Sustainable Development in EU–Asia Trade Relations

Nessel, Camille; Orbie, Jan

doi:10.1007/978-3-030-81281-2_9

Cited by 8 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 35 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Since the mid-2000s, EU FTAs have entailed TSD chapters (Harrison et al 2019). These chapters continue the logic of the GSP regarding the commitment of FTA signatories to international conventions including eight labour conventions and seven to nine multilateral environmental agreements (Nessel & Orbie 2022). However, unlike the GSP, TSD chapters constitute a 'soft instrument' as they embrace dialogue instead of suspension in case of violation of these commitments.…”

Section: Trade and Sustainable Development Chapters In Free Trade Agr...mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In this scholarly debate, one sees a dominance of positivist research and problematic historical, epistemic and culturalist avatars of Eurocentrism. The extensive literature on TSD chapters generally starts by pointing out the special character of the EU as a normative power in international trade (Poletti & Sicurelli 2018;Nessel & Orbie 2022). From this starting point, the works quickly move to a discussion on the effectiveness of these clauses in third countries (Hradilova & Svoboda 2018;Roozendaal 2019), with a traditionally mandatory opposition of EU-US approaches (Van den Putte 2015; Portella 2021).…”

Section: Trade and Sustainable Development Chapters In Free Trade Agr...mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

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: Trade and Sustainable Development Chapters In Free Trade Agr...mentioning

confidence: 99%