Jacob Mardell compares the US and EU strategies to ensure access to raw materials necessary for the green transition in the face of global competition and shows how these should be based on genuine and inclusive partnerships rather than just economic interests.
Exploring the opportunities and challenges of addressing climate change under the AfCFTA and providing recommendations for governments, stakeholders, and development partners
Major multilateral institutions have long claimed that their market-oriented trade rules reduce poverty and advance development. Instead, they hold back the developing world from a more human-centric, social-justice approach that it needs to reach its potential. South Africa has the potential to set an example of how a global “middle power” can drive change. The Covid-19 pandemic has provided extra impetus – and a test.
Turkey and multilateral institutions alike, including the European Union, were already struggling with political and economic crises in the years before the pandemic multiplied the sense of catastrophe. As they seek to pull themselves out of the depths of Covid-19, it is time to set aside the divisions that have long stalled progress for all of them, and seek recovery in cooperation and mutual benefit.
Trade agreements have become an important battleground for tech companies to fight the regulatory pressure they are finally facing in the Global North. But allowing tech companies to capture digital trade talks to defang domestic regulation creates serious risks for privacy, fundamental rights, competition, social and economic justice, and sustainable development.
Mega-infrastructure plans and financing and investment policies to promote private investments in the energy, transport and water sectors are on the rise. This publication provides recommendations to policy- and decision-makers on how human rights and environmental benefits can be maximized.
In this report, we assess the potential of three relatively promising international processes – the focus on fossil fuel subsidy (FFS) reform in the G20 group, the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), and the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) – to act as possible routes to reform in a transatlantic context.
The Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) could include rules on investment protection, including so called investor- state dispute settlement (ISDS).
TTIP will affect a broad range of issues, from energy to the environment, and intellectual property rights to labor rights. The agreement could also have a significant impact on the evolution of agricultural markets and food systems in the U.S. and EU.
This paper examines how the current WTO negotiations propose limits or disciplines on governmental regulations. The paper focuses on regulations that limit or discourage speculators from participating in commodity markets, which contributes to volatility in the prices of food commodities. To demonstrate this point, the paper presents a case study of a specific policy option for regulation of derivatives. It concludes with a description of options for resolving the ambiguity of selected disciplines.
The World Trade Organization is negotiating “disciplines” on domestic regulation, which is essential for both development and environmental protection. Often ambiguous, some of the draft disciplines can be interpreted as a radical departure from the practice of most nations. They could change the course of regulation and development, particularly within federal systems and in small and vulnerable economies, where government systems are changing.
The World Trade Organization is negotiating “disciplines” on domestic regulation, one of which requires regulations to be “pre-established.” Established before what? If this means, before a development permit is sought, the discipline would limit the government’s authority to change environmental or community impact standards before a permit is issued. If so, this discipline could constrain changes in climate policy or environmental regulation of existing extraction industries.
The World Trade Organization is negotiating “disciplines” on domestic regulation, one of which requires regulations to be “pre-established.” Established before what? If this means, before government can apply regulations to an existing financial institution, the discipline would limit the government’s authority to change “too big to fail” policies or increase developmental lending mandates to serve businesses that are rural, small, or owned by women.
The World Trade Organization is negotiating “disciplines” on domestic regulation that could be more powerful than negotiators realize. They could transform the GATS, the General Agreement on Trade in Services, into the first trade agreement that foreign investors enforce through claims against governments for hundreds of millions of dollars. If so, the magnitude of disputes could change the course of development for a small state or a vulnerable economy.
The purpose of this paper is to contribute to a better understanding of the changes that are taking place in the international normative framework on investment through surveying the European Union and United States’ Free Trade Agreements (FTAs) with developing countries.
As with many of the other WTO negotiating areas, talks on “trade in services” present serious challenges to developing countries. One challenge is the fact that – whereas tariffs are a primary barrier to trade in goods – domestic laws and regulations are the primary barrier to trade in services. Hence, when governments make commitments to liberalize services in different sectors such as, energy, environment, basic services, domestic laws and regulations governing these services need to be re-examined to ensure that they do not conflict with WTO rules.
