The <scp>EU</scp>'s Post‐<scp>L</scp>isbon Free Trade Agreements: Commercial Interests in a Changing Constitutional Context

Gstöhl, Sieglinde; Hanf, Dominik

doi:10.1111/eulj.12102

Cited by 13 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 2 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This article has demonstrated how a crisis can be leveraged by actors in the Commission who aim to influence policy outcomes, and how this results in informal policy processes that do not include the European Parliament. In addition, this article has explained how reframing contributed to the DG for Trade assuming the role as a reluctant initiator of the Compact-this has implications for institutional bargaining models used to explain EU external policies more broadly, such as trade (Gstöhl & Hanf, 2014;McKenzie & Maissner, 2017;Sicurelli, 2015).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This article makes an important contribution because it demonstrates how the Commission was able to bridge migration and trade in external policy by reframing the crisis in Jordan as a developmental and economic issue and by reframing the responsibilities of the DG for Trade. This argument has implications for the broader literature on EU external policies that often use models of institutional bargaining and which emphasize the tension between actors that pursue values and those that pursue commercial interests (see, for example, Gstöhl & Hanf, 2014;McKenzie & Maissner, 2017;Meunier & Nicolaïdis, 2006;Sicurelli, 2015).…”

Section: Before the Migration Crisis 1980s-2014mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Crisis-Induced Leadership: Exploring the Role of the EU Commission in the EU–Jordan Compact

Vaagland

2021

PaG

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

<p>The EU–Jordan Compact (hereafter Compact) has been identified as being a groundbreaking, comprehensive approach to global refugee protection. Thus far, research on this underexplored case has mainly focused on the effects of the Compact. The policy process leading to the adoption of the Compact, as well as the motivations of the EU (i.e., the main donor), remain blackboxed. This article explores how the migration crisis affected the EU Commission’s ability to create coordinated, strategic action in external policy. It does so by tracing the internal EU negotiations and developing a causal model that explains how the Commission could overcome silos and efficiently draft a policy proposal linking the issues of migration and trade. The analysis is based on 13 original in-depth interviews with EU representatives. The article contributes to crisisification theory by presenting a mechanism that explains how the Commission can make use of crises. The Commission created cohesion by reframing the crisis, identifying the relevant policy tools with which to address it, and by reframing the responsibilities of the relevant directorate-general. Furthermore, by utilizing the urgency of the crisis, the Commission enabled rapid policy drafting and created an explicit linkage between refugee policy and trade policy. This linkage provided the member states with the motivation to adopt the proposal as a solution to the ongoing migration crisis.</p>

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Before the Migration Crisis 1980s-2014mentioning

confidence: 99%

Crisis-Induced Leadership: Exploring the Role of the EU Commission in the EU–Jordan Compact

Vaagland

2021

PaG

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…With the Treaty of Lisbon, trade, an area where the EU has exclusive competence, 105 was explicitly included as a policy area through which the EU is to pursue and achieve the principles and objectives listed in Article 21(1) and (2) TEU. 106 In the TFEU several articles provide for the link between the principles and objectives of EU external action and the EU's CCP. 107 Article 207(1) TFEU, introduced by the Treaty of Lisbon, states -inter alia -that '[t]he common commercial policy shall be conducted in the context of the principles and objectives of the Union's external action', and Article 205 TFEU refers directly to the principles and objectives of Article 21 TEU.…”

Section: The European Legal Frameworkmentioning

confidence: 99%

Policy vs practice: The use, implementation and enforcement of human rights clauses in the European Union’s international trade agreements

Prickartz

Staudinger

2019

Eur. World

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In the mid-1990s, the EU adopted a general policy of including human rights clauses in all of its international trade agreements. Through these human rights clauses, in addition to other tools such as Human Rights Dialogue and sanctions, the EU seeks to promote the protection of human rights in its external relations. There are, however, some issues arising regarding the content, use, implementation and activation of these clauses. Not only do human rights clauses in different agreements vary in wording and scope, but also the actual implementation and enforcement by the EU differ from case to case, raising questions as to the selective character and the consistency of the EU’s action and, consequently, as to the EU’s credibility as a normative international actor. The main deficiencies in this regard are the selective and at times inconsistent inclusion and activation of human rights clauses, as shown by an examination of the EU’s agreements and their implementation and enforcement in practice. This article examines human rights clauses in the EU’s international trade agreements and the implementation and enforcement thereof, in order to shed light on the promises and pitfalls of the EU’s human rights efforts.

show abstract

“…International agreements are indeed the main instrument for the legal regulation of transatlantic relations. In the post‐Lisbon Treaty EU, most agreements require the EP's consent, and this represents a primary source of parliamentary influence on EU trade policy and international affairs in general (Eckes, ; Servent, ; Gstöhl and Hanf, , p. 746). The situation somewhat differs across the Atlantic.…”

Section: Transatlantic Co‐operation and The Question Of Democracymentioning

confidence: 99%

The Role of the European Parliament and the US Congress in Shaping Transatlantic Relations: TTIP, NSA Surveillance, and CIA Renditions

Jančić

2016

J of Common Market Studies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article analyses the manner in which the parliaments of the EU and the US -two key global strategic partners -participate in the shaping of transatlantic relations. The article argues that the European Parliament (EP) and Congress aim not only to influence their executive branches but also to act autonomously in the transnational arena through parliamentary diplomacy. They seek to secure concessions both formally by scrutinizing transatlantic international agreements, such as TTIP, as well as informally by exposing injustices and diplomatic misconduct through human rights advocacy and institutional pressure, such as in the cases of the NSA surveillance and CIA renditions. The article demonstrates that the EP and Congress have created capacities for internal scrutiny and transnational interparliamentary dialogue and that they utilize their consent powers to make claims, condition transatlantic negotiations and gain greater presence, visibility and influence in international affairs.

show abstract

The EU's Post‐Lisbon Free Trade Agreements: Commercial Interests in a Changing Constitutional Context

Cited by 13 publications

References 2 publications

Crisis-Induced Leadership: Exploring the Role of the EU Commission in the EU–Jordan Compact

Crisis-Induced Leadership: Exploring the Role of the EU Commission in the EU–Jordan Compact

Policy vs practice: The use, implementation and enforcement of human rights clauses in the European Union’s international trade agreements

The Role of the European Parliament and the US Congress in Shaping Transatlantic Relations: TTIP, NSA Surveillance, and CIA Renditions

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About