Market Power Europe in Concept and Practice Chad Damro EU as - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Market Power Europe in Concept and Practice

Chad Damro ‘EU as International Global Actor’ Seminar Series University of Luxembourg 12 June 2014

EU As a Power Debates

n If the EU is something new or sui generis,

what kind of actor is it?

n Small power, gentle power, superpower,

quiet superpower, middle power, ethical power, risk-averse power, fragmented power, tranquil power, conflicted trade power, transformative power, and realist power

Civilian Power

n EU Identity: As opposed to military power n Duchene (1972): EC is “long on economic

power and relatively short on armed force”

n EU able to achieve ‘civilian ends’ n How?

n Non-military n Economic, diplomatic, and cultural policy

instruments

n Typically persuasive, not coercive

Normative Power Europe

n Source of identity: rejection of nationalism,

imperialism and war; unique character as ‘hybrid polity’; long-term development of values in Treaties and practices

n EU Identity: 5 core norms and 4 minor norms n EU able to shape identities of non-members and

change perceptions of what is ‘normal’

n How?

n Contagion, informational diffusion, procedural

diffusion, transference, overt diffusion and cultural filter

Alternative Basis for EU Identity

n Historical development n ECSC, EEC, SEM, etc. n Present role in international system n Primary empirical context for EU n Fundamental basis for EU identity n Large regulated market

Market Power Europe

n EU as Single Market

n Size of market matters

n EU as Regulator

n Regulatory State n Regulatory Capacity

n EU as Domestic Arena of Interest

Contestation

n Relative influence of interest groups and

coalitions

How MPE Exercises Power

n Externalisation

n Attempt to get an actor to adhere to level of

regulation similar to EU or behave in way that generally satisfies or conforms to EU’s market-related policies and regulations

n Intentional/Unintentional n Persuasive/Coercive n Analytical problems n Focus on tools

MPE Tools

q Positive Tools

n Conclusion of trade, cooperation and association agreements n Tariff reduction, quota increase, granting inclusion in GSP n Providing aid, extending loans

n Negative Tools

n Delaying conclusion of agreements, suspending or denouncing

agreements, withdrawing GSP

n Embargo, boycott, tarriff increase, quota decrease n Reducing or suspending aid, delaying granting of successive

loan tranches

n Additional Tools

Evidence of MPE

n What the EU is, says and does n Commission documents n 2001, 2006, 2007, 2010 n Trade policy as illustration n Cases

Potential Cases

n COM: GSM, product safety, food safety,

environmental protection, public procurement, financial regulation, accounting, piracy and counterfeiting, public health (tobacco control), maritime safety, automobiles

n Ban on trade in Bluefin tuna n REACH/chemicals n Singapore Issue n Ban on unsafe airlines n WTO Disputes n Climate change n GMOs

Potential Cases

n Cotonou Denial of Tariff Preferences n GSP+ Denial of Tariff Preferences n Kimberley Process n Trade in Timber n Ban on use of leghold animal traps and imports of furs

from countries that do not have equivalent regulations

n Ban on wildlife trade with Indonesia n Diplomatic and economic pressure to convince Norway

and Canada to prohibit the killing of baby seals

n Labour (including use of child and prison labour) n Data privacy/safe harbour agreement n Securities regulation

Conceptual Contributions

n Utility of EU as Power debates n Key differences for MPE

n Different identity (with key characteristics) n Coercion fundamental feature of MPE n MPE targets non-state actors

n No problem of inconsistency

Market Power Europe and the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership

Why does TTIP matter for MPE?

n While this would be world’s largest trade

agreement, regulatory matters are prominent in the negotiations.

n TTIP is crucial case for MPE because US is an

equally powerful actor in the area of trade.

n If another actor has same characteristics, to what extent

can/does EU externalise like MPE?

Outcomes

n Market Size

n Due to similar size of US market, MPE externalization

• ccurs via coordination.

n Regulatory Capacity

n Similar levels of regulatory capacity and framework

agreements encourage externalisation via process of policy adjustment (and MPE open to reciprocal externalization).

n Interest Contestation

n When/if pro-externalisation coalitions form, they tend to

push for coordination instead of coercive externalization.

Conclusions

n MPE as a conceptual framework n Plenty of policy areas to investigate n TTIP is a trade negotiation like no other for EU. n TTIP as next step of bilateral relationship and

best way to address multilateral aspirations.

n May we best conceive of EU as MPE?