Advertisement

The European Union — A Responsible Trading Partner?

Chapter
  • 31 Downloads
Part of the Palgrave Studies in European Union Politics book series (PSEUP)

Abstract

Is the EU a responsible member of the world trading system? To answer, we need to address a second question: to whom should the EU be responsible when it weighs and adopts policies which have impacts on trading relations with other countries? This chapter sets out to answer these two questions by examining some (not all) areas of trade policy where the EU has found itself in conflict with its trading partners.

Keywords

Trade Policy Trade Liberalisation Common Agricultural Policy Dispute Settlement Uruguay Round 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Bibliography

  1. Ackrill, Robert, ‘CAP Reform 1999: A Crisis in the Making?’, Journal of Common Market Studies, vol. 38, no. 2 (2000).Google Scholar
  2. Arts, Karen, ‘ACP-EU Relations in a New Era: The Cotonou Agreement’, Common Market Law Review, vol. 40, no. 2 (2003).Google Scholar
  3. Badinger, Harald, Fritz Breuss and Bernhard Mahlberg, ‘Welfare Effects of the EU’s Common Organization of the Market in Bananas for EU Member States’, Journal of Common Market Studies, vol. 40, no. 3 (2002).Google Scholar
  4. Baunsgaard, Thomas and Michael Keen, Tax Revenue And (Or?) Trade Liberalization (Washington: Fiscal Affairs Department, International Monetary Fund, 2004).Google Scholar
  5. Busch, Marc and Eric Reinhardt, ‘Developing Countries and the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade/World Trade Organization Dispute Settlement’, Journal of World Trade, vol. 37, no. 4 (2003).Google Scholar
  6. Clapham, Christopher, Africa and the International System: The Politics of State Survival (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Daugbjerg, Carsten and Alan Swinbank, ‘The CAP and Eu Enlargement: Prospects for an Alternative Strategy to Avoid the Lock-in of CAP Support,’ Journal of Common Market Studies, vol. 42, no. 1 (2004).Google Scholar
  8. Dunne III, Matthew, ‘Redefining power orientation: A reassessment of Jackson’s paradigm in light of asymmetries of power, negotiation, and compliance in the GATT/WTO disputes settlement system’, Law and Policy in International Business, vol. 34, no. 1 (2002).Google Scholar
  9. Eeckhout, Piet, External Relations of the European Union — Legal and Constitutional Foundations (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2004).Google Scholar
  10. Forward, Genevra, ‘The Road to Cotonou: Negotiating a Successor to Lomé’, Journal of Common Market Studies, vol. 39, no. 3 (2001).Google Scholar
  11. Freeman, Fran, Jane Mélanie, Ivan Roberts, David Vanzetti, Apelu Tielu and Benjamin Beutre, The Impact of Agricultural Trade Liberalisation on Developing Countries, ABARE Research Report 2000.06 (Canberra: Australian Bureau of Agricultural and Resource Economics, 2000).Google Scholar
  12. Gaisford, James and William Kerr, Deadlock in Geneva: The Battle over Export Subsidies in Agriculture, Department of Economics Discussion Paper Series no. 2001-07 (Calgary: University of Calgary, 2001).Google Scholar
  13. Hurt, Stephen, ‘Cooperation and coercion? The Cotonou Agreement between the European Union and ACP States and the end of the Lomé Convention’, Third World Quarterly, vol. 24, no. 1 (2003).Google Scholar
  14. Ierley, Douglas, ‘Defining the factors that influence developing countries compliance with and participation in the WTO dispute settlement system: another look at the dispute over bananas’, Law and Policy in International Business, vol. 33, no. 4 (2002).Google Scholar
  15. Jackson, John, ‘The Crumbling Institutions of the Liberal Trade System’, Journal of World Trade, vol. 12, no. 2 (1978).Google Scholar
  16. Landau, Alice, ‘The Agricultural Negotiations in the WTO: The Same Old Story?’, Journal of Common Market Studies, vol. 39, no. 5 (2001).Google Scholar
  17. Lister, Marjorie, The European Union and the South: Relations with Developing Countries (London and New York: Routledge, 1997).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Lister, Marjorie (ed.), European Union Development Policy (London and New York: Macmillan, 1998).Google Scholar
  19. Milner, Chris, Oliver Morrissey and Andrew McKay, ‘Some Simple Analytics of the Trade and Welfare Effects of Economic Partnership Agreements’, Journal of African Economies, vol. 14, no. 3 (2005).Google Scholar
  20. Morgan, David and Gavin Goh, ‘Peace in Our Time? An Analysis of Article 13 of the Agreement on Agriculture’, Journal of World Trade, vol. 37, no. 5 (2003).Google Scholar
  21. O’Connor, Bernard, ‘A Note on the Need for More Clarity in the World Trade Organization Agreement on Agriculture’, Journal of World Trade, vol. 37, no. 5 (2003).Google Scholar
  22. OECD, Agricultural Policies in OECD Countries: A Positive Reform Agenda (Paris: OECD, 2002).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Oxfam, From Cancun to Miami: The FTAA Threat to Development in the Hemisphere (Oxford: Oxfam, 2003).Google Scholar
  24. Roederer-Rynning, Christilla, ‘From “Talking Shop” to “Working Parliament?” The European Parliament and Agricultural Change’, Journal of Common Market Studies, vol. 41, no. 1 (2003).Google Scholar
  25. Skogstad, Grace, ‘The WTO and Food Safety Regulatory Policy Innovation in the European Union’, Journal of Common Market Studies, vol. 39, no. 3 (2001).Google Scholar
  26. Stevens, Christopher and Jane Kennan, Preparing for Economic Partnership Agreements: Trade Analysis Handbook (Brighton: University of Sussex Institute of Development Studies, 2005).Google Scholar
  27. Woolcock, Stephen, ‘European Trade Policy’, in Helen Wallace and William Wallace, Policy-Making in the European Union, 4th edn (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000).Google Scholar
  28. WTO, WTO Agriculture Negotiations: The issues, and Where We Are Now (Updated 1 December, 2004) at www.wto.org/english/tradtop_e/agric_e/agnegs_bkgrnd_e.pdfGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Palgrave Macmillan, a division of Macmillan Publishers Limited 2006

Authors and Affiliations

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations