Search

Australia is a member of many multilateral trade bodies and engages in trade agreements of a multilateral and bilateral kind across most regions. In June 2018, it launched negotiations for a Free Trade Agreement (FTA) with the European Union (EU) which are still ongoing and since then Australia and the EU have conducted fifteen rounds of negotiations (last one on 28 May 2023 in Brussels). This paper aims to explore the business awareness of the EU amongst Australian small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) and to analyse the factors that influence their internationalisation. To ascertain this, we reviewed the results of two surveys1 that were conducted pre- and post-COVID-19 pandemic (also coinciding with the Brexit transition period). This paper argues that SMEs in Australia are essentially unaware of the EU as a market and that no significant change in the business perception of the EU and potential international trade opportunities occurred between the pre- and post-COVID-19 political contexts. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Since June 18, 2018, the European Union (EU) and Australia have been negotiating an ambitious and comprehensive free trade agreement (FTA). This paper examines how geographical indications (GIs) are likely to fare in those negotiations, given that Australia and the EU have historically clashed over agricultural policy in international trade and have opposing legal approaches to protecting GIs, apart from wines. Specifically, this paper is concerned with the main challenges facing the EU and Australia on GI‐related matters, as well as the main areas of convergence between both Parties. It begins with an outline of the EU and Australia's current GI legislative frameworks, before exploring both Party's respective interests for including them in the intellectual property chapter of the FTA. Then, it identifies and analyses the main challenges confronting the GI discussions and concludes by determining the main potential points of convergence. This paper is relevant to understand the current relationship between the EU and Australia on GIs, the relative stakes for concluding ambitious GI provisions in the FTA, and the retrospective comparison of GI reform after this agreement has been implemented. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The gross value of Australia's agriculture industry in 2001/2002 was A$38.4 billion with 65% allocated to exports. The major exports markets are South East Asia, Japan, USA, and the EU. Products include wool, beef, wheat, cotton, sugar, and wine. For Australia there have been significant changes over time in markets and production arrangements in the international arena. This is also true of the domestic market especially in the area of meat products. Australians, once dominant red meat eaters, have now ‘gone chicken.’ The total yearly consumption of meats averages around 110 kg per person. Beef up until recent years has always been the dominant player. However, in the last 30 years chicken consumption has risen from being a marginal food item to being a product that is expected to eclipse beef consumption in the very near future. This paper explores the trends and examines the changes as they are reflected by the behaviour of consumers and market chain drivers. The paper provides suggestions that could he gainfully employed at the consumer behaviour levels for other meat producers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The European Union is a major player in the world economy and also the largest trading player on the global scene, accounting for about 20% of world imports and exports. The elimination of trade barriers within the EU confirmed its commitment to global trade liberalisation as it is an important part of multilateral trade negotiations. Apart from WTO trade agreements, the European Union concluded a number of bilateral trade agreements with certain countries and regions in the world. The aim of this paper is to present the EU-Australia trade relationship, Australia being an important trading partner of the EU. The trade flows between them includes both agricultural and non-agricultural products. The database that has been used is represented by the information published by the European Commission and the Australian Government. In conclusion, we found that both EU imports from Australia and EU exports to Australia are dominated by non-agricultural products. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The paper investigates the key insights of European Union (EU) member states agri-food export and import structures and main competitors in the internal and global agri-food markets in terms of geographical distributions and product coverage. The focus is on four agri-food product groups in global trade: fruit and vegetable products, grain products, meat products, and dairy products. The identification of the major competitors in internal EU markets and major EU competitors in global agri-food trade by calculating revealed comparative advantage indices show considerable differences by products and product groups, but in general the major competitors of the EU member states in the analysed global agri-food markets were particularly overseas countries such as the United States of America, Canada, Argentina, New Zealand, and Australia. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper aims to identify evidence of any potential costs of preferential liberalisation of trade in goods between the EU and Australia, notably trade diversion; move beyond Australia's exports of commodities to the EU to look for evidence of competitiveness in high-value-added manufactures; and identify evidence of the potential for deep integration that might be promoted by a formal FTA using the Sussex Framework for analysing economic integration and TradeSift software. It concludes that costs of trade Diversion are unlikely to be large; that there is the potential for a mutual recognition agreement to encourage deep integration in areas of high value added manufactures; but that it might require a formal free trade agreement to give the institutional framework to allow mutual recognition to work. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: The liberalisation of agricultural trade is strongly contested as an international policy project. In the context of the current World Trade Organisation (WTO) Doha trade round, concerns revolve around the implications of freer trade for rural livelihoods and environments. Analysis of this complex and morally charged issue offers important insights into the nature of resistance to the neoliberal agenda. This resistance has been expressed in terms of perceived threats to the ‘multifunctionality’ of agriculture and its ability to provide public environmental and social benefits. We focus specifically on Australia and the European Union (EU), key players in the WTO process but diametrically opposed in their embrace of, or resistance to, agricultural neoliberalisation. While the EU has sought to maintain trade barriers in order to protect both marginal areas and the market advantages derived from a heavily-subsidised, productivist agriculture, Australia relies on ‘competitive productivism’ – unsubsidised, highly productive agriculture – to win markets. There is nevertheless evidence that the compatibility of market rule with agri-environmental (and, to a lesser extent, social) sustainability is being contested in both Australia and the EU, particularly at the regional scale. The nature and terms of this contestation are different, however, given the radically divergent macro-economic and socio-political contexts in which it is being framed. The debate about the socio-environmental implications of market opening within the agriculturally protectionist environment of the EU is largely anticipatory and risk-averting, while in the already market-exposed Australian context it is increasingly compensatory and harm-minimising. In this paper, we argue that neoliberalisation as a policy agenda is reshaped in different states and regions through processes of resistance and accommodation arising from particular geographical, historical, political and institutional contexts, and as a response to crises. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

This paper utilises a bilateral bargaining approach as an explanatory framework for understanding how New Zealand and Australia have conducted their trade policy towards the United States and the European Union. Though alternatives like neo realism and liberal institutionalism have some value for explaining bilateral outcomes between the strong and the weak, the bilateral bargaining approach takes us further by showing how and why the negotiation process can potentially adjust outcomes in favour of weaker states. New Zealand and Australia have sought to exploit such opportunities through the application of three important bilateral strategies: informing tactics; coalition-building; and the execution of formal agreements. Differences in their bilateral bargaining approaches are informed by reference to their commercial history and respective interests, as well as cognitive factors. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Economic relations between Australia and the European Union (EU) have always been strong, but they have not always been easy. They have been difficult for Australia because it associated the EU with the loss of the UK preferential export market on its entry into the then European Economic Community. And because Australia associated the EU with the original Common Agricultural Policy, which combined subsidies for agricultural production and high agricultural tariffs to make Australian agricultural exports not competitive. They have been difficult for the EU also. Australia developed a biosecurity system to protect its agricultural sector: quarantine requirements and food safety standards made the importation of EU plant and animal products too costly. Yet Australia and the EU need each other. The EU, which is Australia’s largest services trade and investment partner, supplies the business services that drive a knowledge economy and provides the credit to finance economic development. Correspondingly, the EU needs Australia both as a commercial base in Asia and as a reliable energy supplier. This article analyses the drivers and difficulties in the economic relationship between Australia and the EU as they start negotiations for a free trade agreement. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article critically examines EU-Australia relations through the negotiation of the 1994 and 2008 Agreements between Australia and the European Community on Trade in Wine. EU-Australia relations are often characterised as defined by Australia's focus on the UK and the EU's agricultural policies. This article moves beyond these assumptions and analyses the negotiation of the wine trade agreements through three factors: the pattern of political institutions, power asymmetry and subjective utility of non-agreement alternatives. It argues that perceptions, miscalculations, and misunderstanding have had an impact on how these factors shaped negotiation outcomes. These negotiations are an under-studied case in the development of EU-Australian relations, and are useful in understanding how the perceptions of negotiators shape outcomes in the EU's negotiations with Australia. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Australian Journal of International Affairs is the property of Routledge 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.)

Many scholars have mounted convincing cases that the engagement of Australia and the European Union (EU) has been characterised by skirmishes regarding the Common Agricultural Policy and its distortion of world markets, and lack of Australian access to EU markets. This article illustrates that agricultural and agri-food trade constitutes a relatively small portion of Australia–EU trade flows; that Australia exports more goods to the EU than in the past; and that, in some agri-food sectors, it exports more goods to the EU than the EU does to Australia. Further, it argues that conflict and competition regarding the Common Agricultural Policy need to be understood in the broader context of world trade and in the context of a new and deeper engagement between the two interlocutors. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Disagreements are a natural and inevitable part of any substantial relationship. This is particularly true in the area of international trade, where national interests and the domestic commercial objectives with which they are closely aligned often come into conflict with the interests of trading partners. Because disagreements are inevitable, trade agreements usually provide a framework for resolution of disputes. However, the typical dispute settlement framework established in trade agreements seldom captures the imagination of the business community. Indeed, public international law frameworks for trade dispute settlement tend not to be used for anything other than disputes of the largest magnitude or where there is a deep political issue that is otherwise insoluble. This article argues that such an approach to the crafting of dispute clauses in trade agreements is a missed opportunity. It suggests that, in the context of the relationship between Australia and the European Union, there is potential to develop a range of different approaches to address problems in an effective and accessible manner. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article presents the revised agreement between Australia and the European Community (EC) on Trade in Wine which addresses issues on wine-making practices, labelling rules and brand protection. It discusses the issues faced by the Australian wine industry, European Union market reforms, and the Australian Wine and Brandy Corporation Amendment Act 2010. The article concludes that Australia is justified in extending the agreement since it will secure access between the two markets.

This article examines the problems and challenges which confronted the Australian government in its response to Britain’s second attempt to join the European Economic Community (EEC) in 1967. While an adequate body of literature exists on Australia’s policy towards Britain’s first application to the EEC (1961–63), the Australian government’s response to the 1967 bid has been completely ignored by historians. This article, therefore, aims to make a historical contribution to the understanding of Australia’s policy towards Britain’s ‘turn to Europe’. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Shared interests between Australia and the European Union (EU) in multilateral trade negotiations are increasing. However, the relationship in the WTO continues to be defined by conflicts over agriculture. This article examines the case for closer Australia-EU co-operation on shared interests in WTO negotiations while continuing to press for more rapid reform of EU agriculture policies. It traces the major changes in the interface between Australia and the EU in the WTO, including the re-structuring of the Australian economy over the past two decades and the more recent efforts by the EU to modify the trade impact of the Common Agriculture Policy (CAP) on world agriculture trade. The article concludes that closer co-operation between Australia and the EU in the WTO on shared interests would enhance Australia's influence in the multilateral trade system. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Disaggregated trade data are used to examine changing trade patterns for five developed economic regions: the USA, the European Union, Australia, Canada and Japan. This study covers the 1980-1997 time period, during which international trade for most goods faced less border protection. Changing trade patterns are found for the USA, Japan, and the EU, while persistent trade patterns are observed for Australia and Canada. Classifying goods into four groups, trade patterns found in manufactured goods were the most dynamic, and trade in bulk agricultural goods the most persistent. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article examines the use of the system of mutual recognition, harmonization and qualified majority voting in the European Union (EU) and Australia as a means to the greater understanding of the impact of globalization in relation to policy convergence. It is argued that the Australian adoption of mutual recognition, based on the EU model, was an example of policy convergence, although the extent of convergence was variable. It is further argued that the convergence was, in part, influenced by globalization. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]