The EU’s Deep Trade Agenda: Stumbling Block or Stepping Stone Towards Multilateral Liberalisation?

Abstract

In 2014, the global economic system celebrated two anniversaries: 70 years ago, on 22 July 1944 at Bretton Woods, New Hampshire, the Articles of Agreement of the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the Articles of Agreement of the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development (Worldbank) were adopted. Since then the global financial and monetary system has undergone significant policy changes, but the institutional framework remained the same. More recently, 20 years ago, on 15 April 1994, the Final Act of the Uruguay Round of Multilateral Trade Negotiations was signed and its key component, the Agreement establishing the World Trade Organization, entered into force on 1 January 1995. Even though the beginning of the multilateral trading system dates back to the late 1940s, the founding of the WTO constitutes a significant institutional reform that marks the beginning of a new era. Anniversaries are usually moments of celebration. However, even a superficial observer will notice that neither the current international financial and monetary regime nor the international trade regime is in a stage that invites celebration. Instead, both are facing difficult and fundamental challenges to their very existence not only from the outside but also from within. So while this may not be a time to celebrate, anniversaries are also often used for reflection about the past and the future. Hence, the European Yearbook of International Economic Law, itself celebrating its fifth volume in 2014, considers these two anniversaries the appropriate moment to reflect on the legacy and the current status of the two main pillars of International Economic Law. Apart from the two Distinguished Essays, the special focus sections of this volume consist of contributions by researchers who replied to a call for papers that the editors of the yearbook issued in 2012. This format gave us the opportunity to include papers written by "new voices" in the field, i.e. researchers at the early stages of their career, who approach the issues debated in this volume with fresh and innovative thoughts. As a consequence of the call for papers, the content of this volume is supply-rather than demand-driven but puts the spot on some issues that might otherwise not have been included in such a volume. v

Two Continents, Divided by Deep Philosophical Waters?

“…According to Engelhardt, DG Agriculture and Rural Development considers protection of GIs under a sui generis system in trade agreements as a 'must-have' 45 , with the EU pursuing (somewhat successfully) a policy of 'securing protection of EU-based GIs through bilateral and regional general trade agreements' 46 . In the case of South Korea, however, the adoption of two trade agreements that present radically different approaches to the issues of GI creates the potential for significant regulatory clashes 47 , as well as demon-strating the seemingly incompatible positions of the EU and US.…”