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
6 - The Role of Domestic Factors in the EU’s Governance of Labour Standards through Trade
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
This chapter analyses the role of domestic factors in the ability of the EU to promote non-trade policy objectives through formal trade policies and market integration as two distinct governance approaches. Focusing on labour standards, the chapter examines how economic and political factors in developing economies influence the ability of key stakeholders – governments, businesses and labour organizations – to undermine or reinforce EU governance efforts. It uses a combination of regression and comparative case analysis to assess associations and understand processes on the ground. The quantitative analysis shows that improvements in labour standards are closely associated with (1) labour standards in key export markets, (2) the technological sophistication of exports, (3) state capacity and (4) the freedom of civil society organizations. Comparative analysis of how differences in state strategies and capacity, key export destinations and the strength of labour organizations across Moldova and Morocco set in place divergent pathways of improvements in labour standards allows us to shed more light on the potentials and limitations of EU governance efforts.
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- Coherence of the European Union Trade Policy with Its Non-Trade ObjectivesWorld Trade Forum, pp. 148 - 179Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2023
References
Adolph, C., Quince, V., & Prakash, A. (2017). “The Shanghai effect: Do exports to China affect labor practices in Africa?” World Development 89, 1–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Amengual, M., & Chirot, L. (2016). “Reinforcing the state: Transnational and state labour regulation in Indonesia.” ILR Review 69(5), 1056–1080.Google Scholar
Amengual, M., & Distelhorst, G. (2020). “Cooperation and punishment in regulating labor standards: Evidence from the Gap Inc supply chain.” https://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3466936Google Scholar
Amengual, M., & Kuruvilla, S. (2020). “Editorial essay: Introduction to a special issue on improving private regulation of labor in global supply chains: Theory and evidence.” ILR Review 73(4), 809–816. https://doi.org/10.1177/0019793920927693Google Scholar
Anner, M. (2020). “Squeezing workers’ rights in global supply chains: Purchasing practices in the Bangladesh garment export sector in comparative perspective.” Review of International Political Economy 27(2), 320–347.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ashraf, N., & van Seters, Jeske (2020). “Making it count: Civil society engagement in EU trade agreements.” ECDPM Discussion Paper No. 276.Google Scholar
Bair, J., Anner, M., & Blasi, J. (2020). “The political economy of private and public regulation in post-Rana Plaza Bangladesh.” ILR Review 73(4), 969–994. https://doi.org/10.1177/0019793920925424CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barrientos, S., Gereffi, G., & Rossi, A. (2011). “Economic and social upgrading in global production networks: A new paradigm for a changing world.” International Labour Review 150(3–4), 319–340.Google Scholar
Börzel, T., & Lebanidze, B. (2015). “European Neighbourhood Policy at the crossroads: Evaluating the past to shape the future.” Working Paper Series No. 12, July.Google Scholar
Bradford, A. (2012). “The Brussels effect.” Northwestern University Law Review 107(1), n.p.Google Scholar
Brando, N., Lein, B., & Marx, A. (2016). “The protection of labour rights in trade agreements: The case of the EU–Colombia Agreement.” Journal of World Trade 50(4), 587–610.Google Scholar
Bruszt, L., and Langbein, J. (2020). “Manufacturing development: How transnational market integration shapes opportunities and capacities for development in Europe’s three peripheries.” Review of International Political Economy 27(5), 996–1019.Google Scholar
Bruszt, L., & McDermott, G. (2014). Leveling the Playing Field: Transnational Regulatory Integration and Development. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Cao, X., Greenhill, B., & Prakash, A. (2013). “Where is the tipping point? Bilateral trade and the diffusion of human rights.” British Journal of Political Science 43(1), 133–156.Google Scholar
Cingranelli, D. L., Richards, D. L., & Clay, C. K. (2014). “The CIRI Human Rights Dataset.” current version copyrights:2014, Dataset version: 2014.04.14, www.humanrightsdata.com/Google Scholar
Commission Européennes (CE) (2005–2015). “Rapport de Suivi Maroc.” Document de Travail des Services de la Commission, Bruxelles.Google Scholar
Coppedge, M., Gerring, J., Knutsen, C. H., Krusell, J., Medzihorsky, J., Pernes, J., … & Wilson, S. L. (2019). “The methodology of ‘varieties of democracy’ (V-Dem).” Bulletin of Sociological Methodology/Bulletin de Méthodologie Sociologique 143(1), 107–133.Google Scholar
Distelhorst, G., & Locke, R. M. (2018). “Does compliance pay? Social standards and firm‐level trade.” American Journal of Political Science 62(3), 695–711.Google Scholar
Distelhorst, G., Locke, R. M., Pal, T., & Samel, H. M. (2015). “Production goes global, standards stay local: Private regulation in the global electronics industry.” Regulation & Governance 9(3), 224–242.Google Scholar
European Commission (EC) (2004–2019). “ENP Progress Report on Moldova.” Commission Staff Working Paper, Brussels.Google Scholar
Garcia, M., & Masselot, A. (2015). “EU–Asia Free Trade Agreements as tools for social norm/legislation transfer?” Asia Europe Journal 13, 241–252.Google Scholar
Gereffi, G., Humphrey, J., & Sturgeon, T. (2005). “The governance of global value chains.” Review of International Political Economy 12(1), 78–104.Google Scholar
Gereffi, G., & Lee, J. (2016). “Economic and social upgrading in global value chains and industrial clusters: Why governance matters.” Journal of Business Ethics 133(1), 25–38.Google Scholar
Greenhill, B., Mosley, L., & Prakash, A. (2009). “Trade-based diffusion of labor rights: A panel study, 1986–2002.” American Political Science Review 103(4), 669–690.Google Scholar
Hafner-Burton, E. (2005). “Trading human rights: How preferential trade agreements influence government repression.” International Organization 59(3), 593–629.Google Scholar
Hainmueller, J., & Hiscox, M. J. (2015). “The socially conscious consumer? Field experimental tests of consumer support for fair labor standards.” MIT Political Science Department Research Paper No. 2012-15, https://ssrn.com/abstract=2062435Google Scholar
Harrison, J., Barbu, M., Campling, L., Richardson, B., & Smith, A. (2019). “Governing labour standards through free trade agreements: Limits of the European Union’s trade and sustainable development chapters.” JCMS: Journal of Common Market Studies 57(2), 260–277.Google Scholar
International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC) (20142020). “ITUC Global Rights Index. The world’s worst countries for workers.” International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC) publication.Google Scholar
Kim, L. (2012). “Ex ante due diligence: Formation of PTAs and protection of labour rights.” International Studies Quarterly 56, 704–719.Google Scholar
Lall, S. (2000). ”The technological structure and performance of developing country manufactured exports, 1985–98.” Oxford Development Studies 28(3), 337–369.Google Scholar
Locke, R. M. (2013). The Promise and Limits of Private Power: Promoting Labor Standards in a Global Economy. Cambridge Studies in Comparative Politics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Locke, R. M., Rissing, B. A., & Pal, T. (2013). “Complements or substitutes? Private codes, state regulation and the enforcement of labour standards in global supply chains.” British Journal of Industrial Relations 51(3), 519–552.Google Scholar
Malesky, E. J., & Mosley, L. (2018). “Chains of love? Global production and the firm‐level diffusion of labor standards.” American Journal of Political Science 62(3), 712–728.Google Scholar
Malesky, E. J., & Mosley, L. (2021). “Labor upgrading and export market opportunities: Evidence from Vietnam.” Economics & Politics 33(3), 483–513.Google Scholar
Marques, J. C., & Eberlein, B. (2020). “Grounding transnational business governance: A political‐strategic perspective on government responses in the Global South.” Regulation & Governance 15(4), 1209–1229.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marx, A., Brecht, L., & Brando, N. (2016). “The protection of labour rights in trade agreements: The case of the EU–Columbia agreement.” Journal of World Trade 50(4), 587–610.Google Scholar
Meardi, G. (2013). Social Failures of EU Enlargement: A Case of Workers Voting with Their Feet. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Miller, D. (2011). “Global social relations and corporate social responsibility in outsourced apparel supply chains: The Inditex Global Framework Agreement.” In Papadakis, K. (Ed.), Shaping Global Industrial Relations (pp. 179–200). Basingstoke; New York: Palgrave Macmillan; ILO.Google Scholar
Mosley, L. (2008). “Workers’ rights in open economies: Global production and domestic institutions in the developing world.” Comparative Political Studies 41(4–5), 674–714.Google Scholar
Oehri, M. (2015). “Comparing US and EU labour governance ‘near and far’ – Hierarchy vs network?” Journal of European Public Policy 22(5), 731–749.Google Scholar
Orbie, J., & Van den Putte, L. (2016). “Labour rights in Peru and the EU trade agreement: Compliance with the commitments under the sustainable development chapter.” ÖFSE Working Paper No. 58.Google Scholar
Pál, T., Maduko, F., & Bruszt, L. (2021), “Promoting Labour Standards through the European Neighbourhood Policy.” Robert Schuman Centre for Advanced Studies Research Paper No. RSC 2021/78, http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3972281CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Peterson, T. M., Murdie, A., & Asal, V. (2016). “Human rights, NGO shaming and the exports of abusive states.” British Journal of Political Science 48(3), 767–786.Google Scholar
Pike, K. (2020). “Voice in supply chains: Does the Better Work program lead to improvements in labor standards compliance?” ILR Review 73(4), 913–938.Google Scholar
Piore, M. J., & Schrank, A. (2008). “Toward managed flexibility: The revival of labour inspection in the Latin world.” International Labour Review 147(1), 1–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Postnikov, E., & Bastiaens, I. (2014). “Does dialogue work? The effectiveness of labor standards in EU preferential trade agreements.” Journal of European Public Policy 21(6), 923–940.Google Scholar
Rossi, A. (2013). “Does economic upgrading lead to social upgrading in global production networks? Evidence from Morocco.” World Development 46, 223–233.Google Scholar
Schimmelfennig, F., & Scholtz, H. (2008). “EU democracy promotion in the European neighbourhood: Political conditionality, economic development and transnational exchange.” European Union Politics 9(2), 187–215.Google Scholar
Schrank, A. (2009). “Professionalization and probity in a patrimonial state: Labor inspectors in the Dominican Republic.” Latin American Politics and Society 51(2), 91–115.Google Scholar
Schrank, A. (2013). “From disguised protectionism to rewarding regulation: The impact of trade-related labour standards in the Dominican Republic.” Regulation and Governance 7, 299–320.Google Scholar
Short, J. L, Toel, M. W., & Hugill, A. R. (2020). “Improving working conditions in global supply chains: The role of institutional environments and monitoring program design.” Industrial and Labor Relations Review 73(4), 873–912.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sturgeon, T., Van Biesebroeck, J., & Gereffi, G. (2008). “Value chains, networks and clusters: Reframing the global automotive industry.” Journal of Economic Geography 8(3), 297–321.Google Scholar
U.S. Department of State (USDS) (2004–2019(a)). “Country Report on Human Rights Practices – Moldova.” Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights and Labor, Washington.Google Scholar
U.S. Department of State (USDS) (2004–2019(b)). “Country Report on Human Rights Practices – Morocco.” Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights and Labor, Washington.Google Scholar
Vogel, D., & Kagan, R. A. (Eds.) (2004). Dynamics of Regulatory Change: How Globalization Affects National Regulatory Policies (Vol. 1). Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Winship, C., & Mare, R. D. (1984). “Regression models with ordinal variables.” American Sociological Review 49(4), 512–525.Google Scholar