1 Economic Partnership Agreements: A new approach to ACP-EU economic and trade cooperation Claude...
-
Upload
claribel-jennings -
Category
Documents
-
view
213 -
download
0
Transcript of 1 Economic Partnership Agreements: A new approach to ACP-EU economic and trade cooperation Claude...
1
Economic Partnership Agreements: A new approach
to ACP-EU economic and trade cooperation
Claude Maerten, European CommissionHead of Unit TRADE C 2 ([email protected])
TRALAC’s Annual International Trade Law Conference 11 November 2004
2
BACKGROUNDBACKGROUND
3
EU Trade relations with ACP countries still the same since Lomé I (1975)
A need for change
Agreed in ACP-EU Cotonou Agreement
WHY ?
4
EU Trade relations with ACP countries Since Lomé I (1975)
Non reciprocal trade preferences
All industrial goods enter the EU duty free
80% of agricultural products enter the EU duty free, and the remaining 20% benefit from preferences
DID IT WORK ?
5
EU Trade relations with ACP countries Since Lomé I (1975)
NO, few successful storiesFisheries, Agriculture, Commodities;
Mauritius, Kenya, Cameroon, Ivory Coast, Zimbabwe;
Same trade relationship during the last 30 years in a new world economic environment
6
EU Trade relations with ACP countries Since Lomé I (1975)
Trade preferences had been eroded considerably (Kennedy Round, Tokyo round, Uruguay Round), and more to come with DDA
In the 80s, margin of preference around 10%
Today, lower than 4% in comparison with MFN, 2% in comparison with GS
Not enough in the past
Not a solution for the future
7
Quick look at the dataQuick look at the data
Share of imports from ACP into EU
0%
1%
2%
3%
4%
5%
6%
7%
8%
1976 1978 1980 1982 1984 1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000
8
Quick look at the dataQuick look at the data
Lack of ACP export diversification5 PRODUCTS = 60 % of total Exports
(petroleum, diamonds, cocoa, fish, and wood products)
AFRICAN COUNTRIES REPRESENT
60 % OF TOTAL ACP EXPORT
Lome trade regime as a tool to promote exports failed
9
Lessons learnt
Unilateral Preferences are Not Enough Trade relationship should go beyond
market access Promote a synergy between aid and
trade Mainstream trade in development
support Need for domestic reforms Develop supply capacities WTO compatibility
10
RATIONALE FOR RATIONALE FOR
EPASEPAS
11
Towards a new approachTowards a new approach
The Cornerstones of EPAsThe Cornerstones of EPAs
EU policies
The Cotonou Agreement
Development dimension
Regional integration
WTO compatibility
12
EU Policies Trade Policy
Contribute to growth, employment and competitiveness in Europe
Multilateral route the top priority; Complete the Doha round Deepen bilateral and regional trade relations; regional
integration
Development policy The 6 priorities
CAP, Fisheries policy
EPA as a link for EU-ACP partnership
13
The Cotonou Agreement Objectives
Sustainable development Poverty eradication Integration into the global economy
EPA is the trade chapter
14
Development dimension Monterey consensus
sustainable, stable, transparent domestic policies in the South; Market Access granted by developed countries
Mainstream trade policies in development strategies PRSP, Integrated Framework, EU development policy; CSP; NIP and
RIP
Trade and Aid Coherence; Complementarity; Coordination (PRSP, Integrated Framework, EU development policy; CSP; NIP and
RIP) Supply capacities; private sector development, … Funding
Market access and Rules Complementarity, parallelism between DDA, EPA
15
Regional integration
Support ACP political choices (coherence, AU)
First step towards gradual integration into world economy
Enlarging markets for attracting investment
Combined South-South-North cooperation (lock-in effects)
16
Western Sahara
Lesotho
South Afri ca
Botswana
Mozambique
Somalia
Morocco
Algeria
Tunisia
Libya Arab Jamahi riyEgypt
Comoros
Seych elles
Mauritius
Mauritania
Chad
Cameroon
Central Afric Rep
Equatorial Guinea
Gabon
Congo
Swaziland
Namibia Zimbab weMadagascar
MalawiZambia
Angola
TanzaniaBurundi
Rwanda
R Dem Congo
Ken ya
Uganda
Ethiopia
Djibouti
EritreaSudanGambia
Senegal
Guinea BissauGuinea
Sierra Leone
Liberia
Côted’Ivoire
TogoGhana
BeninNigeria
Burkina Faso
Cape VerdeNiger
Mali
Eastern and Southern Africa
CEDEAO/ECOW AS +Mauritania
CEMAC +SaoTomePrinc
DG TRADE-c-1 (BS) Graph EPA 1LDC countrie s : i tali c nonLDC countries : und er lined
S.Tome,Princ
« SADC group »BNLS+Angola,Tanzania,Mozambique
17
Western Sahara
Lesotho
South Afri ca
Botswana
Mozambique
Somalia
Morocco
Algeria
Tunisia
Libya Arab Jamahi riy
Egy pt
Comoros
Seych elles
Mauritius
Mauritania
Chad
Cameroon
Central Afric Rep
Equatorial Guinea
Gabon
Congo
Swaziland
Namibia Zimbab weMadagascar
MalawiZambia
Angola
TanzaniaBurundi
Rwanda
R Dem Congo
Ken ya
Uganda
Ethiopia
Djibouti
EritreaSudanGambia
Senegal
Guinea BissauGuinea
Sierra Leone
Liberia
Côted’Ivoire
TogoGhana
BeninNigeria
Burkina Faso
Cape VerdeNiger
Mali
CEDEAO/ECOWAS + Mauritania
CEMAC +SaoTomePrinc
DG TRADE-C-1 (BS) Graph Africa EPA 1976-2001LDC countrie s : i tali c nonLDC countries : und er lined
S.Tome,Princ
« SADC group»BNLS+Angola,Tanzania,Mozambique
1976 2001
I ntra region EU World
EEastern and SSouthern AAfrica
32 bn€
9 bn€ 30%46%
8%5%
1976 2001
I ntra region EU World
65 bn€
24 bn€ 37%
50%10%
3%
1976 2001
I ntra region EU World
15 bn€
3bn€66%
2%3%
46%
1bn€
1976 2001
I ntra region South Af rica
EU World
0%0%
33%37%
15 bn€
9%1%
18
WTO Compatibility Lome/Cotonou waiver
Price to pay against ACP interests
Enabling clause Link between the level of RI and the level of our ambitions
Article XXIV GATT Existing flexibility enough The debate
Article V GATS
Meaning of WTO +
19
ACP Total Trade (Imports+Exports) with EU
by region
ECOWAS43%
ESA18%
SADC group13%
CEMAC12%
ACP Caribbean13%
ACP Pacific1%
20
21
WTO Compatibility Possible scenarios for reciprocity
West Africa 81% Central Africa 79% East and Southern Africa 80% Southern Africa 76% Caribbean 83% Pacific 67%
22
Conclusion
ACP development is the objective; Trade is a tool
Regional integration as a political, economic and development challenge
EPAs are an opportunity