Search results

From model to symbol

At the beginning of the twenty-first century, the European Union (EU) stands out as an important regional organization. This book focuses on the influence of the World Bank on the EU development cooperation policy, with special emphasis on the Lomé Convention. It explains the influence of trade liberalisation on EU trade preferences and provides a comparative analysis of the content and direction of the policies developed towards the African, Caribbean and Pacific (ACP), the Mediterranean, Asia, Latin America and Eastern Europe. It looks at the trade-related directorates and their contribution to the phenomenon referred as 'trade liberalisation'. This includes trends towards the removal or elimination of trade preferences and the ideology underlying this reflected in and created by the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade/World Trade Organisation (GATT/WTO). The book examines the role of the mass media because the media are supposed to play a unique role in encouraging political reactions to humanitarian emergencies. The bolting on to development 'policy' of other continents, and the separate existence of a badly run Humanitarian Office (ECHO), brought the lie to the Maastricht Treaty telling us that the EU really had a coherent development policy. The Third World in general, and Africa in particular, are becoming important components in the EU's efforts to develop into a significant international player. The Cotonou Agreement proposes to end the preferential trade margins accorded to non-least developed ACP states in favour of more liberal free trade agreements strongly shaped by the WTO agenda.

Open Access (free)
The potential and limits of EU development cooperation policy

EUD9 10/28/03 3:16 PM Page 149 9 Conclusions: the potential and limits of EU development cooperation policy Karin Arts and Anna K. Dickson On 23 June 2000 the Cotonou Agreement was signed, replacing the twentyfive-year-old Lomé Convention. There was a distinct feeling of change in Cotonou and the new Agreement is seen as radically overhauling its predecessors and setting a new basis for partnership between the ACP and EU states. It is too early to provide in-depth analysis of the Cotonou Agreement, not least because in many ways Cotonou provides a kind of

in EU development cooperation
An assessment of EU development aid policies

its successor, the Cotonou Agreement. The chapter undertakes a comparative assessment of these changes in the light of wider donor policies towards developing countries. In particular, parallels will be drawn with the policies of the World Bank. The World Bank can rightly claim to be a leading donor institution over this period, both in terms of its role in defining the international development agenda and because of its principal role in forging the changes to donor policies over recent years. 17 EUD2 10/28/03 2:39 PM Page 18 William Brown Furthermore, the

in EU development cooperation
From model to symbol?

policy has been built over time. Until the 1990s, the African, Caribbean and Pacific (ACP) states unequivocally were Europe’s most preferred developing country partners, and ACP–EU relations were the most visible and important component of the EU development cooperation programme. ACP–EU relations started at the very creation of the European Economic Community in 1957 and were elaborated first in the Yaoundé and then in the Lomé Conventions and the 2000 Cotonou Agreement. In many peoples’ eyes the Lomé Convention came to symbolise EU development cooperation, more so

in EU development cooperation

developing countries. Extension and enhancement of the GSP meant that the tariff difference between Lomé and the GSP became only 2 per cent (Dickson, 2000). Many ACP states will have their preferences further reduced under the Cotonou Agreement and will probably enter new reciprocal regional or sub-regional agreements by 2008. Thus the comparative advantage which the ACP states had in 1975 has been significantly eroded. This chapter seeks to identify the main determinants of EU trade policy in relation to the developing countries. It asks why the EU has adopted trade

in EU development cooperation
Bureaucratic politics in EU aid – from the Lomé leap forward to the difficulties of adapting to the twenty-first century

selfish. One feels that Philip Lowe as Director-General did try to do his best. However, with a weaker Commissioner (Pinheiro) and the general decline of Commission prestige and influence, as well as the still apparent lack of influence of the Parliament, which with its left majority might have made a difference, the story has been a sorry one. At all costs a repetition must be avoided when the former Lomé countries have to accept reciprocity, that is extend reverse preferences to the EU, and negotiate to form REPAs under the 2000–20 Cotonou Agreement. But the ACP is

in EU development cooperation
Security and complex political emergencies instead of development

common policies which had consequences for the position of the EC as an international actor. From the late 1950s until the early 1980s, it was even considered as one of the ‘cornerstones’ of European integration (Lister, 1997: 22). As late as 1996, the Commission described the Lomé Convention as ‘one of the most important facets of the European Union’s external activities’ (CEC, 1996: 1). Even though the Lomé Conventions and the more recent Cotonou Agreement cover countries in Africa, the Caribbean and the Pacific, there is no doubt that Sub-Saharan Africa is the most

in EU development cooperation
The role of France and French interests in European development policy since 1957

attempting to formulate different ideas. It advocated a ‘fight against inequalities’ rather than a struggle against poverty. It brought out questions on structural adjustment and it considered the concept of good governance as too vague a notion. However, this criticism or distance exists in words rather than in deeds. The EU’s negotiation mandate mentioned the non-renewal of Stabex. Along with a few ACP countries benefiting from these instruments, France was the only country that really defended the mechanism. The Cotonou Agreement admits that instability in export

in EU development cooperation
The impact of EU membership and advancing integration

/28/03 3:14 PM Page 109 Changing interests in development cooperation Among the signs of concrete changes being made to remedy some of the evaluation results are the May 2000 ‘Commission Communication on the reform of the management of external assistance’ and the post-Lomé changes in ACP–EC relations. The Cotonou Agreement, for example, abandons Stabex and Sysmin. For all except the least developed countries among the ACP, Cotonou replaces the general preferential trade regime by still to be negotiated regional free trade arrangements. Thus long-standing Lomé

in EU development cooperation

practices in the state administrations of future members. In reality, they are currently experiencing a process through which they change from being nation-states to being member states of the European Union. Third, Europe’s relations with developing countries have since the very beginning of the joint European enterprise been a significant feature of Europe’s external relations. Until the June 2000 signature of the Cotonou

in Rethinking European Union Foreign Policy