Market Power Europe and new EU trade policies

Damro, Chad

doi:10.4337/9781783477760.00007

Cited by 6 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 16 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…: 3). Analytically, the entire compendium revolves around the concept of 'market power Europe' (Damro 2012). By adopting this framework, the emphasis is on tracing the 'export' of EU market rules and civilian norms through trade policies, including GSP.…”

Section: Generalised Scheme Of Preferencesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Decolonising EU Trade Relations with the Global Souths?

Alcazar III,

Nessel,

Orbie

2023

JCER

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

That the European Union’s common commercial relations with ex-colonies and more broadly the ‘tiers monde’ now rest variously on benevolence, depoliticised practices, equal partnerships and values fuels reigning foundational myths about the EU in global politics. Efforts to disrupt these received presuppositions have come from interpretivist, postcolonial, post-development, post-structuralist and other heterodox research traditions. Yet the academy has been largely impervious to knowledges that genuinely question and subvert, in both theory and praxis, Eurocentric ways of seeing the world and understanding the EU as a ‘benevolent’ trade actor on the world stage. In dialogue with existing heterodox approaches, this article asks how we might puncture the coloniality of dominant knowledge regimes about EU trade relations vis-à-vis the global souths, i.e., peoples and places that the EU deems peripheral and, as such, in need of trade-related interventions in the name of development. To this end, we propose different ‘subject-positions’ with which to unthink and rethink our ways of knowing EU trade policy and the Eurocentrism lurking behind it by turning to decolonial thought. We borrow heavily from the work of Meera Sabaratnam whose ‘decolonising strategies’ in studying world politics we attempt to exemplify through a critical interrogation of the canonical scholarship around three distinct ‘policy worlds’ of EU external trade relations: Economic Partnership Agreements (EPAs), Generalised Scheme of Preferences (GSP) and Trade and Sustainable Development (TSD) chapters in free trade agreements. Finally, we think reflexively about the decolonial option and the ruptures it triggers as to what EU trade policy is and the colonial logics sustaining ‘normative’ and ‘geopolitical’ narratives on/by the EU as a trade power.

show abstract

Section: Generalised Scheme Of Preferencesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Decolonising EU Trade Relations with the Global Souths?

Alcazar III,

Nessel,

Orbie

2023

JCER

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The basis for reducing GSP beneficiaries from 176 to 88 and for introducing the so-called "graduation" mechanism is to keep with the EU's claim of being "the world's major development actor". Rather than representing a move towards improving the value of trade preferences for the "economies most in need," there are however reasons to argue that the revision theoretically provides the EU with more leverage to pursue its commercial interests (Damro, 2015;De Bièvre & Poletti, 2013;De Gucht & Barnier, 2012;De Ville, Orbie, & Relations, 2014;Langan & Price, 2016;Larik, 2015). Whether these concerns are genuine is an empirical question whose answer largely determines whether, after Brexit, the United Kingdom continues with the existing specifics of the EU scheme or develops a more inclusive United Kingdom-specific GSP framework.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

An assessment of United Kingdom's trade with developing countries under the generalised system of preferences

Akinmade

Khorana

Adedoyin

2020

Journal of Public Affairs

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The European Union (EU) generalised system of preferences (GSP Scheme) grants preferential treatment to 88 eligible countries. There are, however, concerns that the restrictive features (such as rules of origin, low preference margin and low coverage) of the existing scheme indicate gravitation towards commercial trade agenda to which efficiency imperatives appear subordinated. Whether these concerns are genuine is an empirical question whose answer largely determines whether, after Brexit, the United Kingdom continues with the existing specifics of the EU scheme or develops a more inclusive United Kingdom‐specific GSP framework. This study quantitatively examines the efficiency of the EU GSP as it relates to United Kingdom beneficiaries from 2014 to 2017. We draw on the descriptive efficiency estimation (the utilisation rate, potential coverage rate and the utility rate) using import data across 88 beneficiary countries and agricultural products of the Harmonised System Code Chapter 1 to 24. Asides the Rules of Origin that, generally, harm the uptake of GSP, low preference margin is found to cause low utilisation rates in a non‐linear manner. Essentially, a more robust option (such that allows “global Cumulation” or broader product coverage) could, substantially, lower the existing barriers to trade and upsurge the efficiency of the GSP scheme.

show abstract

Working on Workers’ Rights: How the USA and the EU Govern Labor Standards Abroad

Oehri

2017

US and EU External Labor Governance

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Market Power Europe and new EU trade policies

Cited by 6 publications

References 16 publications

Decolonising EU Trade Relations with the Global Souths?

Decolonising EU Trade Relations with the Global Souths?

An assessment of United Kingdom's trade with developing countries under the generalised system of preferences

Working on Workers’ Rights: How the USA and the EU Govern Labor Standards Abroad

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About