the cutting of EU funding to the African Union Mission in Somalia (AMISOM), and the clamping down on African immigrants in the Mediterranean, are likely to have serious repercussions on what seems to be a fading relationship between Europe and Africa. Another issue of consternation is Europe’s introduction of migration control as a new condition for development cooperation following the refugee crisis.

The research sought to assess the determinants of trade flows between European Union and Southern African countries for the period 2001 to 2012, and to determine the trade potential of a Co...

Africa has been divided into four groups of states by the European Union in the negotiation of Economic Partnership Agreements (EPAs) that will define the relationship between Africa and Europe in the future. The EPAs are unfair. They demand reciprocity between the EU countries collectively and each African country individually and they set conditions that will be demanded by any other country or groups of countries with which African countries seek trade arrangements. Further, separate EPAs among different groupings of African countries will undermine Africa’s wider integration efforts, leaving it in thrall to EU companies. In their present form the EPAs are not in Africa’s interest and will unnecessarily undermine the potential for Europe’s improved relationship with the continent.

Efforts to conclude Economic Partnership Agreements between African-Caribbean-Pacific countries and European Union drag on. The former prefers the Agreements as cooperation agreements, promoting development, whereas the latter prefers them strictly as trade regimes. Contested issues include the Agreements’ scope and replacement of non-reciprocity of preferences with reciprocity of preferences. Africans doubted the relevance of the reciprocity principle to development but now succumb to pressures, signing the Agreements. This paper debates current developments in the Agreements, hoping that cautiousness prevails in making commitments. It suggests an alternation of trade benefits between the Agreement partners, based on economic outlooks.

In 2000, African countries expressed reservation over the adoption of UPOV Act of 1991 as a model of plant breeders’ rights (PBRs) for TRIPS-compliance. For the continent, an acceptable system of PBRs protection would include the protection of the rights of communities and associated indigenous knowledge, innovations, technologies and farming practices. One and half decades after, Africa has virtually reversed itself and embraced the UPOV-PBRs system notwithstanding the latter's narrow focus on breeders and marginal reference to farmers. This Article critically explores the concerted sites of pressures, especially free trade and economic partnership agreements, and related policies through which Africa appears to have capitulated and upturned its policy position on PBRs. The continent's present priority over the implementation of PBRs through various regional and national legal initiatives currently at the instance of African Intellectual Property Organization (OAPI), the African Regional Intellectual Property Organization (ARIPO), the Southern African Economic Community (SADC) and specific country initiatives are explored. The article highlights the basis for the incongruity of Africa's newfound interest in the UPOV-PBRs system—a regime not designed for the farmer-centered tenor of African agriculture. It calls attention to the continued relevance of Africa's 2000 Model Law, especially as it applies to PBRs and recommends reality assessment as an important step toward the formulation of IPRs system suited for stakeholders in African agriculture for the continent's food security and food sovereignty.

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 Africanextraversionin terms of EPADP resources may entrench predatory elites while locking-in ECOWAS states into inequitable trade structures that re-embed poverty in the region.

This paper analyzes the relative significance of regional Economic Partnership Agreements (EPAs) in Asia-Pacific. The economy-wide impacts of tariff removals and reductions in non-tariff measures (NTMs) are estimated by using a Computable General Equilibrium (CGE) model of global trade. The Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) and the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP) are shown to complement each other rather than be competitors. The income gains of Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) economies as a whole account for 1.2 per cent of regional GDP by the TPP, 2.1 per cent by the RCEP, and 4.3 per cent by the Free Trade Area of the Asia-Pacific (FTAAP). Meanwhile, larger economic benefits are expected from NTMs reductions in addition to tariff removals. It is thus essential to reform domestic markets in order to enjoy greater economic benefits from international EPAs.

In view of the global run on African resources and the quest for promising new African markets, the EU is at pains to conclude Economic Partnership Agreements (EPAs) with African states. Negotiatio...

Nkrumah warned that European nations would seek to perpetuate neo-colonial patterns of trade and production in their relations with African countries. This chapter examines the current EU Economic Partnership Agreements (EPAs) being implemented in sub-regions of the African, Caribbean and Pacific (ACP) group. It points to concerns about EU ‘ladder-kicking’ in Africa, with regard to premature tariff liberalisation and the import flooding of manufactured and agricultural goods into local markets. This chapter contextualises this impact in terms of livelihoods and growth within vital sectors such as poultry and textiles. Moreover, the chapter points to the EU’s ‘development’ discourse as a legitimating component of its controversial EPA deals in African sub-regions.

Focussing on the struggle for the scheduled SADC Customs Union, Muntschick reveals that extra-regional actors can actually have a negative impact on regional economic integration in the SADC. Firstly, this chapter refers to the organisation’s agenda on market integration and clarifies the intra-regional demand for the envisaged customs union. Secondly, it highlights the SADC member states’ important but asymmetric trade relations to the European Union and, in regard to this shadow structure of extra-regional interdependence, explains the interfering impact of Brussels’s Economic Partnership Agreements (EPA) on deeper market integration in the SADC. This chapter concludes that the European Union’s bilateral and remunerative EPAs fuelled internal fragmentation in the SADC and thus make it almost impossible for the SADC customs union to become a reality in the future.

Japan only recently jumped onto the bandwagon of the global care-chain. Via bilateral treaties, so-called Economic Partnership Agreements (EPA), Japan has implemented an avenue of health-caregiver migration. The agreements are designed in a sector-specific and nation-specific manner, and Japan’s current partner countries include Indonesia, the Philippines and Vietnam. Each partner country may send up to 1000 health-caregivers per year to work in Japan. This quota, however, has not once been met, giving proof of the system’s low degree of attractiveness to many stakeholders involved. This chapter introduces the system of international health-caregiver migration to Japan, as it was implemented in the late 2000s, as well as numerous revisions that have taken place so far. Specific attention is given to the shortcomings of the system. Drawing on governmental documents as well as expert interviews, this chapter provides insights into the output and outcome of Japan’s EPA-administered migration scheme. By introducing Germany’s rather similar Triple Win Program, a comparative perspective will be added. At the core of this chapter stands the question of why Japan and Germany shy away from implementing coherent migration paths and rather opt for window-dressing schemes without any significant economic impact.

The paper discusses trade relations between the European Union and African, Caribbean, and Pacific (ACP) countries over the period from 2000 to 2014. The analysis is based on the data retrieved from the UN Comtrade Database. The EU-ACP trade is analyzed in seven regional groups (Central Africa, Eastern and Southern Africa, East African Community, Southern African Development Community, West Africa, Caribbean, and Pacific) separately. The EU has been negotiating Economic Partnership Agreements (EPAs) with those groups of countries since 2008. The European Union is a major trading partner for ACP countries. However, it has been gradually losing its role as their most important trading partner for Asian giants. The EU dominates in trade with West Africa and the Caribbean countries. China and India have been more important trading partners for Eastern and Southern Africa since 2007, Pacific (2009), East African Community and Southern African Development Community (2010), and Central Africa (2014). Moreover, the Asian giants’ trade with 80 ACP countries has been surpassing the EU-ACP trade since 2012. It seems that South-South cooperation which has been intensively developed by China and India with ACP countries wins with the EU-led trade liberalization and its EPAs.

Trade is key to development. In order for any nation to develop, pathways to trade need to be favorable. The EEC’s and then the EU’s development cooperation policies have historically supported favorable trade agreements with Africa. From Yaounde through Lome 4 bis, elements such as the non-reciprocal nature of trade conditions, the European Development Fund (EDF), STABEX and SYSMIN illustrated the special status Europe1 accorded to Africa and then later the African, Caribbean and Pacific Group of States (ACP). The Cotonou era is a new challenge for the ACP and especially Sub-Saharan Africa (SSA). Though the EU still holds the rhetoric of favoring development, striving for greater partnerships and empowering nations, in actual fact, this new construct and its Economic Partnership Agreements (EPAs) show that the EU stance on the status of the ACP nations has drifted.

This study employs a global computable general equilibrium (CGE) model to examine the potential impacts of the Economic Partnership Agreements (EPAs) between the European Union (EU) and the Southern African Development Community (SADC). The simulation results suggest that a comprehensive EPA scenario is welfare-improving for many SADC members. SADC preferential access to the EU markets is the key source for the prospective welfare and terms of trade gains. Overall, SADC production structures become more concentrated in export-oriented sectors. These structural changes are accompanied by a high degree of adjustment and substantial fiscal losses.

Several States have terminated international investment agreements (IIAs) in recent years—some alarmed at unexpected outcomes in certain investor–State cases, and others simply updating their IIAs as they conclude wider economic partnership agreements. States’ attempts to extinguish investor rights through the consensual termination of an IIA raise complex legal issues. As a threshold matter, investors are capable of deriving legal ‘rights’ under an IIA that may interfere with attempts at termination. However, the grant of such rights under an IIA depends on its specific wording and context. Moreover, although a pre-existing treaty breach for which a formal claim has already been brought cannot be affected by a subsequent termination, States parties to an IIA are free to agree to extinguish investor rights that have not yet been exercised, even with respect to a pre-existing breach. In terminating an IIA on the basis of mutual agreement States parties also have (and have been shown to exercise) the power to override so-called ‘survival’ clauses commonly found in IIAs, thereby excluding all future rights and claims under the treaty. This conclusion is based on fundamental precepts of the law of treaties and is unaffected by any alleged doctrine of ‘acquired rights’.

This article investigates the effects of Japan’s economic partnership agreements (EPAs) on the Japanese import variety with respect to tariff reductions and outward foreign direct investments. The study is focused on the impact of changing tariffs and investments on the range of goods that EPA partners export to Japan for the periods 2005–10 and 2007–12. By using disaggregate tariff and trade data at the nine-digit HS level and by introducing the logit estimates with goods-specific effects, the article finds that both tariff reductions and Japan’s outward foreign direct investment help increase the likeliness of a commodity in the industrial sector to be exported to Japan from its EPA partner countries in the periods 2005–10 and 2007–12.

Without disregarding them, this volume seeks to go beyond the controversial and extensively researched Economic Partnership Agreements to offer new perspectives on the evolution of the trade–development nexus in the European Union against dramatic changes in the international context. In particular, it focuses on the reform of the Generalised System of Preferences, the negotiation of various Preferential Trade Agreements, the application of trade sanctions, the allegedly ambitious agendas on decent work, Aid for Trade and aid untying, and the implications of the changing balance of power in global economic relations. Taking diverse approaches and, at times, reaching different conclusions, contributors directly or indirectly address one or more of the three general themes that are discussed in this introduction: differentiation, coherence, and norms.

This paper offers a contribution to recent debates on European Union (EU) external trade and development policy, with a specific focus on the African, Caribbean and Pacific (ACP) group of countries. The question asked is why the EU encountered such difficulties in the attempt to translate its normative preferences for freer trade and closer economic integration into a series of binding agreements? Drawing on both economic constructivist and historical institutionalist insights, it is argued that the case for reform initially rested on a strong convergence between institutions and ideas, enabling the EU to discursively present desired policy reforms as necessary to satisfy World Trade Organisation trade rules. However, in due course, the institutional dynamics behind the latter began to diverge from the EU's policy preferences and blunt its norm-based argument – thus creating the space for transnational coalitions to, first, question and, ultimately, undermine aspects the EU's trade and development prospec...

The European Commission has promised to promote decent work in the African, Caribbean, and Pacific (ACP) countries through pro-poor direct investment and livelihood-creating trade deals. Aligning with the discourse of the International Labour Organisation, the European Commission seeks to achieve ‘fair globalisation’ in which economic growth is translated into decent jobs. Applying a moral economy perspective, however, the article argues that there is a disjuncture between the norms espoused under the Decent Work Agenda and the tangible implications of European interventions in ACP economies. Specifically, Economic Partnership Agreements will have deleterious consequences for the lives of many poorer producers and workers in ACP countries. The provision of Aid for Trade for decent work, moreover, may not deliver meaningful decent work opportunities in ACP countries. In this analysis, the article explores the emergent normativity-outcomes gap in this sphere of European Union external relations.

In this manuscript, attempts were made to assess the impacts on Nigeria of full and instant tariff elimination from agricultural imports. A schedule of annual percentage reductions till full elimination as against an instant total or arbitrary elimination across all imports from the EU, as well asthe expected annual provisions via aids for envisaged trade to install infrastructural capacity aimed at forestalling fiscal imbalance, leading to stabilization for Nigeria, advocated. The study evaluates the likely share of Nigeria’s imports from the European Union (EU), Economic Community of West African States(ECOWAS), and the rest of the world (ROW) in major agricultural product sections trade. The World Integrated Trade Solutions (WITs) platform was used to illicit a likely Economic Partnership Agreements (EPAs) scenario import data through a tariff eliminated query set up. The major impacts estimated include the resultant consumption impact, revenue impact, welfare impact, trade creation and diversion impacts, welfare impact of trade creation with consumption impact, and Welfare impacts of trade diversion with consumption impacts, in addition to their implications for scheduled tariff eliminations. Summary results were presented at product section levels as percentage of the impacts to contribution of agricultural sector in Nigeria’s GDP. Based on the estimated impacts and terms of trade deal, it is recommended that Nigeria should follow a schedule of percentage tariff reduction across product sections relative to the current most favored nations’ rather than arbitrary measures as a major policy of liberalizing trade. An annual percent tariff reduction rates over the 25 years, of 0.38%; 1.35%; 0.62%; 0.72%; and 0.2, for product sections 01-05, respectively, is recommended. In addition, it is also recommended that corresponding tariff losses in revenue due to scheduled reductions in tariff should be provided annually via aid for trade, for improvement in infrastructure, production and exportation that will sustain and improve intra, inter and extra regional trade in a growth and globalization pursuit aided by the EU. Keywords: International Agricultural Product Imports; Aid for Trade; EPAs; Impacts; Percentage Tariff Reduction Schedule. JEL Classification: F; F1; F6

It is widely accepted that trade promotes economic growth and reduces poverty in both developed and developing regions of the world, including Africa. Trade is supposed to serve as a channel through which the participating countries utilize comparative advantages in their natural resource endowments and productive capacities. While trade among countries may generate growth globally, it is often the case that the aggregate benefits are not equitably distributed among the trading partners. This is evident in the case of the African continent, which is entirely dependent on the export of unprocessed raw materials and mineral resources to the developed and emerging Asian countries to power their economic growth.The paper will analyse the current economic and trade relations between the EU and Africa in broad terms. Africa’s trade position is inherently weak as characterized by dependence on raw commodities for exports (with falling prices on the international markets) and a collapsing manufacturing sector necessitating the importation of basic consumer goods. Africa signed the interim Economic Partnership Agreement (EPA) on tangible goods with the European Union (EU) negotiated under various RECs: e.g. the Eastern and Southern Africa (ESA) ECOWAS, SADC blocs. EPAs are supposed to facilitate the free trade agenda as the EU will offer Africa duty and quota-free access to EU markets and will similarly concede its market to EU exports (reciprocity). Thus, the economic partnership agreements are a threat to the industrialization strategy in African countries. British exit (BREXIT) from the European Union astonished the proponents of regional integration and free trade. African countries remain uncertain on the likely impacts of the BREXIT both within and outside the EU-EPAs context. Brexit will certainly reduce market access and development assistance to developing countries that signed EPA.

Theories and analyses of regionalism, from both ‘orthodox' and ‘critical' strands of international political economy (IPE), have tended to conceptualise regional integration as a process led by intra-regional actors typically in reaction to external forces such as globalisation and the hegemonic power of international actors. This article sheds new light on theories of regionalism by arguing that international actors can have a direct and significant influence on the dynamics of regionalism, particularly in sub-Saharan Africa, by examining the influence of the European Union (EU) on the Southern African Development Community (SADC). Building on the recent literature on Africa and international relations, which shows how lines of sovereignty between domestic and international actors are blurred in the case of African political economies, the article shows how the EU played a significant role in the SADC's inception and has been directly influential in shaping the SADC's strategies and priorities in the post-Lomé period. In the latter instance, this article explains how the EU's institutional embeddedness in the SADC's aid structures and its asymmetrical bargaining power in the SADC Economic Partnership Agreement (EPA) has encouraged the SADC's pursuit of a neoliberal, trade-oriented form of regionalism.

Aid for Trade (AfT) has gained prominence as an innovative form of donor support in the ‘post’-Washington Consensus. AfT mechanisms have been praised as a means of aligning trade liberalisation deals (whether in the Doha Round or within bilaterals) to poverty reduction objectives. This article, through critical analysis of AfT discourse within the ‘moral economies’ of multilateral World Trade Organization and bilateral European Union–African, Caribbean and Pacific negotiations, points to the strategic purposes of donor language in rationalising asymmetric North–South trade systems. Moreover, it questions the ‘development’ credentials of AfT assistance by examining some of the ensuing private sector activities and the impact on the supposed beneficiaries, and the tying of AfT disbursements to the implementation of inappropriate policies.

PurposeThe aim of this paper is to critically analyse the trade preferences offered by the European Union (EU) to developing countries under the Cotonou Agreement and the Generalized System of Preferences (GSP) in relation to trade in sugar. There is a need for a timely examination of this area, given the context of the ACP‐EU Economic Partnership Agreements and the recent termination of the ACP‐EU Sugar Protocol (SP).Design/methodology/approachThe paper focuses on the Caribbean region as a whole with a particular focus on two non‐least developed ACP Caribbean countries, Guyana and Jamaica which held the largest sugar quotas among ACP Caribbean which benefited from the SP.FindingsThe EU trade regime changes have affected the value of the African‐Caribbean and Pacific (ACP) sugar trade regime and could have a serious impact on the amount of sugar available for purchase on the global market. The paper argues that ACP Caribbean countries could find more profitable to grow sugarcane as an agricultural commodity to produce biofuel, which is currently in high demand.Research limitations/implicationsThe analysis in this paper is limited to the arrangements pertaining to developing countries and therefore excludes those relating to least developed countries. Trade in more highly processed sugars such as fructose or glucose, together with the growing trade in biofuel refined from sugar beet and sugar cane are also outwith the scope of this discussion.Originality/valueThe paper deals with an intricate issue. It discusses the socio‐economic impact of the trade regime changes on the selected Caribbean countries and includes a section on recommendations given the economic weight of sugar for these countries.

Both the trade and climate change regimes have their own goals and tools. The main goals of the international trading system are trade liberalization, citizens’ welfare, economic growth, and the optimal use of the world’s natural resources. There is a set of closed and defined trade policy tools (i.e., trade regulation): tariffs, quantitative restrictions, trade remedies, subsidies, norms and standards, process and production methods, intellectual property rights, government procurement, services regulation et cetera, to name but a few. The main goals of climate change policy, on the other hand, are about environmental protection, sustainable development, and the preservation of ecosystems. To achieve these goals, climate change law uses the following policy tools across international law: trade policy tools, funding programs, taxes, permissions, prohibitions, international standards, and financial instruments.This paper advocates the importance of involving major greenhouse gas (GHG) emitters through large preferential trade agreements (PTAs), such as the Trans-Pacific Partnership and the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership, with strong climate change chapters and through economic partnership agreements as avenues to mitigate GHG emissions. PTAs have become a necessity because of the stagnation of the multilateral trading system. The question is how to persuade countries to be parties to climate-based PTAs, and economic incentives for parties are a possibility. Regional trade arrangements could be designed to provide for an attractive package to settle trade-offs and conflicts of interest as well as facilitate the ultimate goal of creating a global climate regime. In proposing climate solutions through trade agreements, the paper also tries to stimulate non-Annex I countries to GHG emissions reduction. Trade mechanisms can be an effective tool for securing environmental objectives. A regional approach seems more realistic than aiming for a global climate agreement. Both approaches (regional and global) share the objective of creating a strong international framework for climate action. However, they differ on how to achieve the goal.