Search

Two main issues are addressed in this article in the context of rule of law in the European Union and the World Trade Organization. The first issue is the role citizens can play in shaping sustainable trade. Sustainability constitutes a principal concern for various regimes that, because of their nature, are in constant interaction with climate change. The second issue this paper investigates is the potential role of international trade in reducing fossil-fuel consumption. The use of fossil fuels contributes to climate change, so there is no excuse for continued inaction. We argue that, in light of the lack of international consensus on how to effectively tackle climate change, an upstream carbon tax with reinvestment supported by border tax adjustments should be enacted unilaterally by the biggest emitters of green-house gases to reduce fossil-fuel consumption and incentivise global carbon abatement.

This EUCROSS working paper analyzes European Union-China trade relations in the context of the current negotiations for a new comprehensive framework agreement between the European Union (EU) and the People’s Republic of China. China is a strong economic power with increasingly sophisticated production in its coastal regions and is attempting to establish itself as a gravity center by concluding many bilateral free-trade agreements in the region. Although China has a strong hold in the Far East, there may be specific policy areas in which China’s influence ends up being global. The paper is divided into six parts. After the introduction, Part II explains the steps taken for negotiating a new comprehensive framework agreement between China and the European Union. Part III is devoted to EU-China trade relations, and Part IV to the bilateral trade relations from a Chinese perspective. Part V examines the various ways to improve the currently difficult EU-China trade relation, followed by the conclusions in Part VI. The paper concludes that dealing with China was one of the main arguments in favour of ratifying the Treaty of Lisbon because it provides for a permanent president of the European Council and a single foreign affairs post for the entire EU, which facilitates the EU’s coherence in its external affairs. Moreover, the paper concludes that the European Commission should negotiate the prospective Partnership and Cooperation Agreement between the EU and China more constructively, without patronizing, and instead accept China as an equal player in the current multipolar framework of global economic governance.

This chapter provides an analysis of bilateral, regional, and multilateral energy investment treaties. The argument is that, although investment is a major issue for energy production, in relation to the global governance of energy investments, there is no overarching regime. In fact, without access to energy, our daily lives would collapse. No truly universal investment framework exists, let alone one concerned with global investment protection in energy. What one might imagine to exist is a putative composite framework constituted by various independent elements. The international community is neither monolithic nor homogenous; it is made up of numerous States that could broadly be lumped together in different groups in relation to their economic strength and levels of industrialization/development. In that respect, the interests of least or less developed countries on the question, say, of foreign investment interests protection had, in the past, not been identical to those of the developed world. This is less the case now, following the end of the Cold War, where it appears that, whatever misgivings existed on the part of the less industrialized world about capitalist-based paths to development seem to have subsided, given that States in the less industrialized world seek to outcompete one another in their quest to attract foreign direct investment and to further integrate into the global economy.

The current international energy trade governance system is fragmented and multi-layered. Streamlining it for greater legal cohesiveness and international political and economic cooperation would promote global energy security. The current article explores three levels of energy trade governance: multilateral, regional and bilateral. Most energy-rich countries are part of the multilateral trading system, which is institutionalized by the World Trade Organization (WTO). The article analyzes the multilateral energy trade governance system by focusing on the WTO and energy transportation issues. Regionally, the article focuses on five major regional agreements and their energy-related aspects and examines the various causes that explain the proliferation of regional trade agreements, their compatibility with WTO law, and then provides several examples of regional energy trade governance throughout the world. When it comes to bilateral energy trade governance, this article only addresses the European Union’s (EU) bilateral energy trade relations. The article explores ways in which gaps could be filled and overlaps eliminated whilst remaining true to the high-level normative framework, concentrating on those measures that would enhance EU energy security.

Energy security is one of the main problems that humanity faces today and the European Union (EU) has to rely on energy-rich countries for its energy needs. The European Innovation Union, the Energy Community, and the Europe 2020 initiative address energy security as a priority, but policies seem to be reactive instead of addressing energy security in its complexity. This problem can be solved with appropriate legal tools. Energy governance has links with several policies: trade, investment, environmental protection, energy transit, energy security, finance, et cetera. Of these policies, energy trade has a high impact for European energy security policy. Currently, the international community does not address trade in energy as a cohesive entity and its governance is fragmented. The paper explores the institutional legal framework for the creation of a European energy union, whose aim is to achieve affordable, secure and sustainable energy. This energy union is based on five pillars, which are analyzed: security, solidarity and trust; the completion of a competitive internal market; moderation of demand; the decarbonization of the EU energy mix (i.e., greater use of renewable energy); and technologies. The EU is the first region in the world to set up the ambitious target of decarbonizing its economy by 2050. The paper then looks at the energy union in the context of the rule of law. All of this could be reproduced in other regions of the world and eventually create a new international energy order. This requires a fresh and comprehensive approach to legal instruments.

The aim of this article is to map out the governance of renewable energy and argues that effective renewable energy governance at the international and European level has become a major challenge of public international law and European Union (EU) law. The article first analyzes renewable energy governance in the context of the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change. It then examines the various international energy bodies that deal with the governance of renewables and deals with renewables in specific sectors of international/supranational law and policy, namely the sustainable development goals and multilateral development banks in the context of economic development, the G7 and the G20, international trade and, lastly, the European Union’s renewables legislation and policies, as examples of the most committed region in the world to renewable energy. This article concludes with a number of questions for further legal research resulting from the broad array of activity concerning renewables in EU law, international law, and international organizations.

This chapter examines the case of unconventional fossil fuels in the European Union (EU) and China. Recent developments in the extraction of energy from unconventional fossil fuels will have consequences for the governance of global energy trade and European energy security. When it comes to trading energy, there is a clear difference between oil and gas, in that oil can be easily transported, whereas gas needs to be liquefied or transported through pipelines and, consequently, the technological and political challenges are higher for gas than they are for oil. The chapter’s main argument is that shale gas and shale oil will revolutionise world energy politics and economics. Irrespective of whether environmentally acceptable extraction technologies and political consensus for the extraction of unconventional fossil fuel sources in Europe can be found, the EU will be unable to avoid its impacts on global energy markets and will have to adapt EU internal and external energy policies accordingly. Since the entry into force of the Lisbon Treaty in 2009, the EU’s internal and external governance framework has evolved; however, EU energy policy is only partially ready for the unconventional energy revolution. The EU has taken remarkable steps towards addressing its Member States’ respective energy security in a more cohesive manner, although issues do exist in terms of the distinct energy interests of EU Member States that undermine cohesive EU action.

This chapter provides an analysis on the links of climate change, energy, and international trade, specifically from the perspective of the EU’s external relations. The chapter first analyzes the links between these three sectors (climate change, energy, and trade). It then examines the environmental language in EU free-trade agreements. Finally, and before the conclusions, it looks at obstacles that explain the lack of coordination between environmental and trade agreements.

This chapter presents an analysis of sustainable development goals in the context of two mega-regional trade agreements: the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) and the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP). These preferential trade agreements present a more efficient vehicle by which to promote sustainable development than the multilateral trading platform. The chapter discusses sustainable development and energy within the proposed TTIP. The TTIP aims to further economic growth, investment and trade between the United States and the European Union (EU), and could potentially have a very large impact as the U.S.-EU trade and investment flows are sizeable and a critical element in global commerce. The chapter argues that the TTIP has the potential to foster sustainable development, energy efficiency, and energy security.The chapter explores the topic of sustainable development, reporting the stated trade and TTIP-specific goals of both the United States and the EU, which generally includes the promotion of sustainable development. An examination of the three pillars of sustainable development— environmental protection, economic sustainability, and social sustainability — follows, discussing ways in which the TTIP could integrate terms ensuring protection and support of these elements. The chapter then focuses on the role that energy could play for the TTIP. It discusses support schemes and initiatives it could include to increase trade in raw materials and natural resources such as natural gas, and in energy efficiency and renewable energy technologies. The chapter finally examines the environment chapter of the TPP and explores how sustainable the TPP is by analyzing the various provisions of the TPP’s environment chapter.

Energy security remains a vital issue for the European Union (EU), even more so in the wake of the events that unfolded in early 2014 in Ukraine. The EU's already fragile position in the international energy arena in terms of security of supply appears to be more uncertain than ever after its umpteenth fallout with its historic energy supplier, Russia. This situation is untenable and calls for swift and decisive action to adequately tackle the issue once and for all. The article looks at the creation of a single EU energy market through the integration of energy networks in the EU. This article then examines various ways to diversify its energy supply, whether through increasing the import of liquefied natural gas or through its relations with the Eurasian Union. It then explores the International Energy Charter as an example of the EU's engagement with transnational policy networks. It concludes that from energy transit, to technology transfer, to investment protection, energy and trade present interplay...

This chapter provides an analysis of natural gas as a resource that can enhance energy security in the European Union (EU). To set the scene, the section “The Gas Exporting Countries Forum” gives an overview of the Gas Exporting Countries Forum as an example of the gas oligopoly in today’s market. The section “A Primer on Natural Gas Transportation and Shale Gas Extraction” shows the basics of natural gas transportation and shale gas extraction, whereas sections “More Imports of LNG Will Diversify EU Energy Supplies” and “US Shale Gas Revolution: Implications for EU Energy Security Enhancement” provide an analysis of how the EU can increase its imports of liquefied natural gas (LNG) to diversify its energy supplies and what the implications of the US shale gas revolution are for EU energy security. The final section concludes the chapter.

In the context of a current global economic crisis and an unfinished World Trade Organization (WTO) Doha Round, multilateralism is at its weakest point. The proliferation of bilateral and regional trade agreements seems to be the natural consequence of failed multilateralism. In this difficult context, this paper argues that China—one of the three global economic superpowers—has an opportunity to lead the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership. For the past decade, China’s position as a strong player in international trade has been remarkable. Structural reforms in China, including trade liberalization, have resulted in annual real GDP growth rates in excess of 10 % over the past few years, rising per capita income and poverty reduction. In the process, China has become one of the world’s largest traders. China attempts to establish itself as a gravity center in Asia by concluding many politically motivated bilateral free-trade agreements in the region. In this sense, the paper argues that China’s trade policy strategy is the creation of a powerful Asian trading bloc, given China’s strong position in Asia. In fact, few regional initiatives are undertaken by other countries without first considering what China thinks or how China might react. If multilateralism continues to weaken, the likelihood of a Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership led by China within the next decade is very high as part of China’s strategy of promoting regional identity. Should this crystallize, one could envisage a tripolar global trade regime with a new Asian pole to counteract the already existing power centers in the European Union and the U.S. Furthermore, China’s policy towards regional trade agreements will have a major impact on the international trading system, the debate about regionalism and multilateralism, and the policy of the WTO concerning regional trade agreements.

The conservation of exhaustible natural resources constitutes a prominent linkage and one of the ongoing debates in the relationship between trade liberalization and environmental sustainability. Indeed, the recognition of this linkage was embodied as an important exception to the rules of the GATT, which justifies a violating measure related “to the conservation of exhaustible natural resources”. The trade dispute settlement tribunals have remarkable experience in handling debates concerning the application of this crucial exception. However, the various decisions that were held in these debates have not yet examined the application of the exception to the interaction between trade and the conservation of oil as an exhaustible natural resource. This paper argues that the decisions of the dispute settlement systems of the GATT and WTO have limited and narrowed the scope of conserving exhaustible natural resources within the trade regime and, most probably, they would restrict the protection of oil resources in any future dispute. This paper will examine the various decisions relating to the tensions between trade and the conservation of exhaustible natural resources. It will demonstrate that the GATT and WTO tribunals focused the discussion of conserving exhaustible natural resources on the exceptions and not on the rules, and that they narrowed the application of the trade exception. It is most likely that this approach will limit the protection of any future oil-conserving measure.

This chapter assesses the role that energy plays in the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) negotiations and the growing importance that energy security is acquiring in the US–European Union (EU) political agenda. It analyses the potential effects that the liberalization of trade in energy and raw materials is supposed to exert in both economies and the way in which the so-called US shale gas revolution will drive major changes in the commercialization of energy products. The chapter illustrates the main problematic aspects currently under discussion regarding the application of the TTIP to the energy sector. Lastly, it discusses how divestment campaigns might constitute a valid instrument of sociopolitical pressure to induce energy companies and governments to adopt more ethical and environmentally friendly policies.

This article argues that the Kyoto Protocol to the 1992 Framework Convention on Climate Change was doomed to face difficulties ab initio. Moving the climate change agenda forward multilaterally among the 195 parties to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) is proving to be a serious challenge. The lack of progress in UNFCCC negotiations in recent years, especially the failure to obtain an international agreement on emissions limitations targets and timetables by all major developed and developing country emitters, has led many to question whether the UNFCCC is, in fact, the best and most effective forum for mobilizing a global response to climate change. The current approach to negotiating a comprehensive, universal, and legally binding global agreement on climate change is unlikely to succeed. The article concludes that no breakthroughs will take place regarding a global climate change agreement until there is more political maturity on the side of the U.S., and until rapidly emerging economies such as China and India indicate that they are ready to play their part in tackling the climate change challenge, since they are part of the solution. Large emitters of GHG need to be involved for negotiations to come to a conclusion. Much progress is still needed until we reach an international agreement that covers all the world’s countries and that is strong enough to tackle climate change effectively and is equitable enough to gain the sympathy of all countries.

Although climate change is a truly global issue, for the purposes of this article only two main players in the global climate change negotiations will be analyzed: the European Union (EU) and China. Each one of them is geographically and socially diverse, which is taken into account when analyzing them. China and the EU are the world’s first and third largest emitters of CO2 respectively in absolute terms, and the EU has some of the strongest domestic support to address the climate change challenge. In the bilateral relations between China and the EU, climate change is an important part of the agenda. Both parties are keen to improve the climate situation globally. The article first analyzes the Chinese position in climate negotiations. It then deals with the EU’s position by analyzing the EU’s greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions cuts and emissions trading scheme.

This paper argues that China’s attitude to multilateral trade is unclear. Moreover, China assumes little responsibility to maintain international order in global economic governance. In other words, China should hide less behind the status of a developing country and stand up to its own ambition to new leadership. For example, China seems to go against “traditional” powers (mainly the U.S.), and tends to focus on South-South regionalism.1 The results of the July 2008 World Trade Organization (WTO) miniministerial conference, composed of a trade G-7,2 are evidence of this. At the miniministerial, WTO members’ latest attempt to salvage a deal in the Doha round broke down. Import-sensitive China and India were pitted against the U.S.’s demands for predictable market access for farm products.3

This paper aims at understanding the potential of partnerships of the European Union (EU) with emergent global actors (the so-called new leading powers (NLP) or BRIC countries1), focusing on international trade law and policy. Although the power base of these actors (Brazil, Russia, India, and China – the BRIC countries) is their respective region (South America for the case of Brazil, Eastern Europe for Russia, the Subcontinent for India, and the Far East for China),2 there may be specific policy areas in which their influence might be global.3 With this in mind, the paper raises interesting questions: is the EU an attractive trade partner for the new leading powers? Does the EU want cooperation with the BRIC countries? What can the EU expect from cooperation with the BRIC countries? What are the characteristics of these partners? What are the EU's priorities in its foreign trade policy? With which partners should the EU cooperate in which policy areas? With which instruments can the EU engage these partners and how can the EU internal coordination be ensured?

This paper analyses the potential of partnerships of the European Union (EU) with two of the so-called BRIC countries, i.e., Brazil and India. The scope of analysis will be the EU vis-a-vis these two countries, using two types of trade liberalisation: bilateralism/regionalism and multilateralism. The paper argues that the EU's objective of engaging with Brazil and India is to establish peace, security and prosperity in the 21st century. The paper also argues that there remains substantial scope for Brazil and India to make further commitments towards greater liberalisation within the services sectors and within all modes of supply provided in the General Agreement on Trade in Services. It will also be argued that the attitude of Brazil and India to multilateralism and responsibility in global governance is questionable or unclear. Both countries want to become more important players; yet, they seem to lean against 'old' powers (mainly the US) and tend to focus on South-South regionalism.

In this paper, I address the issue of European Union (EU) Member States' participation in the World Trade Organization (WTO) after the EU Reform Treaty enters into force. In Giuliano Amato's view, no member of the EU is powerful enough to be taken seriously on its own in the international arena. Thus, in order to play an effective role in the world, the EU must join together. In this sense, coordinating its foreign trade policies and streamlining the process was one of Amato's major ambitions during the Convention on the future of Europe. If Amato's ambitions were to materialize, it would therefore be correct to interpret that EU Member States will no longer participate in the WTO forum because the EU Constitutional and Reform Treaties give exclusive competence to the EU in all areas of trade policy. However, how do we reconcile the fact that the EC and its Member States are currently members of the WTO, but after the EU Constitutional Treaty or its successor, the Reform Treaty, the EU will have exclusive competence in all trade matters? Aren't EU Member States sovereign states? Once the EU Reform Treaty is in force, how will the current polycephalous physiognomy of the EU in the WTO change? Will it make a difference? Will the EU become monocephalous in international trade negotiations, i.e., a sole trade actor? What will its implications be? Will EU Member States disappear from international trade fora? Is the EU becoming a federation of States when it comes to trade policy?

The multilateral trade system aims at the eventual total liberalization of cross-border trade through the removal of as many trade barriers – such as tariffs, quantitative restrictions, and trade-distortive practices – as may be politically acceptable to the economic areas involved. For their part, the governing structures of the economic areas concerned – for the most part, the governments of sovereign States – are faced with the task of addressing a much broader set of interests than those pertaining to trade. However, the accession of sovereign actors and regional economic unions (such as the European Union) to international treaty-based organizations, such as the World Trade Organization (WTO), and their acceptance of the relevant international obligations, often commensurately condition their policy-making. In that respect, it is not uncommon for, say, certain measures that WTO members take in order to address some subjective policy objective that is, on the face of it, extraneous to cross-border trade, to infringe upon their international obligations – for instance, such measures may infringe upon obligations owed by WTO members under their WTO membership in a manner that is not in line with WTO rules. On the occasion of recent WTO cases that contain findings against Canada in relation to a regional measure aimed at the promotion of renewable energy, it may be pertinent to examine the degree to which the existing WTO normative framework may permit its members policy space to take measures aimed at promoting renewable energy. To that end, we provide a tour d’horizon of the WTO rules that are likely to be engaged by such policies. As part of this, we examine the GATT/WTO system’s evolved responsiveness towards environmental objectives. Finally, we highlight whatever perceived systemic obstacles might exist to the meaningful bridging of the WTO’s environmental objectives with its core trade liberalization objectives. In conclusion, we find the stronger view to be that the relevant WTO jurisprudence appears to suggest that the WTO system is being fully and effectively used on the part of members in relation to their environmental objectives, and that members’ bona fide environmentally-focused measures that, incidentally, distort or otherwise restrict cross-border trade are ultimately upheld by the WTO system so long as they are bona fide, applied evenhandedly, and not unduly restrictive. That said, while the system, as it stands, is considerably flexible towards ‘externalities’ such as environmental protection objectives, further trade liberalization remains the system’s principal objective. This, however, does not happen in a policy-value vacuum, given that the cause of trade liberalization is increasingly conditioned by environmental protection objectives.

The authors discuss the ambiguities surrounding allusions often made to global energy governance, focusing mainly on the question of energy transit. They discuss how the issue has been sanctioned in various regimes in international law (including the UN Convention on the Law of the Seas, the Energy Charter Treaty and Article V of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade). They go further to expatiate on the complexities of this governance regime that is rendered even more convoluted by regional energy transit provisions included in important regional treaties such as those of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), the Association of Southeast Asian Nations and the European Union (EU).

This article is an attempt to a thorough analysis of the EC's current law and policy in the field of international trade. It deals with the existing EC's common commercial policy competence from the Treaty of Nice up to the European Convention's days. Thus, a policy and legal analysis of EC trade policy is provided to diagnose whether changes made to Article 133 EC are adequate to the current needs of the EC in the international trade forum. It concludes that stagnation continues to be present, and there seems to be a revival of the ERTA principle.

The legal aspects at the junction of interstate energy cooperation have become increasingly important in a world that is hungry for energy security. This book focuses on selected legal issues relating to international energy governance. International law as it stands today is not well equipped to handle international energy governance issues fully. This legal deficiency affects energy security negatively. If the currently fragmented and multi-layered international energy governance regime were streamlined for greater legal cohesiveness and international political and economic cooperation, it would promote energy security. Some chapters of the book take a broader view on interstate energy cooperation, such as energy transit, energy market liberalization and energy investment. Others focus on specific areas of such cooperation, such as trade and energy; trade, environment and energy; and energy exploration and maritime delimitation disputes. The book also presents an analysis of European Union energy governance and renewable energy.

This chapter proposes the introduction of a regional model for promoting climate change mitigation as an alternative to the present structure of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC)/Kyoto Protocol framework. Given the proliferation of Preferential Trade Agreements (PTAs), especially in the form of bilateral treaties, in the international trading system, the chapter advocates creating PTAs with strong climate change chapters, thus embedding climate goals within bilateral/trilateral/plurilateral trade agreements. Involving major greenhouse gas (GHG) emitters through PTAs, which include climate chapters, can be an effective avenue towards reducing GHG emissions, and could therefore facilitate the ultimate goal of creating an effective global climate regime. The chapter explains why countries are slowly moving away from multilateralism and proposes increasing and improving environmental protection aspects within trade agreements. It suggests how to do it and which proposed PTAs would be most suitable for the suggested proposition to be successful. Keywords: environmental protection; greenhouse gas (GHG); Kyoto Protocol; multilateralism; Preferential Trade Agreements (PTAs); trade agreements; UNFCCC

This chapter addresses the General Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS) in relation to temporary migration policy. It is argued that Mode 4 of the GATS remains essentially subject to strict domestic regulations and limitations. Yet, many countries accept the importance of temporary migration as a necessary element to become more competitive in a knowledge-based society. In the European Union (EU), for example, a new global approach is needed so that migration strikes the right balance amidst the risk of labor market shortages, economic impacts, negative social consequences, integration policies, and external policy objectives. Moreover, the changing demands of an ageing society and a labor market in constant evolution have challenged established assumptions about migration from outside the EU. Therefore, it is argued that the EU needs more temporary migration from an economic point of view.The movement of people has increased markedly in recent decades, with international migration doubling since 1975. However, migration patterns today are very different from those in previous cycles of globalization. Temporary migration, which is often work-related, has increased across the countries of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development over the past two decades, and migration of highly-skilled people has also become much more common. As competitiveness is increasingly shaped by a country’s ability to attract and retain a skilled workforce, competition among countries for highly-skilled workers is likely to continue to increase.

This chapter addresses the current World Trade Organization (WTO) negotiations on trade in services in the framework of Doha Development Agenda (DDA), and analyzes the legal implications that these services negotiations have for European Community (EC) in the world trading system. It can be seen that the substance and nature of services negotiations in Doha Round are quite different from those of the Uruguay Round: the latter laid the ground rules for trade in services in General Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS); the former is about extending liberalization and complementing those ground rules. The chapter analyzes the consequences of the Nice Treaty reform of Article 133 EC in relation to trade in services. It explores the position of EC in the WTO generally, and in the Doha Development Agenda more specifically, as well as the trade position adopted by EC and its Member States in the new services negotiations. Keywords: Doha Development Agenda (DDA); Doha round; European Community (EC); General Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS); Nice Treaty; trade in services; World Trade Organization (WTO); world trading system

This timely book examines international trade and investment law at various levels of governance, including unilateral, bilateral, regional, and multilateral arrangements.

This paper argues that China’s attitude to multilateral trade is unclear. Moreover, China assumes little responsibility to maintain international order in global economic governance. Furthermore, this paper argues that China should hide less behind the status of a developing country and stand up to its own ambition to new leadership. The paper is divided into eight parts. After the introduction, Part II deals with the criteria to be a global economic superpower, making the case that China is one of the three global economic superpowers today (the U.S. and the European Union (EU) being the other two). Part III examines China’s attitude toward multilateral trade, making the case for China’s preference for regionalism, and analyzes China’s position at the WTO. Part IV examines the current EU-China relations by analyzing the steps taken for negotiating a prospective and comprehensive Partnership and Cooperation Agreement between the two parties. Part V is devoted to EU-China trade relations and Part VI to the bilateral trade relations from a Chinese perspective. Part VII, before the conclusions in Part VIII, examines the various ways to improve the currently difficult EU-China trade relations.

This chapter tackles the complex issue of the prognosis of the European Union (EU) in the world trading system and provides a view into the near future for finding better ways to use EC trade policy in global context. It analyses the EU Constitutional Treaty on EU trade policy as a background for understanding the EC's present role in WTO framework. The chapter explores a clear tension in decision-making processes of EC commercial policy, and analyses the criticism the EU has received for its commercial policy: that it is unable to negotiate without internal agreement and incapable of negotiating with one voice, due to a constraining mandate. It concludes that the role of the national Parliaments of Member States and the European Parliament should grow in order for the EU Constitutional Treaty to be part of the optimal solution to the trade-off of efficiency versus accountability in trade policy decision-making. Keywords: commercial policy; decision-making processes; European Communities (EC); European Parliament; European Union (EU) Constitutional Treaty; trade policy; world trading system

This paper analyzes the potential of partnerships of the European Union (EU) with Brazil. The scope of analysis will be the EU vis-a-vis Brazil using three types of trade liberalization: unilateralism, bilateralism/regionalism, and multilateralism. The paper argues that the EU's objective of engaging with Brazil is to establish peace, security, and prosperity in the XXI century. The paper also argues that there remains substantial scope for Brazil to make further commitments towards greater liberalization within the services sectors and within all modes of supply provided in the General Agreement on Trade in Services. It will also be argued that the attitude of Brazil to multilateralism and responsibility in global governance is questionable or unclear. Brazil wants to become a more important player; yet, it seems to lean against traditional powers (mainly the U.S.), and tends to focus on South-South regionalism.

This article deals with international trade law at various levels of governance. Multilateralism has dominated international relations in the various fields of international economic law such as international trade law and international monetary law after World War II - thereby giving birth to the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT)/Word Trade Organization (WTO) and to the International Monetary Fund, respectively. At first, international trade agreements were bilateral. Then came the GATT 1947, which multilateralized bilateral trade agreements. Years later, international trade law saw the collapse of multilateralism in 1979, which broke down during the Tokyo Round of multilateral trade negotiations. A series of new plurilateral (or selectively multilateral) agreements were adopted during the Tokyo Round, which caused a fragmentation of the multilateral trading system. In 1994, international trade law was again multilateralized with the WTO Agreement. This article suggests variable geometry (that is, the idea that only a few WTO Members will benefit from plurilateral agreements on several topics on the agenda) and sectoral agreements as the way forward to unblock the multilateral trading system. The variable-geometry approach has the advantage of removing the current frustration at the WTO negotiating table - and sometimes violent protests organized by civil society - with its slow negotiating pace.

The Lisbon Treaty tries to improve efficiency and accountability in European Union (EU) trade policy making. This paper recognises the validity of the EU member states' misgivings about giving too prominent a role to the European Commission. Have we reached an adequate institutional balance in European Community (EC) trade policy after the Lisbon Treaty reforms?

This paper analyses the potential of partnerships of the European Union (EU) with two of the so-called BRIC countries, i.e., Brazil and India. The scope of analysis will be the EU vis-a-vis these two countries, using two types of trade liberalisation: bilateralism/regionalism and multilateralism. The paper argues that the EU's objective of engaging with Brazil and India is to establish peace, security and prosperity in the 21st century. The paper also argues that there remains substantial scope for Brazil and India to make further commitments towards greater liberalisation within the services sectors and within all modes of supply provided in the General Agreement on Trade in Services. It will also be argued that the attitude of Brazil and India to multilateralism and responsibility in global governance is questionable or unclear. Both countries want to become more important players; yet, they seem to lean against 'old' powers (mainly the US) and tend to focus on South-South regionalism.