Abstract
The politicisation of recent European Union (EU) trade negotiations such as the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership or the Comprehensive and Economic Trade Agreement suggests that the more negotiations focus on deep integration issues, the higher the potential for polarization of values and interests. Yet, as we argue, this pattern does not necessarily hold true in EU trade negotiations with the developing world. In the case of the Economic Partnership Agreements with West Africa and the Caribbean region, the pattern of politicisation was ‘reversed’: Politicisation remained low in the Caribbean region, despite the inclusion of deep integration issues. To the contrary, negotiations became highly politicised in West Africa, where negotiations focussed on the traditional realm of trade in goods. Combining the insights from the literature on the role of non-state actors (NSAs) in trade policy-making in developing countries and on politicisation, we show that limited pre-existing mobilisation resources of NSAs, and few opportunities to engage with the political level of negotiations, imply that those affected by the inclusion of deep integration issues hardly mobilise. We also find that lack of technical expertise and the significance of traditional trade areas pre-empts NSAs from engaging in emotive framing on deep integration issues. This helps us to unpack the different patterns of politicisation across both regions: Politicisation in West Africa was facilitated by civil society actors who—in contrast to the Caribbean region—could draw on pre-existing networks, expertise, and direct access to the regional negotiation level.
Subject
Public Administration,Sociology and Political Science
Reference56 articles.
1. Africa Trade Network. (2006). Forward with the struggle to stop the EPAs: Declaration of the 9th annual meeting of the Africa trade network. Accra: Africa Trade Network. Retrieved from https://www2.weed-online.org/uploads/atn_declaration_2007.pdf
2. African Trade Policy Centre. (2007). EPA negotiations: African countries continental review (Work in Progess No. 64. February 2007). Addis Ababa: Economic Commission for Africa.
3. Bishop, M., Heron, T., & Payne, A. (2013). Caribbean development alternatives and the CARIFORUM–European Union economic partnership agreement. Journal of International Relations and Development, 16(1), 82–110.
4. Buonanno, L. A. (2017). The new trade deals and the mobilisation of civil society organizations: Comparing EU and US responses. Journal of European Integration, 39(7), 795–809.
5. Caribbean Regional Negotiation Machinery. (2008, March 27). CRNM EPA reflections. RNM Update 0801.
Cited by
10 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献