IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/enarwp/25130.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Review of Trade Agreements and Issues

Author

Listed:
  • Kurzweil, Marianne
  • Ledebur, Oliver von
  • Salamon, Petra

Abstract

Along with multilateral agreements such as the WTO agreement, the EU evolved different trade agreements to induce European integration, perpetuate economic relations with former colonies and improve relations with developing, emerging and transitional countries by granting trade preferences. Common features of the EU preferential agreements are that they: cover general trade; allow a phasing-in period with a fast implementation in non-agricultural sectors (except for textiles); grant preferences for sensitive products of agri-food sectors (e.g. sugar, beef, bananas and dairy products) in terms of tariff-rate quotas (limited imports by reduced most-favoured nation rates); implement special safeguards, because the CAP is regarded as the ultimate objective; and, address more qualitative aspects such as common standards, sanitary and phytosanitary measures, property rights and institutional settings as well as the investment environment.

Suggested Citation

  • Kurzweil, Marianne & Ledebur, Oliver von & Salamon, Petra, 2003. "Review of Trade Agreements and Issues," ENARPRI Working Papers 25130, European Network of Agricultural and Rural Policy Research Institutes (ENARPRI).
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:enarwp:25130
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.25130
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/25130/files/wp030003.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.25130?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. International Monetary Fund, 1992. "Regional Trade Arrangements," IMF Occasional Papers 1992/005, International Monetary Fund.
    2. Fernandez, Raquel & Portes, Jonathan, 1998. "Returns to Regionalism: An Analysis of Nontraditional Gains from Regional Trade Agreements," The World Bank Economic Review, World Bank, vol. 12(2), pages 197-220, May.
    3. Arvind Panagariya, 1996. "The Free Trade Area of the Americas: Good for Latin America?," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 19(5), pages 485-515, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Agata Antkiewicz & John Whalley, 2005. "China's New Regional Trade Agreements," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 28(10), pages 1539-1557, October.
    2. Jorge Nufiez Ferrer, 2006. "Increasing the Market Access for Agricultural Products from Bangladesh to the EU," Trade Working Papers 22288, East Asian Bureau of Economic Research.
    3. Chemnitz, C. & Grethe, H., 2006. "Handelspräferenzen der EU für Tomaten aus Marokko – wer profitiert?," Proceedings “Schriften der Gesellschaft für Wirtschafts- und Sozialwissenschaften des Landbaues e.V.”, German Association of Agricultural Economists (GEWISOLA), vol. 41, March.
    4. Jorge Nufiez Ferrer, 2006. "Increasing the Market Access for Agricultural Products from Bangladesh to the EU," CPD Working Paper 58, Centre for Policy Dialogue (CPD).
    5. Chemnitz, Christine & Grethe, Harald, 2005. "EU Trade Preferences for Moroccan Tomato Exports--Who Benefits?," 2005 International Congress, August 23-27, 2005, Copenhagen, Denmark 24686, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    6. Salamon, Petra & Ledebur, Oliver von, 2006. "Der Europaische Milchmarkt Zwischen Reform Und Liberalisierung," 46th Annual Conference, Giessen, Germany, October 4-6, 2006 14965, German Association of Agricultural Economists (GEWISOLA).
    7. Salamon, P. & von Ledebur, O., 2007. "Der europäische Milchmarkt zwischen Reform und Liberalisierung," Proceedings “Schriften der Gesellschaft für Wirtschafts- und Sozialwissenschaften des Landbaues e.V.”, German Association of Agricultural Economists (GEWISOLA), vol. 42, March.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Marianne Kurzweil & Oliver von Ledebur & Petra Salamon, 2003. "Review of trade agreements and issues," ENARPRI Working Papers 003, ENARPRI (European Network of Agricultural and Rural Policy Research Institutes).
    2. Christophe Rault & Robert Sova & Ana Maria Sova, 2008. "The Role of Association Agreements within European Union Enlargement to Central and Eastern European Countries," Aussenwirtschaft, University of St. Gallen, School of Economics and Political Science, Swiss Institute for International Economics and Applied Economics Research, vol. 63(03), pages 309-328, September.
    3. Arvind Panagariya, 2000. "Preferential Trade Liberalization: The Traditional Theory and New Developments," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 38(2), pages 287-331, June.
    4. Joseph Francois & M. Rombout, 2000. "Preferential Trade Arrangements, Induced Investment, and National Income in a Heckscher-Ohlin-Ramsey Model," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 00-061/2, Tinbergen Institute.
    5. Rana, Arslan Tariq & Kebewar, Mazen, 2014. "The Political Economy of FDI flows into Developing Countries: Does the depth of International Trade Agreements Matter?," EconStor Preprints 91501, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics.
    6. Guglielmo Caporale & Christophe Rault & Robert Sova & Anamaria Sova, 2009. "On the bilateral trade effects of free trade agreements between the EU-15 and the CEEC-4 countries," Review of World Economics (Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv), Springer;Institut für Weltwirtschaft (Kiel Institute for the World Economy), vol. 145(3), pages 573-573, October.
    7. Denise Eby Konan & Keith E. Maskus, 2012. "Preferential Trade and Welfare with Differentiated Products," Review of International Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 20(5), pages 884-892, November.
    8. Lucian Cernat, 2001. "ASSESSING REGIONAL TRADE ARRANGEMENTS: ARE SOUTH–SOUTH RTAs MORE TRADE DIVERTING?," International Trade 0109001, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    9. Proff, H., 2002. "Business unit strategies between regionalisation and globalisation," International Business Review, Elsevier, vol. 11(2), pages 231-250, April.
    10. Martínez-Zarzoso, Inmaculada & Nowak-Lehmann D., Felicitas, 2004. "MERCOSUR-European Union Trade: How important is EU Trade Liberalisation for MERCOSUR's Exports?," University of Göttingen Working Papers in Economics 30, University of Goettingen, Department of Economics.
    11. Panagariya, A., 1997. "Preferential trading and the myth of natural trading partners," Japan and the World Economy, Elsevier, vol. 9(4), pages 471-489, December.
    12. Robinson, Sherman & Thierfelder, Karen, 2002. "Trade liberalisation and regional integration: the search for large numbers," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 46(4), pages 1-20.
    13. Baldwin, Richard Edward & Rieder , Roland, 2007. "A Test of Endogenous Trade Bloc Formation Theory on EU Data," East Asian Economic Review, Korea Institute for International Economic Policy, vol. 11(2), pages 77-110, December.
    14. Earl L. Grinols & Peri Silva, 2008. "Industrial targeting in free trade areas with policy independence," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 41(3), pages 796-816, August.
    15. Emilie M. Hafner-Burton & Alexander H. Montgomery, 2012. "War, Trade, and Distrust: Why Trade Agreements Don’t Always Keep the Peace," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 29(3), pages 257-278, July.
    16. Jeffrey A. Frankel & Miles Kahler, 1993. "Introduction to "Regionalism and Rivalry: Japan and the United States in Pacific Asia"," NBER Chapters, in: Regionalism and Rivalry: Japan and the United States in Pacific Asia, pages 1-18, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    17. Nuno Limão, 2018. "Are Preferential Trade Agreements with Non-trade Objectives a Stumbling Block for Multilateral Liberalization?," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Policy Externalities and International Trade Agreements, chapter 10, pages 283-317, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    18. Arvind Panagariya, 1999. "The Regionalism Debate: An Overview," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 22(4), pages 455-476, June.
    19. Zorob, Anja, 2007. "The Potential of Regional Integration Agreements (RIAs) in Enhancing the Credibility of Reform: The Case of the Syrian-European Association Agreement," GIGA Working Papers 51, GIGA German Institute of Global and Area Studies.
    20. A. Ganesh Kumar & Gordhan Kumar Saini, 2007. "Economic co-operation in South Asia: The Dilemma of SAFTA and beyond," Indira Gandhi Institute of Development Research, Mumbai Working Papers 2007-017, Indira Gandhi Institute of Development Research, Mumbai, India.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    International Relations/Trade;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ags:enarwp:25130. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: AgEcon Search (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/enaprea.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.