Economic Partnership Agreements

The concept of Economic Partnership Agreements (EPAs ) and Economic Partnership Agreement (EPA ) designates a project funded by the EU agreements on free trade areas between the EU and the 78 ACP countries (the former in the majority of European colonies in Africa, the Caribbean and the South Pacific ).

The contractual basis of the EPA is in the Cotonou Agreement, which was on 23 June 2000, signed by the Member States of the EU and the Member States of the ACP Group of States in Cotonou, Benin.

The central aim of the agreement was to replace the criticism of the WTO non-reciprocal trade preferences under the Lomé Convention ( 1975-2000 ) by reciprocal trade agreement by 1 January 2008.

By January 2008, however, only one was signed with CARIFORUM EPA and the interim EPAs 9 with individual ACP countries or country groups.

Key elements

Reciprocity

The emphasis is Starting to eliminate from the intention of the current incompatibility of existing trade agreements with the WTO rules specified in the negotiations on the EPAs on non-discrimination and reciprocity. You mean the gradual abolition of all since 1975 granted by the EU trade benefits of the ACP countries as well as the short-term abolition of all trade barriers that exist between the partner states. Should be open to in order to ensure non-discriminatory market access, the EPAs for all developing countries, so that the status of the ACP countries is limited as the main development partner of the EU.

In the negotiations on the EPAs, the EU is in the dilemma of having to permanently preserve stemming from the colonial past special status of the ACP States and the other hand to meet the obligations of membership in the WTO. As a solution to this problem, an agreement is sought, which stipulates a minimum level of reciprocity to meet the WTO criteria, to give but in reality the ACP countries as much leeway so that they can maintain trade protection of their main products.

The extent of trade liberalization under the EPAs is controversial. Several studies that examined the potential impact of open markets in this context, warn of foreseeable negative consequences. A delegation of the European Affairs Committee of the French National Assembly published a comprehensive report, which corroborated these warnings in July 2006. The report identifies four shocks, which would be exposed to the ACP States, when they opened their markets:

1 a domestic shock due to the expected loss of revenue due to the cut correspond import duties;

2 a foreign trade shock due to falling exchange rates when the ACP countries can not compete;

3 a shock for the poor, under construction industries in ACP countries which are not up to the competition from the EU;

4 an agricultural shock, as local markets and producers with cheap imports from the European Union ( highly subsidized ) can not compete.

It is therefore uncertain whether the existing WTO provisions on regional trade agreements at the end to be revised by the Doha round in favor of the Economic Partnership Agreements.

Regionalism

According to the Cotonou principle of differentiation and regionalization developing countries should be enabled to act within the EPAs in regional groups. To date (February 2007), six regional groups formed, which act as a negotiating partner for the EU to ACP countries. These regional groups are

  • The Economic Community of West African States ( ECOWAS)
  • La Communauté économique et monétaire de l' Afrique centrale
  • The Southern African Development Community
  • The East African Community
  • The Caribbean Forum of African, Caribbean and Pacific States (CARIFORUM )
  • The Pacific region

Negotiations are conducted by the ACP countries under pressure from the EU until the end of 2007 to come to a conclusion. Otherwise, the EU wants to delay the disbursement of funds from the European Development Fund.

Specific questions

The new regional grouping raises the question of how to deal within the EPAs with the group of the poorest countries in the world ( so-called LDCs ) within the ACP Group of States. These countries experienced in the previous trade agreements a privileged treatment. At the time ( early 2007 ) 39 of the 77 ACP countries are defined by the United Nations as LDCs.

In contrast to the other ACP States, automatically applies to LDCs in the event of failure to sign a WPA the " Everything But Arms " agreement. This system of privileged trade relations between the EU and LDC countries (also outside the ACP group ) was adopted in 2001 by the EU Council of Ministers and enables the poorest countries all products - with the exception of arms - duty-free in unlimited quantities in the EU area to export. The non- signing of an EPA would therefore be less problematic than for non- LDCs for the LDC countries within the ACP Group. Non - LDCs fall in case of non - signature automatically back to the less favorable " General System of Preferences " ( GSP).

Critical campaign

A critical campaign called STOP EPA follows according to own data initiatives from African civil society, reject the EPAs in their current form and be used for economically, socially and environmentally sustainable alternatives. Among the supporters of the campaign in Germany include, among others

  • Attac
  • Bread for the World - Church Development Service
  • Food First Information and Action Network ( FIAN ), Germany
  • German Watch
  • Observatory Southern Africa eV - issa
  • Church work on Southern Africa ( KASA )
  • Coordination Southern Africa ( KOSA )
  • Medico international
  • Network Africa Germany ( NAD)
  • Oxfam Germany
  • Tanzania Network
  • Terre des hommes
  • World Economy, Ecology & Development (WEED )
253394
de