Book contents
- Coherence of the European Union Trade Policy with Its Non-Trade Objectives
- Coherence of the European Union Trade Policy with Its Non-Trade Objectives
- Copyright page
- Contents
- Contributors
- Introduction
- 1 European Union Trade Policy and Non-Trade Issues
- 2 The European Union
- 3 Export Credit Agencies
- 4 The Effects of Non-Trade Provisions in Trade Agreements on Bilateral FDI
- 5 How EU Trade and Cooperation Policies Stimulated China to Go Green
- 6 The Role of Domestic Factors in the EU’s Governance of Labour Standards through Trade
- 7 EU Trade Agreements and Non-Trade Policy Objectives
- 8 Trade, the G20 and the EU
- 9 Enhancement of the European Parliament’s Monitoring for Better Coherence between Trade Policy and NTPOs
- Conclusion
- Index
- References
7 - EU Trade Agreements and Non-Trade Policy Objectives
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 19 October 2023
Book contents
- Coherence of the European Union Trade Policy with Its Non-Trade Objectives
- Coherence of the European Union Trade Policy with Its Non-Trade Objectives
- Copyright page
- Contents
- Contributors
- Introduction
- 1 European Union Trade Policy and Non-Trade Issues
- 2 The European Union
- 3 Export Credit Agencies
- 4 The Effects of Non-Trade Provisions in Trade Agreements on Bilateral FDI
- 5 How EU Trade and Cooperation Policies Stimulated China to Go Green
- 6 The Role of Domestic Factors in the EU’s Governance of Labour Standards through Trade
- 7 EU Trade Agreements and Non-Trade Policy Objectives
- 8 Trade, the G20 and the EU
- 9 Enhancement of the European Parliament’s Monitoring for Better Coherence between Trade Policy and NTPOs
- Conclusion
- Index
- References
Summary
The EU’s common commercial policy is used as an instrument to realize its values in EU trading partners, reflected in the inclusion of sustainable trade and development chapters in EU preferential trade agreements (PTAs). This chapter asks if including non-trade provisions (NTPs) in EU PTAs has a systematic positive effect on non-trade outcomes in partner countries. It analyzes the relationship between bilateral trade flows, the coverage of NTPs in EU PTAs and the performance of EU partner countries on several non-trade outcome variables using synthetic control methods. It finds no robust evidence of a causal effect of including NTPs in EU PTAs on indicators of non-trade outcomes.
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- Coherence of the European Union Trade Policy with Its Non-Trade ObjectivesWorld Trade Forum, pp. 180 - 207Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2023
References
Abadie, Alberto, and Gardeazabal, Javier, 2003, “The economic costs of conflict: A case study of the Basque Country,” American Economic Review, 93 (1), 113–132.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Abadie, Alberto, Diamond, Alexis, and Hainmueller, Jens, 2010, “Synthetic control methods for comparative case studies: Estimating the effect of California tobacco control program,” Journal of the American Statistical Association, 105 (490), 493–505.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Adarov, Amat, 2018, “Eurasian economic integration: Impact evaluation using the gravity model and the synthetic control methods,” Technical Report, wiiw Working Paper.Google Scholar
Angrist, Joshua D., and Pischke, Jörn-Steffen, 2008, Mostly Harmless Econometrics: An Empiricist’s Companion, Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Antràs, Pol, and Staiger, Robert W., 2012, “Offshoring and the role of trade agreements,” American Economic Review, 102 (7), 3140–3183.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Athey, Susan, and Imbens, Guido W., 2017, “The state of applied econometrics: causality and policy evaluation,” Journal of Economic Perspectives, 31 (2), 3–32.Google Scholar
Aytug, Huseyin, Kutuk, Merve Mavucs, Oduncu, Arif, and Togan, Subidey, 2017, “Twenty years of the EU–Turkey customs union: A synthetic control method analysis,” JCMS: Journal of Common Market Studies, 55 (3), 419–431.Google Scholar
Baier, Scott L., and Bergstrand, Jeffrey H., “Do free trade agreements actually increase members’ international trade?,” Journal of International Economics, 2007, 71 (1), 72–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baier, Scott L., Bergstrand, Jeffrey H., and Feng, Michael, 2014, “Economic integration agreements and the margins of international trade,” Journal of International Economics, 93 (2), 339–350.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Billmeier, Andreas, and Nannicini, Tommaso, 2013, “Assessing economic liberalization episodes: A synthetic control approach,” Review of Economics and Statistics, 95 (3), 983–1001.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brandi, Clara, Schwab, Jakob, Berger, Axel, and Morin, Jean-Frédéric, 2020, “Do environmental provisions in trade agreements make exports from developing countries greener?,” World Development, 129, 104899.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brown, Drusilla K., Deardorff, Alan V., and Stern, Robert M., 2013, “Labor Standards and Human Rights: Implications for International Trade and Investment,” in Drabek, Zdenek and Mavroidis, Petros C. (eds.), Regulations of Foreign Investment: Challenges to International Harmonization, World Scientific Studies in International Economics, World Scientific Publishing Company, pp. 153–195.Google Scholar
Büthe, Tim, and Milner, Helen V., 2008, “The politics of foreign direct investment into developing countries: Increasing FDI through international trade agreements?,” American Journal of Political Science, 52 (4), 741–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Büthe, Tim, and Milner, Helen V., 2014, “Foreign direct investment and institutional diversity in trade agreements: Credibility, commitment, and economic flows in the developing world, 1971–2007,” World Politics, 66 (1), 88–122.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chyzh, Olga, 2016, “Dangerous liaisons: An endogenous model of international trade and human rights,” Journal of Peace Research, 53 (3), 409–423.Google Scholar
Donnelly, Jack, 2013, Universal Human Rights in Theory and Practice, Cornell University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dür, Andreas, Baccini, Leonardo, and Elsig, Manfred, 2014, “The design of international trade agreements: Introducing a new dataset,” Review of International Organizations, 9 (3), 353–375.Google Scholar
Flanigan, Robert J., 2006, Globalization and Labor Conditions: Working Conditions and Worker Rights in a Global Economy, Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Greenhill, Brian, Mosley, Layna, and Prakash, Aseem, 2009, “Trade-based diffusion of labor rights: A panel study, 1986–2002,” American Political Science Review, 103(4), 669–690.Google Scholar
Hafner-Burton, Emilie M., 2005, “Trading human rights: How preferential trade agreements influence government repression,” International Organization, 59 (3), 593–629.Google Scholar
Hafner-Burton, Emilie M., 2009, Forced to Be Good: Why Trade Agreements Boost Human Rights, Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Halicioglu, Ferda, and Ketenci, Natalya, 2016, “The impact of international trade on environmental quality: The case of transition countries,” Energy, 109, 1130–1138.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hannan, Swarnali Ahmed, 2017, The Impact of Trade Agreements in Latin America Using the Synthetic Control Method, International Monetary Fund.Google Scholar
Hosny, Amr Sadek, 2012, “Algeria’s trade with GAFTA countries: A synthetic control approach,” Transition Studies Review, 19 (1), 35–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Juhn, Chinhui, Ujhelyi, Gergely, and Villegas-Sanchez, Carolina, 2013, “Trade liberalization and gender inequality,” American Economic Review, May 103 (3), 269–273.Google Scholar
Kaul, Ashok, Klößner, Stefan, Pfeifer, Gregor, and Schieler, Manuel, 2015, “Synthetic control methods: Never use all pre-intervention outcomes together with covariates.” IDEAS: Munich Personal RePEc Archive, https://ideas.repec.org/p/pra/mprapa/83790.htmlGoogle Scholar
Kim, Moonhawk, 2012, “Ex ante due diligence: Formation of PTAs and protection of labor rights,” International Studies Quarterly, 56 (4), 704–719.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kis-Katos, Krisztina, and Sparrow, Robert, 2011, “Child labor and trade liberalization in Indonesia,” Journal of Human Resources, 46 (4), 722–749.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kis-Katos, Krisztina, and Sparrow, Robert, 2015, “Poverty, labor markets and trade liberalization in Indonesia,” Journal of Development Economics, 117, 94–106.Google Scholar
Kohl, Tristan, Brakman, Steven, and Garretsen, Harry, 2016, “Do trade agreements stimulate international trade differently? Evidence from 296 trade agreements,” The World Economy, 39 (1), 97–131.Google Scholar
Kox, Henk L. M., and Rojas-Romagosa, Hugo, 2020, “How trade and investment agreements affect bilateral foreign direct investment: Results from a structural gravity model,” The World Economy, 43(12), 3103–3406.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Laget, E., Osnago, A., Rocha, N., and Ruta, M., 2020, “Deep trade agreements and global value chains,” Review of Industrial Organization, 57 (2), 379–410.Google Scholar
Lechner, Lisa Maria, 2018, “The European Union’s inclusion of non-trade issues in preferential trade agreements,” RESPECT mimeo.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Li, Zijian, and Jennings, Aaron, 2017, “Worldwide regulations of standard values of pesticides for human health risk control: A review,” International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 14(7), 826.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Limão, Nuno, 2007, “Are preferential trade agreements with non-trade objectives a stumbling block for multilateral liberalization?,” Review of Economic Studies, 74 (3), 821–855.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Manchin, Miriam, 2021, “Description of version 2 of the panel dataset on non-trade policy outcome indicators,” EUI RSCAS Working Paper.Google Scholar
Mansfield, Edward D., and Reinhardt, Eric, 2008, “International institutions and the volatility of international trade,” International Organization, 62 (4), 621–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McAusland, Carol, and Millimet, Daniel L., 2013, “Do national borders matter? Intranational trade, international trade, and the environment,” Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 65 (3), 411–437.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McLaughlin Mitchell, Sara, and Hensel, Paul R., 2007, “International institutions and compliance with agreements,” American Journal of Political Science, 51 (4), 721–737.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Miroudot, Sébastien, and Rigo, Davide, 2019, “Preferential trade agreements and multinational production,” RSCAS Working Papers, 2019/14.Google Scholar
Mosley, Layna, and Uno, Saika, 2007, “Racing to the bottom or climbing to the top? Economic globalization and collective labor rights,” Comparative Political Studies, 40 (8), 923–948.Google Scholar
Olper, Alessandro, Curzi, Daniele, and Swinnen, Johan, 2018, “Trade liberalization and child mortality: A synthetic control method,” World Development, 110, 394–410.Google Scholar
Orefice, Gianluca, and Rocha, Nadia, 2014, “Deep integration and production networks: An empirical analysis,” The World Economy, 37 (1), 106–136.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Osnago, Alberto, Rocha, Nadia, and Ruta, Michele, 2017, “Do deep trade agreements boost vertical FDI?,” World Bank Economic Review, 30 (1), 119–125.Google Scholar
Postnikov, Evgeny, 2014, “The design of social standards in EU and US preferential trade agreements,” in Deese, David (ed.), Handbook of the International Political Economy of Trade, Edward Elgar, pp. 531–549.Google Scholar
Rasch, Georg, 1980, Probabilistic Models for Some Intelligence and Attainment Tests, University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Rose, Andrew K., 2004, “Do we really know that the WTO increases trade?,” American Economic Review, 94 (1), 98–114.Google Scholar
Sauré, Philip, and Zoabi, Hosny, 2014, “International trade, the gender wage gap and female labor force participation,” Journal of Development Economics, 111, 17–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Spilker, Gabriele, and Böhmelt, Tobias, 2013, “The impact of preferential trade agreements on governmental repression revisited,” Review of International Organizations, 8 (3), 343–361.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ubaldo, Mattia Di, and Gasiorek, Michael, 2020, “Non-trade provisions in trade agreements and FDI,” Working Paper Series 2120, Department of Economics, University of Sussex Business School, December.Google Scholar