The EU Deep Trade Agenda

Araujo, Billy A. Melo

doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198753384.001.0001

Cited by 36 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…When by the 1970s world tariffs became only a fraction of what they had been in the first years of the post-war period, other elements that hampered trade came into view, socalled 'non-tariff barriers' such as cross-national differences in regulation (Winslett, 2016). Especially since the Uruguay Round (1986)(1987)(1988)(1989)(1990)(1991)(1992)(1993)(1994) and the transformation of the GATT into the World Trade Organization (WTO), we have witnessed an increase in the scope, depth and legal bite of the international trade system (Araujo, 2016;Horn, Mavroidis, & Sapir, 2009). Trade negotiations had become more focused on 'behind-the-border barriers', while the meaning of what constitutes a trade 'barrier' expanded beyond clearly discriminatory policies (Lang, 2011, pp.…”

Section: Why Transparency Became An Issue In the Trade Systemmentioning

confidence: 99%

How Much Is Enough? Explaining the Continuous Transparency Conflict in TTIP

Gheyle

Ville

2017

PaG

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Transparency has been a central issue in the debate regarding the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP), especially on the side of the European Union (EU). The lack of transparency in the negotiating process has been one of the main criticisms of civil society organizations (CSOs). The European Commission (EC) has tried to gain support for the negotiations through various 'transparency initiatives'. Nonetheless, criticism by CSOs with regard to TTIP in general and the lack of transparency in specific remained prevalent. In this article, we explain this gap between various transparency initiatives implemented by the EC in TTIP and the expectations on the side of European CSOs. We perform a content analysis of position papers on transparency produced by CSOs, mainly in response to a European Ombudsman consultation, complemented by a number of official documents and targeted interviews. We find that the gap between the TTIP transparency initiatives and the expectations of CSOs can be explained by different views on what constitutes legitimate trade governance, and the role of transparency, participation, and accountability herein.

show abstract

Section: Why Transparency Became An Issue In the Trade Systemmentioning

confidence: 99%

How Much Is Enough? Explaining the Continuous Transparency Conflict in TTIP

Gheyle

Ville

2017

PaG

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This is particularly relevant considering the historical context of public procurement. Several countries have long used public procurement to address sustainability aspects, but the practice lost some momentum during the 1980s' neo-liberal influence when the state's power was reduced in favor of the private market (McCrudden, 2007;Melo Araujo, 2016). While municipalities are public institutions with sustainability goals, wholesalers are profit-driven companies, suggesting that the state's power through procuring authorities is still limited by market forces.…”

Section: Actor Relationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Sustainable public food procurement: criteria and actors’ roles and influence

Molin,

Lingegård,

Martin

et al. 2024

Front. Sustain. Food Syst.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Food production and consumption significantly contribute to climate change. The public sector, which procures large quantities of food, has a crucial role in steering toward more sustainable food systems. More empirical studies involving practitioners are called for to understand the complexity of sustainable public food procurement. This study examines how actors interpret and implement sustainability in food procurement, as well as their influence on this process. A comprehensive analysis of multi-actor collaboration and stakeholder engagement involving interviews with key actors such as procurement officers, wholesalers, chefs, and food producers is presented. Findings highlight a consensus on the need for sustainability measures, such as purchasing local and organic products. The results showcase the potential transformation of power dynamics within the supply chain in response to modifications in procurement standards toward local produce and the overuse of product-specific criteria. However, assuming that local is invariably sustainable carries the risk of falling into the “local trap” when the consequence of procuring local varies and requires further investigation. The influence of system-level factors, including market dynamics and regulatory frameworks, plays a significant role in implementing sustainable procurement, as well as alignment and coordination in the supply chain.

show abstract

“…The EU commits to more robust assertion of its economic interests, values and objectives, in particular in response to China. Due to the inadequacies and failures of the multilateral trade order, the EU, starting with the Global Europe Communication in 2006, had become more directed towards self‐centred motives of improving EU market access and shifted towards bilateralism in the form of deep and comprehensive free trade agreements (FTAs) (Gstöhl & De Bièvre, 2018; Melo Araujo, 2016; Siles‐Brügge, 2014; Smith, 2018). In view of new challenges, the EU changed its trade policy focus again, with a view to allowing the EU to reap the benefits of the international rules‐based trade, while having the right multilateral, bilateral, and unilateral tools to more assertively enforce its trade rights and to protect a level playing field.…”

Section: The Eu Trade Policy's Assertiveness Turnmentioning

confidence: 99%

The EU's strategic autonomy in times of politicisation of international trade: The future of commission accountability

Weiß

2023

Global Policy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Trade relations face unprecedented challenges, which has led to an increased politicisation and contestation of trade rules. In response, the EU has changed its trade policy under the motto ‘Open Strategic Autonomy’ towards a more assertive policy. The EU seeks to significantly expand its room of manoeuvre and to gain more autonomy by strengthening the enforcement of its trade rights and by ensuring more effectively, including unilaterally, a level playing field. This reorientation engenders several new or amended trade policy instruments, but meets with reservations as the renewed politicisation of EU trade policy will have internal consequences and raise demands for more democratic accountability of the European Commission. The new policy instruments will enlarge its leeway in trade policy. The future of the EU's multilateral, rule‐ instead of power‐oriented political stance becomes unclear, which might undermine its negotiation position in WTO reform and collide with the EU's respect for international law. The tensions of the EU's new hybrid approach with its international commitments even more fuel demands for increased accountability of the Commission as a safeguard against employing the new powers for protectionism and disrespect to international law. The contribution analyses the need for increased Commission accountability in the redirected trade policy.

show abstract

The EU Deep Trade Agenda

Cited by 36 publications

References 0 publications

How Much Is Enough? Explaining the Continuous Transparency Conflict in TTIP

How Much Is Enough? Explaining the Continuous Transparency Conflict in TTIP

Sustainable public food procurement: criteria and actors’ roles and influence

The EU's strategic autonomy in times of politicisation of international trade: The future of commission accountability

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About