Imposed coherence: negotiating economic partnership agreements

Journal of European Integration

Volumn 30, Issue 3, 2008, Pages 363-380

  Elgström, Ole ^a   Pilegaard, Jess ^b  

^a LUND UNIVERSITY   (Sweden)

^b Udenrigsministeriet   (Denmark)

Author keywords

Coherence; Economic Partnership Agreements; EU ACP relations; historical institutionalism; trade negotiations

Indexed keywords

EID: 85050416713     PISSN: 07036337     EISSN: 14772280     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/07036330802141949     Document Type: Article

References (44)

1. Barnett, M., and Finnemore, M., 1999. The politics, power, and pathologies of international organizations. International Organization, 53(4): 699–732.
2. Borras, S., 1999. The cognitive turn(s) in EU studies, Roskilde: Roskilde University (Research Paper 6/99).
3. Bretherton, C., and Vogler, J., 1999. The European Union as a global actor, London: Routledge.
4. Brown, W., 2004. “ From uniqueness to uniformity? An assessment of EU development policies ”. In EU development cooperation — from model to symbol, Edited by: Arts, K., and Dickson, A., 17–41. Manchester: University Press.
5. Bulmer, S., 1998. New institutionalism and the governance of the single European market. Journal of European Public Policy, 5: 365–386.
6. Campbell, J.L., 2004. Institutional change and globalization, Princeton: University Press.
7. Carbone, M., 2008. Mission impossible: the European Union and policy coherence for development. Journal of European Integration, 30(3): 323–342.
8. Crawford, G., 1998. “ Human rights and democracy in European development policy ”. In European Union development policy, Edited by: Lister, M., 131–178. London: Macmillan.
9. Daugbjerg, C., 2003. Policy feedback and paradigm shift in EU agricultural policy: the effects of the MacSharry reform on future reform. Journal of European Public Policy, 10(3): 421–437.
10. Dickson, A., 2004. “ The unimportance of trade preferences ”. In EU development cooperation — from model to symbol, Edited by: Arts, K., and Dickson, A., 42–59. Manchester: University Press.
11. DTI and DFID. 2005. “ Economic Partnership Agreements: making EPAs deliver for development. Department of Trade and Department for International Development, 22 March 2005 ”. Available at: www.dti.gov.uk. [Accessed spring 2006]
12. Duke, S., 1999. Consistency as an issue in EU external activities, Maastricht: European Institute of Public Administration. (Working Paper, 99/W/06)
13. Dür, A., 2006. Assessing the EU’s role in international trade negotiations. European Political Science, 5: 362–376.
14. Elgström, O., 2005. “ The Cotonou Agreement. Asymmetric negotiations and the impact of norms ”. In European Union negotiations, Edited by: Elgström, O., and Jönsson, C., 183–199. London: Routledge.
15. Elsig, M., 2002. The EU’s common commercial policy: institutions, interests and ideas, Aldershot: Ashgate.
16. EPA Watch. 2002. Commission draft negotiating directives for future ACP-EU trade negotiations. Initial comments and proposals 30 April 2002. Available at: http://server2.matematici.com/epawatch/index.jsp?id=66 [Accessed 2 June 2008]
17. st Century, 20 November, Brussels: DG VIII, Development.
18. European Commission. 2002a. Draft recommendation for a COUNCIL DECISION authorising the Commission to negotiate Economic Partnership Agreements with the ACP countries and regions, Brussels 9 April 2002; see EPAwatch
19. European Commission. 2002b. EU mandate for trade negotiations with African, Caribbean and Pacific Countries, Brussels 17 June 2002
20. European Commission. 2005. Note for the attention of delegations in ACP countries, Brussels: Subject: Recent UK statements on EPAs. 11 April 2005
21. European Council. 2002. EU Council of Ministers directives for the negotiation of Economic Partnership Agreements with ACP countries and regions
22. European Research Office. 2002. The ACP guidelines and the EU negotiating mandate: a comparison, September
23. Forwood, G., 2001. The road to Cotonou: negotiating a successor to Lomé. Journal of Common Market Studies, 39(3): 423–442.
24. Hewitt, A., and Witheman, K., 2004. “ The Commission and development policy: bureaucratic politics in EU aid — from the Lomé leap forward to the difficulties of adapting to the twenty-first century ”. In EU development cooperation — from model to symbol, Edited by: Arts, K., and Dickson, A., 133–148. Manchester: University Press.
25. Hoebink, P., 2003. “ Coherence and consistency in Europe’s foreign policy ”. In Bond (anthology) Europe in the world: essays on EU foreign, security and development policies, 37–43. London: Bond.
26. Holland, M., 2002. The European Union and the Third World, Houndmills, Basingstoke: Palgrave.
27. Holland, M., 2004. “ Development policy: paradigm shifts and the ‘normalization’ of a privileged partnership? ”. In Developments in the European Union 2, Edited by: Cowles, M., and Dinan, D., 275–295. London: Palgrave Macmillan.
28. Hopmann, T., 1996. The negotiation process and the resolution of international conflicts, Columbia: University of South Carolina Press.
29. Kay, A., 2003. Path dependency and the CAP. Journal of European Public Policy, 10(3): 405–420.
30. Lister, M., 1997. The European Union and the South, London: Routledge.
31. Mandelson, P., 2005. Statement to the Development Committee of the European Parliament by Trade Commissioner Peter Mandelson, Brussels, 17 March 2005 Speeches and articles by Peter Mandelson. Available at: http://ec.europa.eu/commission_barroso/mandelson/speeches_articles/sppm019.en. htm [Accessed 1 June 2008]
32. Meunier, S., 2005. Trading voices. The European Union in international commercial negotiations, Princeton: University Press.
33. Meunier, S., and Nicolaïdes, C., 2005. “ The European Union as a trade power ”. In International relations and the European Union, Edited by: Hill, C., and Smith, M., 247–266. Oxford: University Press.
34. Nugent, N., 2003. The government and politics of the European Union, Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
35. Nuttall, S., 2005. “ Coherence and Consistency ”. In International Relations and the European Union, Edited by: Hill, C., and Smith, M., 91–112. Oxford: University Press.
36. Pierson, P., 1993. When effect becomes cause. World Politics, 45: 595–628.
37. Pierson, P., 1998. “ The path to European integration: a historical institutionalist analysis ”. In European integration and supranational governance, Edited by: Sandholtz, W., and Sweet, A., 27–58. Oxford: University Press.
38. Pierson, P., 2000. Path dependence, increasing returns and political science. American Political Science Review, 94(2): 251–267.
39. Pilegaard, J., 2006. Between coherence and fragmentation: the EU’s everything but arms initiative, Copenhagen: Political Studies Press.
40. Putnam, R., 1988. Diplomacy and domestic politics: the logic of two-level games. International Organization, 42: 427–460.
41. Ravenhill, J., 2002. Back to the nest? Europe’s relations with the African, Caribbean and Pacific group of countries, University of Edinburgh. (Working Paper PEIF-9)
42. Stetter, S., 2004. Cross-pillar politics: functional unity and institutional fragmentation of EU foreign policies. Journal of European Public Policy, 11(4): 720–739.
43. Van Reisen, M., 1999. EU global player: the North–South policy of the European Union, Utrecht: Eurostep International Books.
44. Young, A., 2007. Trade politics ain’t what it used to be: The European Union in the Doha Round. Journal of Common Market Studies, 45(4): 789–811.