IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/pugtwp/331542.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Effects of Bilateral Trade Agreements on the Multilateral Trading Arena: special consideration of EPA between EU and ACP countries

Author

Listed:
  • Hailu, Martha Belete

Abstract

To substitute the trade preferences granted to ACP countries by the EU, which are scheduled to be phased out in 2008, the EU and ACP countries are negotiating Economic Partnership Agreements. Regarded as vehicles to promote development, there are basically four key principles up on which the partnership agreements are established: WTO compatibility, SDT as well as flexibility for ACP states, maintaining the acquis of Lome’ Conventions and preserving sub regional and regional integration processes. The EPAs are to be negotiated between the EU and the regional trading blocks of the ACP countries and will take the form of free trade areas. The issues that are to be addressed in the EPA negotiations are, among other things, trade in goods, liberalization of the service sector and trade related issues such as competition policy, investment, trade and environment, government procurement as well as trade and labor standards. Some of these issues, the ones known as “Singapore Issues”, have been put on the table at the multilateral trading negotiations at the WTO and due to lack of consensus, were dropped from the Doha work program. The introduction of these issues to EPA negotiations amounts to bringing dead issues in to life again and hence, need careful consideration as it may lead to a WTO plus commitment. This paper discusses some concepts as well as legal issues related to the economic partnership agreements between the EU and ACP countries. The paper is divided in to three main sections. The first section will deal with the principles of world trading system and GATT Article XXIV exception. Section II focuses on the trade relationship that existed between the EU and ACP countries, and examines the different issues underpinned in EPAs. Section three, which is the last section, will try to see the implication of EPAs on the multilateral trading arena.

Suggested Citation

  • Hailu, Martha Belete, 2006. "Effects of Bilateral Trade Agreements on the Multilateral Trading Arena: special consideration of EPA between EU and ACP countries," Conference papers 331542, Purdue University, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Global Trade Analysis Project.
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:pugtwp:331542
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/331542/files/2777.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Mohamed Hedi Bchir & Sébastien Jean & David Laborde, 2006. "Binding Overhang and Tariff-Cutting Formulas," Review of World Economics (Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv), Springer;Institut für Weltwirtschaft (Kiel Institute for the World Economy), vol. 142(2), pages 207-232, July.
    2. Joseph Francois & Will Martin, 2003. "Formula Approaches for Market Access Negotiations," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 26(1), pages 1-28, January.
    3. Brockmeier, Martina & Sommer, Ulrich & Thomsen, Karin, 2005. "Sugar Policies: An Invincible Bastion for Modelers?," 89th Seminar, February 2-5, 2005, Parma, Italy 232588, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    4. Will Martin & Kym Anderson, 2006. "Agricultural Trade Reform and the Doha Development Agenda," World Bank Publications - Books, The World Bank Group, number 6889.
    5. Sébastien Jean & David Laborde & Will Martin, 2005. "Consequences of Alternative Formulas for Agricultural Tariff Cuts," Working Papers 2005-15, CEPII research center.
    6. Kym Anderson & Will Martin & Dominique van der Mensbrugghe, 2006. "Doha Merchandise Trade Reform: What Is at Stake for Developing Countries?," The World Bank Economic Review, World Bank, vol. 20(2), pages 169-195.
    7. James E. Anderson & J. Peter Neary, 2005. "Measuring the Restrictiveness of International Trade Policy," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262012200, April.
    8. Bach, Christian F. & Martin, Will, 2001. "Would the right tariff aggregator for policy analysis please stand up?," Journal of Policy Modeling, Elsevier, vol. 23(6), pages 621-635, August.
    9. Bureau Jean-Christophe & Salvatici Luca, 2004. "WTO Negotiations on Market Access in Agriculture: a Comparison of Alternative Tariff Cut Proposals for the EU and the US," The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 4(1), pages 1-35, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Will Martin & Kym Anderson, 2007. "The Doha agenda and agricultural trade reform: the role of economic analysis," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 37(s1), pages 77-87, December.
    2. Pelikan, J. & Brockmeier, M., 2009. "Wohlfahrtswirkungen einer Handelsliberalisierung: Welchen Einfluss hat die Zollaggregation auf die Modellergebnisse?," Proceedings “Schriften der Gesellschaft für Wirtschafts- und Sozialwissenschaften des Landbaues e.V.”, German Association of Agricultural Economists (GEWISOLA), vol. 44, March.
    3. Brockmeier, Martina & Pelikan, Janine, 2008. "Agricultural market access: A moving target in the WTO negotiations?," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(3), pages 250-259, June.
    4. Sébastien Jean & David Laborde & Will Martin, 2008. "Choosing Sensitive Agricultural Products in Trade Negotiations," Working Papers 2008-18, CEPII research center.
    5. Houssein Guimbard & David Laborde Debucquet & Cristina Mitaritonna, 2009. "A Picture of Tariff Protection Across the World in 2004 MAcMap-HS6, Version 2," Working Papers 2009-22, CEPII research center.
    6. Anderson, Kym & Martin, Will & van der Mensbrugghe, Dominique, 2013. "Estimating Effects of Price-Distorting Policies Using Alternative Distortions Databases," Handbook of Computable General Equilibrium Modeling, in: Peter B. Dixon & Dale Jorgenson (ed.), Handbook of Computable General Equilibrium Modeling, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 0, pages 877-931, Elsevier.
    7. Martina Brockmeier & Janine Pelikan, 2006. "Agricultural Market Access: A Moving Target in the WTO Negotiations?," The Institute for International Integration Studies Discussion Paper Series iiisdp125, IIIS.
    8. Brockmeier, Martina & Pelikan, Janine, 2006. "Agricultural Market Access: A Moving Target in the WTO Negotiations?," 2006 Annual Meeting, August 12-18, 2006, Queensland, Australia 25428, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    9. Brockmeier, Martina & Pelikan, Janine & Klepper, Rainer, 2006. "Die Wto-Ministerkonferenz In Hongkong: Welche Handelswirkungen Haben Die Aktuellen Vorschlage Fur Den Marktzugang?," 46th Annual Conference, Giessen, Germany, October 4-6, 2006 14951, German Association of Agricultural Economists (GEWISOLA).
    10. Maria Cipollina & Luca Salvatici, 2008. "Measuring Protection: Mission Impossible?," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 22(3), pages 577-616, July.
    11. Anania, Giovanni, 2007. "Multilateral Negotiations, Preferential Trade Agreements and the CAP. What's Ahead?," Working Papers 7283, TRADEAG - Agricultural Trade Agreements.
    12. Kym Anderson & Will Martin & Dominique van der Mensbrugghe, 2006. "Distortions to World Trade: Impacts on Agricultural Markets and Farm Incomes," Review of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 28(2), pages 168-194.
    13. Mary Amiti & John Romalis, 2007. "Will the Doha Round Lead to Preference Erosion?," IMF Staff Papers, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 54(2), pages 338-384, June.
    14. Romain Perez & Mustapha Sadni Jallab, 2009. "Preference erosion and market access liberalization: the African dilemma in multilateral negotiations on agriculture," Review of World Economics (Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv), Springer;Institut für Weltwirtschaft (Kiel Institute for the World Economy), vol. 145(2), pages 277-292, July.
    15. David Laborde & Will Martin, 2012. "Agricultural Trade: What Matters in the Doha Round?," Annual Review of Resource Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 4(1), pages 265-283, August.
    16. Suwa-Eisenmann, Akiko & Cadot, Olivier & Gallezot, Jacques, 2009. "EU Trade Barriers in the Agri-food Sector: When Protection Breeds Dependence," CEPR Discussion Papers 7219, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    17. Martin, William J. & Anderson, Kym, 2008. "Agricultural trade reform under the Doha Agenda: some key issues," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 52(1), pages 1-16.
    18. Giovanni Anania, 2007. "Multilateral trade negotiations, preferential trade agreements and European Union’s agricultural policies," QA - Rivista dell'Associazione Rossi-Doria, Associazione Rossi Doria, issue 3, July.
    19. Listorti, Giulia & Tonini, Axel & Kempen, Markus & Adenauer, Marcel, 2013. "How to Implement WTO Scenarios in Simulation Models: Linking the TRIMAG Tariff Aggregation Tool to Capri," 135th Seminar, August 28-30, 2013, Belgrade, Serbia 160388, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    20. Bouët, Antoine, 2006. "What can the poor expect from trade liberalization?: opening the "black box" of trade modeling," MTID discussion papers 93, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).

    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:pugtwp:331542. 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/gtpurus.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.