• EPA

EPA

The European Union (EU) presents itself as an ally of developing countries in trade negotiations. It makes out to be sensitive to their concerns and looking out for shared interests as a partner. This has been the case particularly in the EPA negotiations. This research from ICCO aims to test how far European negotiators are living up to these supposed objectives.

The research was based on structured interviews of ACP ambassadors in Brussels. They were tested on versions of EU statements about the objectives and processes of EPA negotiations. They were asked whether they agreed with statements about EPA negotiations and for evidence to support their response. The statements corresponded to common assertions by the EU and were based directly on public statements or official documents of the European Commission and Council.

The majority of the ACP negotiators interviewed for the study disagreed with EU claims including that:

• the EPAs would support regional integration. Regions have been fragmented in the rush to meet the negotiating deadlines.ACP countries have been driven to decide their common trade regimes before negotiations end. Historically, successful regional integration initiatives tend to be lengthy and progressive with common border measures taking some time to achieve
  
• the EC took a partnership approach to negotiations. Respondents emphasised the inequality between parties as the defining characteristic of negotiations
  
• strong-arm tactics and bribes had not been used. Most agreed they had been put under pressure to negotiate trade related issues as part of the EPAs. Research suggests that the ACP’s lack of negotiating capacity has been exploited, particularly where Singapore issues are concerned
  
• the EU had achieved a coordinated approach to trade and aid
  
• the EPAs are instruments of development. There is evidence that commercial interest have been pursued.
  

To improve prospects for development friendly EPAs, the EU needs to tackle key areas of its approach. They need to show:

• increased flexibility, with respect to market access commitments and to consider cooperation-only provisions in trade-related areas
  
• improved transparency in the negotiating process to remove questions of inappropriate tactics. And so that progress can be informed with external assessments of the development value of EC proposals
  
• that ACP proposals more regularly form the basis of negotiations. Their priorities should be driving the agenda
  

• Full text of document
• Publisher details
• Send to a friend