phd student department of international and european ... · old vs new regionalism 2 or 3...
TRANSCRIPT
Sofia Maragkidou
Phd student
Department of International and European Studies,
University of Macedonia, Greece
1
Methodology (Stages)
A. Constructing the subject under research
Starting point: the phenomenon of the proliferation
of Regional Trade Agreements (RTAs), particularly
of Free Trade Agreements (FTAs) and its links with
the phenomenon of globalization in the context of
the US and EU trade policies
Research on the objectives of the US and EU
trade policies focusing on the dynamic region of
East Asia
2
Methodology (Stages)
B. Formulating the research question and the problematic
Research question: To what extent and how the EU and US “deep” FTAs strategies reinforce EU and US actorness in the world trade scene and particularly in the region of East Asia?
Problematic: The EU and the US are trying to shape/influence the international trade rules by promoting their objectives, norms and standards in their external relations.
Principal argument: the use of “deep” FTAs as an alternative means for “managing globalization” exporting values, norms and standards on the basis of their respective interests.
C. Developing the theoretical framework: Regionalism
multidisciplinary approach: IPE and IR perspectives
3
Reasons for the proliferation of FTAs
RTAs/PTAs
are concluded among a group of states or state-like actors which may
or may not be geographically close and which involve
intergovernmental cooperation
mechanisms of economic integration (FTAs looser form)
External factors:
Securing markets and providing export opportunities for domestic
companies
Increasing costs of being excluded from FTAs due to trade diversion-
domino effects
Non-conclusion of the Doha Round
Internal factors
Economic growth
Lock-in mechanisms for domestic reforms
More flexible-linked to the laboratory rationale
'Non economic' foreign policy and national security objectives
4
5
Old vs New Regionalism
2 or 3 waves/generations of regionalism: 1st wave end of the WWII-1950s:
Customs Union+CAP by 6 european states (old regionalism)
2nd wave 1980s-today: US shift to the use of FTAs-NAFTA, EU, MERCOSUR, AFTA, SAFTA (new regionalism)
New “deep” FTAs: Are increasingly cross-regional
Focus on deep integration issues
Include foreign direct investment
Promote harmonization of domestic tax, and macro-economic policies and legal regulation
Provide for the establishment of institutions to facilitate integration
6
7
WTO Working Document n°12 “Multilateral Trade Agreements: A changing landscape, 2006”
Regionalism and the WTO
FTAs are exempted from the Most Favored Nation (MFN) principle under certain conditions: elimination of tariffs and other trade
restrictions to be applied to “substantially all trade”- “substantially all sectors” (art. 24 of the GATT+ art. 5 of GATS) imprecise wording, unclear scope
FTAs may promote trade diversion, reduce welfare and deprive resources from the WTO
FTAs may prompt non-PTA countries to pursue multilateral trade liberalization, may serve as laboratories for international cooperation (WTO+ provisions) and increase competitiveness and welfare.
8
EU’s trade policy: A tool for enhancing its
global actorness
The EU constitutes the largest trading block in the world and it is
becoming a power through trade:
uses the incentive of market access as a bargaining chip to
promote its values, objectives and geo-economic interests.
most WTO members seek deals with the EU and increasingly adapt
to its standards the EU has become the world's largest
regulatory power across a range of sectors (e.g. food, chemicals)
Lisbon Treaty: greater consistency and coherence between the
EU’s commercial and foreign policies.
Overall, the EU seeks to :
write the rules of the game
develop the institutional architecture to monitor those rules
build the capacity of international organizations to enforce them
expand its territorial reach by negotiating FTAs that establish
advantageous rules of trade.
9
Rationale of the EU’s new FTAs strategy
Until 1999 :
de facto moratorium on the negotiation
of EU FTAs
prevalence of the doctrine of managed
globalization in the EU’s external trade
policy
focus on multilateral trade liberalization
2006 onwards: Shift to an ultra liberal policy (Communication Global Europe)
and use of deep FTAs due to:
Increasing geo-economic competition with its main competitors (US, Japan, China,
India) -“race for markets”
The US competitive liberalization strategy-
increasing focus on the area of Asia Pacific
Doha Round dead-end need to put
forward its deep integration agenda with its trading partners
10
Aims of the EU’s new FTAs strategy
The 2006 Global Europe Communication aimed at promoting:
Reciprocal market opening
The improvement of global standards
The deepening of strategic cooperation with the EU’s international partners
Increasing EU competitiveness and influence at global level
FTA priority partners: ASEAN, South Korea, MERCOSUR, India, Russia and Gulf Cooperation Council Criteria:
Market potential (economic size and growth)
Level of protection of protection against EU exports
Potential partners’ negotiations with EU competitors
11
US Trade Policy
The US was the champion of multilateralism for the first decades of the
GATT
It entered late the regionalism game (1st “shallow “FTA” with Israel in
1983)
Breakthrough: NAFTA (1994)-model for future FTAs
After failed multilateral trade negotiations in Doha the US progressively
turned to bilateral and regional routes
Clinton administration:
Trade policy with strong mercantilistic flavor
“Economic security” was the main focus of US diplomatic initiatives
Focus on increasing US competitiveness
Asia emerged as the most important priority for new trade initiatives
(APEC, FTAA, Big Emerging Markets initiative)
George W. Bush administration:
Explicit linkage between trade and foreign and security policies of the
US (FTAs in Middle East and East Asia)
Doctrine of competitive liberalization
Increase of the number of FTAs under negotiation 12
US Trade Policy
Obama administration aims at reinvigorating US economy and global economic leadership Emphasis on the TTP and TTIP : Follows the strategy of competitive liberalization Aims at influencing the formulation of standards and the
establishment of norms in the Asia Pacific, while deepening shared US-EU norms create benchmarks for future multilateral liberalization
In particular, The TPP aims at a “rebalance” of the US in Asia The TTIP aims at generating regulatory coherence,
repositioning the US-EU relationship vis-à-vis third countries and strengthening the ground rules of the international order
Overall, both agreements are expected to have WTO+ provisions
However the Trade Promotion Authority has not been renewed yet, the EU leadership will change and Senate elections will take place in the US
13
Comparing US and EU FTAs approaches
US approach FTAs are an evolving version of NAFTA Scope is structurally standardized Content of provisions fairly uniform Symmetry and reciprocity
EU approach Differentiation of provisions and partner
commitments Flexibility Relatively modest ambition in terms of open
marketing
Bruegel study (2009): differences in coverage (services, investment and enforceability of provisions)
EU FTAs exclude relatively more agricultural lines and are less ambitious on services and IPR
However, after the KOREU FTA, EU FTAs try to match the US FTAs template and scope
14
Conclusions
Regionalism is likely to be the only game in town for at least the next few years
Competition dynamics between the EU and the US FTAs strategies: race for market access, expansion of their territorial
sphere of influence shaping the rules of global trade
Cooperation dynamics: TTIP create a modern “gold standard”
FTA for future FTAs on the basis of regulatory convergence
strengthening the EU-US leadership in the WTO
rebalancing their influence vis-à-vis the emerging economies
15
THANK YOU FOR YOUR
ATTENTION!
16