tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9208316479128947462024-03-13T17:51:48.383+05:30Tread the middle pathRamblings about international trade & investment law and rule-making in a globalised world...Srikarhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17073379167588035440noreply@blogger.comBlogger874125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-920831647912894746.post-62534045899283492972024-03-11T22:42:00.005+05:302024-03-11T22:42:57.625+05:30Climate change and FTAs<p style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: trebuchet;">Following on the <b><a href="https://www.efta.int/sites/default/files/documents/legal-texts/free-trade-relations/india/1.%20Main%20Agreement.pdf">EFTA-India TEPA</a></b> posts, apart from investment promotion an interesting set of arguments on the labour provisions are found here in the<b><a href="https://ielp.worldtradelaw.net/2024/03/let-them-eat-cake-reflections-on-the-labor-provisions-in-the-new-india-efta-agreement.html"> IELP blog</a></b> by<b><a href="https://twitter.com/LeclercqDesiree"> Desiree LeClerco</a></b>. </span></p><p style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: trebuchet;">As a continuation, let us look at the "Climate Change" provisions in the FTA. A rarity in India's FTA, the provisions read as under:</span></p><p style="text-align: justify;"><i><span style="font-family: trebuchet;">Article. 11.5</span></i></p><p style="text-align: justify;"><i><span style="font-family: trebuchet;"> Climate Change </span></i></p><p><i><span style="font-family: trebuchet;"></span></i></p><blockquote><p style="text-align: justify;"><i><span style="font-family: trebuchet;">1. The Parties recognise the importance of achieving the objectives and goals of
the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, done at New
York on 09 May 1992 (hereinafter referred to as “UNFCCC”) and the Paris
Agreement, done at Paris on 12 December 2015, in order to address the urgent
threat of climate change, based on best available science and reflecting the
principles of the UNFCCC and the Paris Agreement, including equity and the
principle of common but differentiated responsibilities and respective
capabilities, in light of different national circumstances. </span></i></p><p style="text-align: justify;"><i><span style="font-family: trebuchet;">2. The Parties reaffirm their commitment to implement their respective obligations
and commitments under the UNFCCC and the Paris Agreement. </span></i></p><p style="text-align: justify;"><i><span style="font-family: trebuchet;">3. Pursuant to paragraph 1, the Parties shall endeavour to cooperate bilaterally, and
in other fora, as appropriate.</span></i></p></blockquote><p style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: trebuchet;">Would these provisions have an impact during implementation of the trade agreement? </span></p><p><i></i></p>Srikarhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17073379167588035440noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-920831647912894746.post-16128448887117670962024-03-10T20:37:00.004+05:302024-03-10T20:44:03.452+05:30Of innovation, targets and compliance - a new template in FTAs?<p><span style="font-family: trebuchet;">More on the recently concluded EFTA-India FTA.</span></p><p><span style="font-family: trebuchet;">As reported in the press, this is perhaps for the first time in the negotiating history of FTAs that investment promotion targets and job creation have been included in a legal free trade agreement in the <b><a href="https://www.efta.int/sites/default/files/documents/legal-texts/free-trade-relations/india/1.%20Main%20Agreement.pdf">EFTA-India FTA</a></b>.</span></p><p><span style="font-family: trebuchet;">As this <b><a href="https://pib.gov.in/PressReleaseIframePage.aspx?PRID=2013169#:~:text=EFTA%20has%20committed%20to%20promote,not%20cover%20foreign%20portfolio%20investment.">press note</a></b> stated, </span></p><ul style="background-color: white; box-sizing: border-box; color: #333333; font-size: 14px; margin: 0px 0px 10px 40px; padding: 0px;"><li style="box-sizing: border-box; text-align: justify;"><span style="box-sizing: border-box;"><span style="box-sizing: border-box; font-family: trebuchet; font-size: 16px;"><i>EFTA has committed to promote investments with the aim to increase the stock of foreign direct investments by USD 100 billion in India in the next 15 years, and to facilitate the generation of 1 million direct employment in India, through such investments. The investments do not cover foreign portfolio investment.</i></span></span></li><li style="box-sizing: border-box; text-align: justify;"><span style="box-sizing: border-box;"><span style="box-sizing: border-box; font-family: trebuchet; font-size: 16px;"><i>For the first ever time in the history of FTAs, a legal commitment is being made about promoting target-oriented investment and creation of jobs.</i></span></span></li></ul><div style="text-align: justify;"><span style="color: #333333; font-family: trebuchet;">Chapter 7 of the FTA speaks about Investment Promotion and Co-operation. The relevant provision related to foreign direct investment commitments is listed here:</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span style="color: #333333; font-family: trebuchet;"><br /></span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span style="color: #333333; font-family: trebuchet;">Article 7.1.3 states:</span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><span style="color: #333333; font-family: trebuchet;"><i></i></span></div><blockquote><div style="text-align: justify;"><span style="color: #333333; font-family: trebuchet;"><i><br /></i></span></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><i><span style="font-family: trebuchet;">The Parties share the objectives that: </span></i></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><i><span style="font-family: trebuchet;"><br /></span></i></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><i><span style="font-family: trebuchet;">(a) the EFTA States shall aim to increase foreign direct investment from
investors of the EFTA States into India by 50 billion (US dollars) within
10 years from the entry into force of this Agreement and an additional
50 billion (US dollars) in the succeeding 5 years 6 7
; and</span></i></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><i><span style="font-family: trebuchet;"><br /></span></i></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><i><span style="font-family: trebuchet;">(b) the EFTA States shall aim to facilitate the generation of 1 million jobs8
within 15 years in India from the entry into force of this Agreement,
resulting from inflows of foreign direct investment from investors of the
EFTA States into India.</span></i></div></blockquote><p><span style="font-family: trebuchet;">Non-compliance is not subject to dispute settlement but India can take remedial measures under Article 7.8 to rebalance
the concessions given to the EFTA States in the Schedule of Commitments
under the Chapter on Trade in Goods.</span></p><p><span style="font-family: trebuchet;">Some quick thoughts:</span></p><p><span style="font-family: trebuchet;">Though the chapter is not subject to dispute settlement ( a lengthy legal process of a panel hearing and appellate review), there are remedial measures for "non-compliance". Thus, it is not hard law in terms of legal enforcement through dispute settlement but soft law with a bite! Further the obligation of foreign direct investment is only on EFTA and not vice vera. FDI targets and job employment figures for the first time as "commitments" in an FTA.</span></p><p><span style="font-family: trebuchet;">FTA templates are not static they say. This is surely on good example.</span></p><div style="text-align: justify;"><i></i></div>Srikarhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17073379167588035440noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-920831647912894746.post-11222346966346351622024-03-10T13:19:00.009+05:302024-03-10T13:22:55.370+05:30Another FTA in the making.<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEhGHig8x9qoxh_PUgvf7xDoxkvcoPzExr9iDK_C5lakn1Wgrwmuya6MPVQZ7HuUFsM5NF8bNk_Qw0oq2eUvXn2YOaISF4SHted2KgjRzDzCrPxoPjZB2SES5hsUo5Hl1TEfD0CV4gSHmAyeS8dI6F4VzKbKRmIUyYt8sJHBn8CA30xEiI7lyug1r4TvTWs" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img alt="" data-original-height="170" data-original-width="276" height="197" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEhGHig8x9qoxh_PUgvf7xDoxkvcoPzExr9iDK_C5lakn1Wgrwmuya6MPVQZ7HuUFsM5NF8bNk_Qw0oq2eUvXn2YOaISF4SHted2KgjRzDzCrPxoPjZB2SES5hsUo5Hl1TEfD0CV4gSHmAyeS8dI6F4VzKbKRmIUyYt8sJHBn8CA30xEiI7lyug1r4TvTWs" width="320" /></a></div><div style="text-align: center;">(EFTA)</div><p>Fresh from the press today! </p><p>Reports of a free trade agreement between India and European Free Trade Association (EFTA) consisting of The Governments of Iceland, the Principality of Liechtenstein, the Kingdom of Norway
and the Swiss Confederation are in the news <b><a href="https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/economy/foreign-trade/india-efta-announce-free-trade-pact-to-promote-investments/articleshow/108363224.cms?from=mdr">here</a></b>, <b><a href="https://www.livemint.com/news/india/indiaefta-formally-free-trade-agreement-signed-on-sunday-all-you-need-to-know-11710051688256.html">here</a></b>, <b><a href="https://www.financialexpress.com/policy/india-efta-ink-free-trade-agreement-bkg-3420350/">here</a></b> and <b><a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K4Oh0MhM5nU">here</a></b>.</p><p>So an FTA would have a basic text - and here it is - the <b><a href="https://www.efta.int/sites/default/files/documents/legal-texts/free-trade-relations/india/1.%20Main%20Agreement.pdf">India-EFTA FTA</a></b>.</p><p>The detailed commitments parties to the FTA have made is found <b><a href="https://www.efta.int/free-trade/ongoing-negotiations-talks/india">here</a></b>.</p>Srikarhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17073379167588035440noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-920831647912894746.post-74153389071764263342024-03-05T08:20:00.006+05:302024-03-05T08:22:45.372+05:30Of WTO Ministerial Conferences and outcomes<p><span style="font-family: times; font-size: x-small;"><br /></span></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEg5ujNOKjgADFagXi0tz33FIJRb6gzGFR8tpbQO0nylsBn2VCv6VJbXLjNoxkXJBh2DuwTbiRzLseef-atlX2ZsqMxTg7cRx7NqNDAqiu1d7V585VmzHJRz7MTOZLdGBALfh5wApub_jKAspHIFtHFN2SK76N_HL2BF9qr4PYBVCDVKiN5WVvktMxObXHE" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img alt="" data-original-height="178" data-original-width="283" height="201" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEg5ujNOKjgADFagXi0tz33FIJRb6gzGFR8tpbQO0nylsBn2VCv6VJbXLjNoxkXJBh2DuwTbiRzLseef-atlX2ZsqMxTg7cRx7NqNDAqiu1d7V585VmzHJRz7MTOZLdGBALfh5wApub_jKAspHIFtHFN2SK76N_HL2BF9qr4PYBVCDVKiN5WVvktMxObXHE" width="320" /></a>(<span style="font-family: times; font-size: small; text-align: left;">https://www.wto.org/english/thewto_e/minist_e/mc13_e/mc13_e.htm)</span></div><p><span style="font-family: trebuchet;">For those who are cursorily following the developments of the 13th Ministerial Conference at the World Trade Organization which just concluded at Abu Dhabi, UAE, here is a <b><a href="https://www.wto.org/english/thewto_e/minist_e/mc13_e/documents_e.htm">detailed list of decisions</a></b> that were agreed upon hosted on the WTO website.</span></p><p><span style="font-family: trebuchet;">The Abu Dhabi Ministerial Declaration, the main Ministerial decision, is <b><a href="https://docs.wto.org/dol2fe/Pages/SS/directdoc.aspx?filename=q:/WT/MIN24/DEC.pdf&Open=True">here</a></b>. Much is said about the breakdown of the dispute settlement process in the WTO with the Appellate Body being defunct. The Ministerial Conference agreed to work towards a resolution with<b><a href="https://docs.wto.org/dol2fe/Pages/SS/directdoc.aspx?filename=q:/WT/MIN24/37.pdf&Open=True"> this decision</a></b>.</span></p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><div class="row pb10" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin-left: -15px; margin-right: -15px; padding-bottom: 10px;"><br /></div>Srikarhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17073379167588035440noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-920831647912894746.post-54267659456245086382023-10-28T11:09:00.002+05:302023-10-28T11:09:24.828+05:30Of some myths and a quiz<p style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: times;">Back to some weekend trade readings:</span></p><p style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: times;"><b><a href="https://www.cato.org/blog">CATO</a></b> has this interesting set of articles on globalization - called the <b><a href="https://www.cato.org/defending-globalization">Defending Globalization</a></b>. Two articles in it is close to what this blog is about - international trade;</span></p><p style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: times;">1. <b><a href="https://www.cato.org/publications/world-trade-organization-myths-versus-reality">James Bacchus</a></b> has written succinctly and brilliantly on the myths and truths surrounding the World Trade Organization - on how views on the creation, motivations and agenda surrounding the WTO are mixed. That free trade doesn't really mean no barriers at all in the context of global trade rules and on how the dispute settlement mechanism works.</span></p><p style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: times;">2. <b><a href="https://www.cato.org/publications/why-do-we-need-trade-agreements-all">Simon Lester</a></b> writes about the confusion around what free trade agreements are all about. They are not about unbridled free trade but reduced barriers with set rules of the game. Of course, it depends on the political appetite and economic realities in countries which determine the extent to which they are willling to go in these trade agreements - shallow or <b><a href="https://datatopics.worldbank.org/dta/about-the-project.html">deep trade agreements as the World Bank</a></b> calls them.</span></p><p style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: times;">Lastly an <b><a href="https://catoinstitute568.outgrow.us/catoinstitute568catoinstitute-2">interesting quiz</a></b> on international trade. Having been a trade negotiator myself but now a jaded one at that, I decided to bite the bullet and take it. Though largely US-centric, I faired pretty okay and got this certificate:</span></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEhnPm3hI9eRiYhHAiiv9ZD_V7PD9Mserz3wmxMgKlRoEIMH8oyFskTILJbNT_LH_ddpnhGWn1ZkxsJHom7duTzvqd8H3URh8Cu6kxtozG2LnPy3ucpljl7mGZ2s7ZV3PXLp_PLHiPlLO3u4DYkD-hsM9Y6R8r8DH4BeRJd6PC7_GTzb9HVc87i_11_XV0s" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><span style="font-family: times;"><img alt="" data-original-height="1292" data-original-width="2856" height="210" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEhnPm3hI9eRiYhHAiiv9ZD_V7PD9Mserz3wmxMgKlRoEIMH8oyFskTILJbNT_LH_ddpnhGWn1ZkxsJHom7duTzvqd8H3URh8Cu6kxtozG2LnPy3ucpljl7mGZ2s7ZV3PXLp_PLHiPlLO3u4DYkD-hsM9Y6R8r8DH4BeRJd6PC7_GTzb9HVc87i_11_XV0s=w464-h210" width="464" /></span></a></div><p style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: times;">Time to restart active blogging!</span></p>Srikarhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17073379167588035440noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-920831647912894746.post-62776246637872177862023-10-26T23:11:00.000+05:302023-10-26T23:11:17.331+05:30ISDS - what is the path ahead?<p style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: times;">Investor State Dispute Settlement (ISDS) has been and will remain a contentious issue in national and international fora. Does it give foreign corporations an unbridled right to ride rough shod on national governments and priorities? On the other hand, is it essential for the maintenance of the rule of law and minimum protection against arbitrary action? Does it foster foreign direct investment? Has it been undeniably harsh on developing economies? Are the damages claimed in these proceedings unjustifiable?</span></p><p style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: times;">For those following these issues, white papers are not uncommon. A recent white paper on why ISDS should be abandoned in the Americas is an interesting read. Titled <b><a href="https://rethinktrade.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/1565_ISDS-Free-Americas-White-Paper_10.24-1.pdf">"Turning the Tide: How to Harness the Americas
Partnership for Economic Prosperity
to Deliver an ISDS-Free Americas"</a>.</b> It argues for an exit from ISDS for countries in this region.</span></p><p style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: times;">One interesting aspect that the paper covers is whether ISDS promotes FDI at all. While the jury is still out on this aspect, the paper claims:</span></p><p></p><blockquote style="font-style: italic; text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: times;">Promised Boost in Foreign Direct
Investment Never Materialized: In essence,
ISDS essentially offers corporations a form
of government-subsidized, cost-free political
risk insurance to move their capital across
borders, and it does so largely irrespective of
the investors’ motives or the impacts of their
investments. Many countries entered into
these agreements under the assumption that
such investment protections and privileges
would promote foreign investment flows.
However, decades of econometric studies
have found no conclusive evidence that
investment agreements, of which ISDS is
typically a prominent feature, actually result
in increased foreign direct investment in host
countries. </span></blockquote><p style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: times;">Another <b><a href="https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/joes.12392">study quoted</a></b> in the paper looks at the impact of IIAs on FDI and has this rather discerning observation:</span></p><p><i><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="background-color: white;"></span></span></i></p><blockquote style="text-align: justify;"><i><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="background-color: white;">Given the widespread interest devoted to the effect of IIAs and the intuitively appealing notion that providing a measure of protection for foreign investors should reduce the riskiness of FDI and thus increase it, it is worthwhile to reflect on why the measured effect of IIAs is so negligibly small. One possibility is that the protection provided to investors by IIAs is in fact insufficient to alter their investment decisions. This could be because investors find the cost of arbitration under IIAs to be too costly (potentially in excess of $5 million); too risky (in that they have no better than a 50:50 chance of winning in arbitration); or that the arbitral awards are inadequate compensation for their losses (arbitrators often award amounts that are less than the plaintiff firms claim as losses). </span><span style="background-color: white;">A second possibility could be the proliferation of IIAs. Over 3000 BITs have been signed and to these should be added the investor protection mechanisms embodied in the other types of treaties we have discussed in this paper. Thus, as the number of IIAs increases, their marginal effect on FDI should fall, perhaps rapidly. Early treaties were negotiated between host countries that saw themselves as potentially attractive hosts and those countries that were a major source of FDI. Successive treaties had to include host countries that were less attractive targets for FDI for reasons other than the risks they posed to foreign investors and potential investors’ home countries that were less important sources of FDI. There are also IIAs signed between pairs of countries that are both net importers of capital and FDI, and the effect of such IIAs is likely nil. Thus, the importance of choosing appropriate home and host countries and their IIAs for study is important for the results obtained.</span></span></i></blockquote><i><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="background-color: white;"></span></span></i><p></p><p style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: times;">Will we see a re-evaluation of ISDS in investment agreements or just the status quo? Is there a rethink or will there be a re-emergence of ISDS in a different form. Is state to state dispute settlement an alternative - a la WTO? What about the <b><a href="https://www.uria.com/en/publicaciones/8220-brazils-decision-to-stay-outside-the-investment-arbitration-world-and-reliable">Brazilian model</a></b> of investment agreement and co-operation that shuns ISDS?</span></p><p style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: times;">Where will the tide turn ultimately?</span></p><p><br /></p><p></p><!-- x-tinymce/html -->Srikarhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17073379167588035440noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-920831647912894746.post-26350737004656257902023-10-01T10:55:00.000+05:302023-10-01T10:55:32.957+05:30This TINA is all about alternatives!<p style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: times;">TINA is commonly referred to a "There is No Alternative" in negotiations parlance. However, this TINA (Trade Intelligence and Negotiation Adviser) here is all about alternatives!</span></p><p style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: times;">As trade negotiators, one is often faced with the question of proposing suitable legal language that reflects one's national position as well as achieving optimum results in an agreement. While traditional areas in trade agreements have more or less standardised language, the picture is far less stabilized in newer areas (<b><a href="http://treadthemiddlepath.blogspot.com/2023/09/data-sets-guide-and-negotiating-strategy.html">deep trade agreements</a></b>) like labour, gender, environment, competition in terms of treaty language. The consequences of not comprehending the impact of treaty language can be devastating in case of a dispute. Obligations arise out of agreements and enforceability is the stick that ensures compliance.</span></p><p style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: times;">In that context, having a knowledge of different approaches to treaty language becomes critical. It is an important tool in the capacity building effort of States to engage meaningfully in treaty negotiations. It becomes all the more critical for developing and least developed economies. Setting the rules of the game instead of being rule takers demands understanding of different provisions, their implications as well as nuanced differences. Including a "shall" can have very different consequences than a "may" or "should" though legal interpretations in dispute settlement may very well say a "should" is a "shall" in that context!</span></p><p style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: times;">Efforts have been made in the past to provide such capacity in different ways. Found this interesting database called <b><a href="https://legal.tina.trade/">Legal TINA</a></b> prepared by the <b><a href="https://www.unescap.org/events/2022/expert-feedback-session-legal-tina">UN's Economic and Social Commission for Asia Pacific</a></b>. It provides a wealth of information on different RTAs covering areas both new and old, comparisons of treaty language and what their implications could be. A goldmine for treaty negotiators. It has a search provision area wise as well as issue wise.</span></p><p style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: times;">I tried out some areas and found interesting results:</span></p><p style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: times;"><b>Labour, Business and Corporate Social Responsibility</b> - A look at provisions related to corporate social responsibility shows a wide variety of commitments, soft approaches as well as divergent scopes.</span></p><div class="accordion" id="accordion_30504030201" style="background-color: white; box-sizing: border-box; color: #646c9a; font-size: 13px;"><div class="card" style="background-clip: border-box; border-radius: 0.25rem; border: 1px solid rgb(235, 237, 242); box-sizing: border-box; display: flex; flex-direction: column; margin: 0px; min-width: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; overflow: visible !important; position: relative;"><div class="card-header" id="heading_30504030201" style="background-color: #f7f8fa; border-bottom: 0px; border-radius: calc(0.25rem - 1px) calc(0.25rem - 1px) 0px 0px; box-sizing: border-box; cursor: pointer; margin: 0px; padding: 0px;"><div aria-controls="collapse_30504030201" aria-expanded="true" class="card-title" data-bs-target="#collapse_30504030201" data-bs-toggle="collapse" style="align-items: center; box-sizing: border-box; color: #0e5898; display: flex; font-size: 1.1rem; justify-content: flex-start; margin: 0px; padding: 1rem; text-align: justify;"></div></div></div></div><blockquote><div class="accordion" id="accordion_30504030201" style="background-color: white; box-sizing: border-box; color: #646c9a; font-size: 13px;"><div class="card" style="background-clip: border-box; border-radius: 0.25rem; border: 1px solid rgb(235, 237, 242); box-sizing: border-box; display: flex; flex-direction: column; margin: 0px; min-width: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; overflow: visible !important; position: relative;"><div class="card-header" id="heading_30504030201" style="background-color: #f7f8fa; border-bottom: 0px; border-radius: calc(0.25rem - 1px) calc(0.25rem - 1px) 0px 0px; box-sizing: border-box; cursor: pointer; margin: 0px; padding: 0px;"><div aria-controls="collapse_30504030201" aria-expanded="true" class="card-title" data-bs-target="#collapse_30504030201" data-bs-toggle="collapse" style="align-items: center; box-sizing: border-box; color: #0e5898; display: flex; font-size: 1.1rem; justify-content: flex-start; margin: 0px; padding: 1rem;"><span style="font-family: times; text-align: justify;">D3.2.1 Corporate Social Responsibility</span></div></div><div aria-labelledby="heading_30504030201" class="collapse show" data-parent="#accordion_30504030201" id="collapse_30504030201" name="collapse_30504030201" style="box-sizing: border-box;"><div class="card-body" style="box-sizing: border-box; flex: 1 1 auto; font-size: 1rem; padding: 1.25rem;"><p style="box-sizing: border-box; margin-bottom: 1rem; margin-top: 0px; text-align: justify;"><span style="box-sizing: border-box; font-size: 11pt;"><span style="box-sizing: border-box;"><span style="box-sizing: border-box; color: black;"><strong style="box-sizing: border-box;"><span style="font-family: times;">Example Provisions on Commitments to Corporate Social Responsibility</span></strong></span></span></span></p><p style="box-sizing: border-box; margin-bottom: 1rem; margin-top: 0px; text-align: justify;"><span style="box-sizing: border-box; font-size: 11pt;"><span style="box-sizing: border-box;"><span style="box-sizing: border-box; color: black;"><strong style="box-sizing: border-box;"><em style="box-sizing: border-box;"><span style="font-family: times;">Example Option A: Corporate Social Responsibility</span></em></strong></span></span></span></p><p style="box-sizing: border-box; margin-bottom: 1rem; margin-top: 0px; text-align: justify;"><span style="box-sizing: border-box; font-size: 11pt;"><span style="box-sizing: border-box;"><span style="box-sizing: border-box; color: black;"><span style="font-family: times;">1. The Parties affirm the importance of each Party encouraging enterprises operating within its territory or subject to its jurisdiction to voluntarily incorporate into their business practices and internal policies those guidelines and principles of corporate social responsibility that have been endorsed or are supported by that Party, including the OECD Guidelines on Multinational Enterprises. These guidelines and principles address issues such as labour, environment, gender equality, community relations and anti-corruption.</span></span></span></span></p><p style="box-sizing: border-box; margin-bottom: 1rem; margin-top: 0px; text-align: justify;"><span style="box-sizing: border-box; font-size: 11pt;"><span style="box-sizing: border-box;"><span style="box-sizing: border-box; color: black;"><span style="font-family: times;">2. The Parties shall make all possible efforts, through dialogue, consultations and cooperation to resolve any matter that may arise relating to this Article.</span></span></span></span></p><p style="box-sizing: border-box; margin-bottom: 1rem; margin-top: 0px; text-align: justify;"><span style="box-sizing: border-box; font-size: 11pt;"><span style="box-sizing: border-box;"><span style="box-sizing: border-box; color: black;"><span style="font-family: times;">3. A Party shall not have recourse to dispute settlement under this Agreement for any matter arising under this Article.</span></span></span></span></p><p style="box-sizing: border-box; margin-bottom: 1rem; margin-top: 0px; text-align: justify;"><span style="box-sizing: border-box; font-size: 11pt;"><span style="box-sizing: border-box;"><span style="box-sizing: border-box; color: black;"><span style="font-family: times;">Source: Canada-Israel, Article 16.4</span></span></span></span></p><p style="box-sizing: border-box; margin-bottom: 1rem; margin-top: 0px; text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: times;"> </span></p><p style="box-sizing: border-box; margin-bottom: 1rem; margin-top: 0px; text-align: justify;"><span style="box-sizing: border-box; font-size: 11pt;"><span style="box-sizing: border-box;"><span style="box-sizing: border-box; color: black;"><strong style="box-sizing: border-box;"><em style="box-sizing: border-box;"><span style="font-family: times;">Example Option B: Corporate Social Responsibility</span></em></strong></span></span></span></p><p style="box-sizing: border-box; margin-bottom: 1rem; margin-top: 0px; text-align: justify;"><span style="box-sizing: border-box; font-size: 11pt;"><span style="box-sizing: border-box;"><span style="box-sizing: border-box; color: black;"><span style="font-family: times;">Recognizing the importance of cooperation on trade-related and investment-related aspects of environmental and labour policies in order to achieve the objectives of this Agreement, the Parties may, inter alia:</span></span></span></span></p><p style="box-sizing: border-box; margin-bottom: 1rem; margin-top: 0px; text-align: justify;"><span style="box-sizing: border-box; font-size: 11pt;"><span style="box-sizing: border-box;"><span style="box-sizing: border-box; color: black;"><span style="font-family: times;">(e) cooperate to promote corporate social responsibility, notably through the exchange of information and best practices, including on adherence, implementation, follow-up, and dissemination of internationally agreed guidelines and principles;</span></span></span></span></p><p style="box-sizing: border-box; margin-bottom: 1rem; margin-top: 0px; text-align: justify;"><span style="box-sizing: border-box; font-size: 11pt;"><span style="box-sizing: border-box;"><span style="box-sizing: border-box; color: black;"><span style="font-family: times;">Source: Japan-United Kingdom EPA, Article 16:12 (e)(f)</span></span></span></span></p><p style="box-sizing: border-box; margin-bottom: 1rem; margin-top: 0px; text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: times;"> </span></p><p style="box-sizing: border-box; margin-bottom: 1rem; margin-top: 0px; text-align: justify;"><span style="box-sizing: border-box; font-size: 11pt;"><span style="box-sizing: border-box;"><span style="box-sizing: border-box; color: black;"><strong style="box-sizing: border-box;"><em style="box-sizing: border-box;"><span style="font-family: times;">Example Option C: Corporate Social Responsibility</span></em></strong></span></span></span></p><p style="box-sizing: border-box; margin-bottom: 1rem; margin-top: 0px; text-align: justify;"><span style="box-sizing: border-box; font-size: 11pt;"><span style="box-sizing: border-box;"><span style="box-sizing: border-box; color: black;"><span style="font-family: times;">1. Each Party affirms its commitment to enhance the contribution of trade and investment to the goal of sustainable development in its economic, social and environmental dimensions.</span></span></span></span></p><p style="box-sizing: border-box; margin-bottom: 1rem; margin-top: 0px; text-align: justify;"><span style="box-sizing: border-box; font-size: 11pt;"><span style="box-sizing: border-box;"><span style="box-sizing: border-box; color: black;"><span style="font-family: times;">2. To that end, the Parties:</span></span></span></span></p><p style="box-sizing: border-box; margin-bottom: 1rem; margin-top: 0px; text-align: justify;"><span style="box-sizing: border-box; font-size: 11pt;"><span style="box-sizing: border-box;"><span style="box-sizing: border-box; color: black;"><span style="font-family: times;">(e) in accordance with their domestic laws or policies agree to promote corporate social responsibility, provided that measures related thereto are not applied in a manner which would constitute a means of arbitrary or unjustifiable discrimination between the Parties or a disguised restriction on trade; measures for the promotion of corporate social responsibility include, among others, exchange of information and best practices, education and training activities and technical advice; in this regard, each Party takes into account relevant internationally agreed instruments that have been endorsed or are supported by that Party, such as the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises, the United Nations Global Compact and the ILO Tripartite Declaration of Principles concerning Multinational Enterprises and Social Policy.</span></span></span></span></p><p style="box-sizing: border-box; margin-bottom: 1rem; margin-top: 0px; text-align: justify;"><span style="box-sizing: border-box; font-size: 11pt;"><span style="box-sizing: border-box;"><span style="box-sizing: border-box; color: black;"><span style="font-family: times;">Source: EU-VietNam FTA Article 13:10 (e)</span></span></span></span></p><p style="box-sizing: border-box; margin-bottom: 1rem; margin-top: 0px; text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: times;"> </span></p><p style="box-sizing: border-box; margin-bottom: 1rem; margin-top: 0px; text-align: justify;"><span style="box-sizing: border-box; font-size: 11pt;"><span style="box-sizing: border-box;"><span style="box-sizing: border-box; color: black;"><strong style="box-sizing: border-box;"><em style="box-sizing: border-box;"><span style="font-family: times;">Example Option D: Corporate Social Responsibility</span></em></strong></span></span></span></p><p style="box-sizing: border-box; margin-bottom: 1rem; margin-top: 0px; text-align: justify;"><span style="box-sizing: border-box; font-size: 11pt;"><span style="box-sizing: border-box;"><span style="box-sizing: border-box; color: black;"><span style="font-family: times;">The Parties shall strive to facilitate trade in products that contribute to sustainable development, including products that are the subject of schemes such as fair and ethical trade schemes, as well as those respecting corporate social responsibility and accountability principles</span></span></span></span></p><p style="box-sizing: border-box; margin-bottom: 1rem; margin-top: 0px; text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="box-sizing: border-box; font-size: 11pt;"><span style="box-sizing: border-box; color: black;"><span style="box-sizing: border-box;">Source: UK – Ukraine, Article 279.3 </span></span></span><span style="box-sizing: border-box; color: black;"><span style="box-sizing: border-box; font-size: 11pt;"><span style="box-sizing: border-box;"><span style="box-sizing: border-box;"></span></span></span></span></span></p></div></div></div></div><div class="accordion" id="accordion_30504030202" style="background-color: white; box-sizing: border-box; color: #646c9a; font-size: 13px;"><div class="card" style="background-clip: border-box; border-radius: 0.25rem; border: 1px solid rgb(235, 237, 242); box-sizing: border-box; display: flex; flex-direction: column; margin: 0px; min-width: 0px; overflow-wrap: break-word; overflow: visible !important; position: relative; text-align: justify;"></div></div></blockquote><p style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: times;">The stark contrast between the UK-Ukraine provision as compared to Canada Israel provision indicates the extent to which countries are willing to engage in adhering to commitments in this area. Further, the period in which the agreement was entered into is also relevant since perceptions and approaches have evolved over time. </span></p><p style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: times;">The intellectual property search provided alternative ways of incorporating provisions on compulsory licensing and protection of undisclosed test data - from being TRIPS compliant to TRIPS plus obligations.</span></p><p style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: times;">The limitation of the Legal TINA could be the coverage of RTAs in its database, the time frame of these RTAs as well as non-consideration of innovative, out of the box legal, textual language not found in any RTA so far! However, it is definitely a great tool for trade negotiators to understand the legal landscape, the reasons for divergent viewpoints and how to tailor make one's position based on national interest and mutual benefit of the trading partner.</span></p><p style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: times;">Hat Tip <a href="https://www.linkedin.com/in/yann-duval-1baab8/">@Yann Duval</a>!</span></p><p></p>Srikarhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17073379167588035440noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-920831647912894746.post-54283525024794931042023-09-26T14:42:00.005+05:302023-09-26T14:42:29.546+05:30Digital Economy Framework Agreement - ASEAN's template for the world?<p style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: times;">There is a constant churning and desire to make international trade rules in the field of ecommerce and digital trade. While the <b><a href="https://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/ecom_e/joint_statement_e.htm">Joint Initiative on Ecommerce</a></b> by some WTO members is touted as a future blueprint, regional initiatives are finding space. This <b><a href="https://asean.org/asean-launches-worlds-first-regionwide-digital-economy-framework-agreement/">recent announcement</a></b> by ASEAN on a Digital Economy Framework Agreement seems to be moving in the direction of regional digital trade rules.</span></p><p style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: times;">The <b><a href="https://asean.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/09/Framework-for-Negotiating-DEFA_ENDORSED_23rd-AECC-for-uploading.pdf">framework for negotiating</a></b> such an agreement spells out the wide scope of the agreement:</span></p><p><i><span style="font-family: times;"></span></i></p><blockquote><p style="text-align: justify;"><i><span style="font-family: times;">On without prejudice basis, ASEAN DEFA negotiations will consider including but not be
limited to the following elements: </span></i></p><p style="text-align: justify;"><i><span style="font-family: times;">1. Digital Trade aims to facilitate cross-border trade by creating a seamless trade
experience with electronic documents and interoperable processes. </span></i></p><p style="text-align: justify;"><i><span style="font-family: times;">2. Cross-border E-Commerce aims to create a more efficient and fairer environment for
cross-border e-commerce, including digital goods and services. </span></i></p><p style="text-align: justify;"><i><span style="font-family: times;">3. Payments and E-Invoicing aims to promote digital payments and electronic invoicing
by fostering technical interoperability, encourage innovation and competition, and
developing relevant regulation. </span></i></p><p style="text-align: justify;"><i><span style="font-family: times;">4. Digital ID and Authentication aims to develop a mutual recognizable and
interoperable digital identity and electronic authentication framework within the region. </span></i></p><p style="text-align: justify;"><i><span style="font-family: times;">5. Online Safety and Cybersecurity aim to improve cooperation in cybersecurity and
create an open and secure online environment, with comprehensive protection to
parties in a digital transaction. </span></i></p><p style="text-align: justify;"><i><span style="font-family: times;">6. Cross-border Data Flows and Data Protection aims to facilitate cross-border data
flow and establish frameworks to protect data privacy. </span></i></p><p style="text-align: justify;"><i><span style="font-family: times;">7. Competition Policy aims to create a fair/non-discriminatory, transparent competitive
environment with consistent guidelines on enforcement and better choice for
consumers </span></i></p><p style="text-align: justify;"><i><span style="font-family: times;">8. Cooperation on Emerging Topics aims to establish mechanisms for regulatory
cooperation for relevant standards and regulations to keep up with technological
innovations in emerging topics such as AI. </span></i></p><p style="text-align: justify;"><i><span style="font-family: times;">9. Talent Mobility and Cooperation aims to facilitate digital talent mobility between
countries and close collaboration on talent building.</span></i></p></blockquote><p> <span style="font-family: times; text-align: justify;">Will it lead to a fructification of regional rules in the ASEAN region to be replicated in their FTAs later and perhaps at the WTO? Will it cover issues of data localisation and free exchange of data? Will it be able to address the digital divide amongst ASEAN members? Will there be enforceable rules? Will there be dispute settlement provisions? Will it be <b><a href="https://www.eastasiaforum.org/2023/04/20/aseans-splintering-digital-economy-governance/">ASEAN's template</a></b> for the world on multilateral rules for the digital economy or a soft law approach to greater digital integration?</span></p><p style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: times;">Interesting area to keep a watch on!</span></p><p><i></i></p>Srikarhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17073379167588035440noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-920831647912894746.post-21324506933013210822023-09-24T13:01:00.002+05:302023-09-24T13:01:23.021+05:30Random: "Alt-Tech", digital trade rules and a casebook!<p style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: times;">Sunday readings:</span></p><p style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: times;">1. I have often blogged on big tech and the challenge of regulation <b><a href="http://treadthemiddlepath.blogspot.com/2021/05/heterodox-approaches-to-big-techs.html">here</a></b>, <b><a href="http://treadthemiddlepath.blogspot.com/2022/01/game-on-is-it-less-competition.html">here</a></b> and <b><a href="http://treadthemiddlepath.blogspot.com/2020/06/gafa-to-faang-will-digital-tax-measures.html">here</a></b>. An interesting piece on India's alternative to big tech - Open APIs and interoperability implemented in systems like the UPI and ONDC - and the concomitant challenges it brings. <b><a href="https://www.smritiparsheera.com/home">Smriti Parsheera</a></b> argues in <b><a href="https://repository.nls.ac.in/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1113&context=ijlt">this piece</a></b> that it brings with it its own set of challenges that need to be addressed:</span></p><p></p><blockquote style="font-style: italic; text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: times;">To summarise, the term big tech offers a helpful and now well-understood label for describing the world’s most powerful technology companies.
The challenges posed by the dominance and practices of these firms are
well recognised, as is the need for imposing more effective checks on them.
India is still in the early stages of formulating its governance strategy on big
tech, reflected through competition enforcement, domain-specific regulatory
actions and new technical systems that aim to alter the underlying dynamics
of digital markets. While much has been said about the innovative and inclusive potential of these new systems, the paper highlighted that these developments are accompanied by certain competition and accountability concerns
that are not being adequately addressed in the current model.</span></blockquote><p style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: times;"><i>2.</i> The challenge of articulating a negotiating position in difficult but emerging areas like digital trade is reflected in this piece by Jhanvi Tripathi in this piece on <b><a href="https://www.orfonline.org/expert-speak/ipef-and-indias-digital-trade-dilemma/">IPEF and India's digital trade</a></b>. Which way should one go? Binding trade rules that enhance free flow of data and competition. Soft law approaches that enhance trust, privacy and inclusion? A third model which emphasizes the role of digital public infrastructure? Or a mix of them all? The piece argues that one needs to bite the bullet in terms of having a digital trade rules negotiating stance. However, are trade rules the only way forward?</span></p><p style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: times;">3. For those who are interested in international economic law and policy, this free digital international trade law text book is a great find! Check out <b><a href="https://genevatradeplatform.org/e-casebook/">"International Trade Law: A casebook for a system in crisis"</a> </b>for accessing a free text book on international trade law. Kudos to the <b><a href="https://genevatradeplatform.org/">Geneva Trade Platform</a></b> for conceiving this.</span></p><p></p>Srikarhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17073379167588035440noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-920831647912894746.post-4686237486162937682023-09-19T21:52:00.005+05:302023-09-19T21:57:33.007+05:30Data sets, a guide and a negotiating strategy!<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEjYc7NlmvrMQag78CYFUJMlIXAgLqJDekUIh3mvG9gPWEX0y7hqbJojCKUv4cRLJX5TEqv3zSu-pVeJDN6CdFDO8l0eMl5WfBIgSCZBDmfi2-Y9vvYblHWLj-xDuCPG83rg7eo4I3C5a2Xb1yKuaVf1AYK7R9CWxu_L_uan5AySOWpJAgl_g0oiZHd9lw0" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><span style="font-family: times;"><img alt="" data-original-height="248" data-original-width="203" height="240" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEjYc7NlmvrMQag78CYFUJMlIXAgLqJDekUIh3mvG9gPWEX0y7hqbJojCKUv4cRLJX5TEqv3zSu-pVeJDN6CdFDO8l0eMl5WfBIgSCZBDmfi2-Y9vvYblHWLj-xDuCPG83rg7eo4I3C5a2Xb1yKuaVf1AYK7R9CWxu_L_uan5AySOWpJAgl_g0oiZHd9lw0" width="196" /></span></a></div><p style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: times;">As trade negotiators, one often grapples with models and treaty negotiations. One is in search of alternatives, models and diverse set of options. This is more so when trade negotiations are in multiple areas and not just the traditional tariffs and services sector. What if they cover competition, environment, labour, public enterprises and gender? The World Bank has termed them <b><a href="https://datatopics.worldbank.org/dta/about-the-project.html#">Deep Trade Agreements</a></b>. They define it as:</span></p><p><span style="background-color: white; color: #333333;"><i><span style="font-family: times;"></span></i></span></p><blockquote style="text-align: justify;"><i><span style="font-family: times;">Deep Trade Agreements are reciprocal agreements between countries that cover not just trade but additional policy areas, such as international flows of investment and labor, and the protection of intellectual property rights and the environment. While these agreements are still referred to as trade agreements, their goal is integration beyond trade or deep integration.</span></i></blockquote><p></p><p style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: times;">I came across this excellent and extensive exercise by the World Bank titled the <b><a href="file:///Users/srikarmacbook/Downloads/9781464815393.pdf">Handbook of Deep Trade Agreements</a></b> which covers a wide set of provisions across trade agreements which make a comparison of provisions across sectors of tariff, export restrictions, services, intellectual property, investment, visa and asylums, trade facilitation, technical barriers to trade, public procurement, subsidies, competition policy, state owned enterprises and labour market regulations. It compares different trade agreements with respect to the various provisions contained, similarities as well as different approaches in each of these sectors. A goldmine for researchers, ofcourse, but even greater help for trade and investment law negotiators to understand what the data set of 279 PTAs are telling us. They not only help in understanding some of the motivations of why certain provisions exist but also assist in ensuring bargains are more balanced.</span></p><p style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: times;">Some great revelations in the Handbook that I found noteworthy in the conclusions after a quick read were as follows:</span></p><p style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: times;">Investment:</span></p><p style="text-align: justify;"><i><span style="font-family: times;"></span></i></p><blockquote><p style="text-align: justify;"><i><span style="font-family: times;">• The scope and depth of investment provisions has increased over
time, although at a modest rate. </span></i></p><p style="text-align: justify;"><i><span style="font-family: times;">• Most PTAs extend national and MFN treatment in the preestablishment phase, while all provide for national treatment (and
to a lesser extent MFN treatment) in the post-establishment phase. </span></i></p><p style="text-align: justify;"><i><span style="font-family: times;">• A majority of PTAs offer investment protections in the form of
provisions on expropriation and fair and equitable treatment. </span></i></p><p style="text-align: justify;"><i><span style="font-family: times;">• The majority of PTAs include a broad “right to regulate” provision
that allows the host state to override investment provisions for
public interest or national security purposes. </span></i></p><p style="text-align: justify;"><i><span style="font-family: times;">• Provisions aimed at protection of the environment occur in
more than three-quarters of PTAs.</span></i></p><p style="text-align: justify;"><i><span style="font-family: times;"> • More than three-quarters of PTAs provide for investor-state
dispute settlement. </span></i></p><p style="text-align: justify;"><i><span style="font-family: times;">• PTA regional groupings demonstrate a number of common
characteristics, particularly with regard to provisions on sco<span style="text-align: left;">pe and
definitions and investment liberalization and protection.</span></span></i></p></blockquote><p><span style="font-family: times;">Intellectual Property:</span></p><p></p><blockquote style="font-style: italic; text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: times;"> In the coming decade, three important questions are likely to rise to the fore: The first is
whether any additional hubs will develop beyond the four mentioned above. To date, all
of the hubs pushing forward with TRIPS-plus rules in PTAs are composed of advanced
economies. However, as this chapter has noted, the frequency with which IPR-related
provisions are included in PTAs concluded among developing countries has increased since
2011. Will this eventually result in a group of developing countries with a deep integration
trade agenda to develop their own hub (e.g., a Pacific alliance in Latin America)? Or will the
major centers for the development of TRIPS-plus rules remain in the advanced economies?A second question is whether there will be further consolidation of the existing models of
IPR-related provisions that have arisen out of the four hubs. Already, there are cross-regional
PTAs forming across some of these hubs, especially between the advanced Asian economies
and the other hubs. With the US and EU already actively exploring the possibility of a
trans-Atlantic PTA and the US open to rejoining the CPTPP, additional possibilities exist
for further deep integration. How will this affect the development of TRIPS-plus rules and
norms? Will this lead to even greater harmonization amongst the major economies? If
so, will this be along the lines established in CPTPP, given its first-mover status as a megaregional PTA, or be based on another model?</span></blockquote><p><span style="font-family: times;">Visa and Asylum:</span></p><p></p><blockquote style="font-style: italic; text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: times;">Types of movement of persons. The focus of PTAs on specialized or high-skilled individuals is confirmed
when looking at the types of movement of persons addressed: many PTAs address the movement,
for example, of investors or dependents; very few cover migrant workers looking for employment, undocumented migrants or refugees. Importantly, of the 100 PTAs covering visa and asylum, 72
explicitly exclude employment on a permanent basis. In other words, migration in PTAs focuses
on high-skilled, specialized individuals and temporary (not permanent) movement of persons. </span></blockquote><p><span style="font-family: times;">Environmental Regulations (ERPs- Environmental related provisions) </span></p><blockquote style="font-style: italic; text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="text-align: left;">PTAs negotiated between developed countries and between developed and developing
countries tend to include the highest number of ERPs. High-income countries appear
to be the primary proponents of including detailed ERPs in PTAs. Yet, several developing
countries, in particular those that have already signed PTAs with high-income countries
incorporating ERPs, have also increasingly incorporated ERPs into their trade agreements
with other developing countries. The scope and level of commitments of these ERPs are,
however, usually not as detailed as those found in PTAs negotiated between developed and
developing countries. Overall, the evolution of the different types of ERPs incorporated in
PTAs reflects a dynamic context in which PTAs often have a demonstration effect, enabling
countries to negotiate and devise new ways to address emerging issues and challenges.</span><span style="text-align: left;"> </span></span></blockquote><p><span style="font-family: times;"> Trade negotiations are mostly about solid data, legal expertise and a clear vision of what the intended outcome should be of the intended trade arrangement. A lack of any one of the three could be disastrous. The dataset, analysis and conclusions offered in the handbook are definitely a useful guide to script one's own strategy to deal with a negotiating agenda. What kind of provisions exist in the area and what would benefit one's national interest the most? A clearer understanding of one's options is an asset in a negotiation.</span></p><p></p><p></p>Srikarhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17073379167588035440noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-920831647912894746.post-9269450099040905042023-09-17T19:24:00.004+05:302023-09-18T08:02:16.173+05:30Complexities of negotiating trade arrangements<p style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: times;">The <b><a href="https://ustr.gov/ipef">Indo-Pacific Economic Framework (IPEF)</a></b> has got a lot of attention in recent times. The reasons are many - the composition of the participants, geo-political ramifications, the nature of the arrangement as compared to a traditional free trade agreement, the subjects it intends to cover and the potential it has for the future as a template for high-standard trade arrangements.</span></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEicEBLFPhHNNZd1fH45CrKG7wjrltqndiOQqcY25kFIkrRBiX4zIpTBg0MXJt8bO7C3L6F06Xw3bkujeLrg-JSwTSDht6Kh6YhONYultXdsBh_dFpL109Pa7PRzqufu91yocuQVquVyqaxPzzk7eP7ry2bBn2v9xo_oUJ4-c4NX-i1IpFld_h937HbRe80" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><span style="font-family: times;"><img alt="" data-original-height="168" data-original-width="300" height="179" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEicEBLFPhHNNZd1fH45CrKG7wjrltqndiOQqcY25kFIkrRBiX4zIpTBg0MXJt8bO7C3L6F06Xw3bkujeLrg-JSwTSDht6Kh6YhONYultXdsBh_dFpL109Pa7PRzqufu91yocuQVquVyqaxPzzk7eP7ry2bBn2v9xo_oUJ4-c4NX-i1IpFld_h937HbRe80" width="320" /></span></a></div><span style="font-family: times;"><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /></div></span><p style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: times;">What got my attention this week was a brilliantly written piece by <b><a href="https://www.hinrichfoundation.com/profiles/experts-contributors/stephen-olson/">Stephen Olson</a> </b>on the challenges of the United States in implementing the IPEF framework. Titled "<b><a href="https://kas-japan.or.jp/wp-content/uploads/2023/09/IPEF-Discussion-Paper-Series_Chapter-6.pdf">Indo-Pacific Economic Framework - Negotiating and Implementing challenges for the US</a></b>", it covers a range of issues surrounding the IPEF. It brings out how domestic interests impact international negotiating positions, the different approaches of trade negotiation (a traditional free trade agreement with binding rules and dispute settlement as compared to a low standard setting arrangement without enforceability), how trade policy, strategies, priorities and approaches can change at the national level over time based on national interest, the diversity in international negotiation strategies (single undertaking versus silo approach), the novelty of non-market access trade negotiations and non-trade issues in trade negotiations. </span></p><p style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: times;">Another interesting aspect is the tension between supporting one's business interests in a multilateral/plurilateral forum and domestic opposition to those very businesses. This is especially seen in the tech sector with Big Tech (making digital trade rules to further national players/companies vis a vis domestic regulatory control concerns from within). This tension is brought out here by the piece:</span></p><p></p><blockquote style="font-style: italic; text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: times;">In order to ensure at least a requisite level of domestic US support for the digital provisions of
the IPEF, US negotiators will need to structure nuanced positions that will be acceptable to both
Big Tech and the various interests that would like to reign them in. The IPEF negotiating partners
are unlikely to accept these US proposals at face value and will counter-propose modifications
or alternative provisions. Any digital agreement the US is ultimately able to secure with its IPEF
partners could prove to be far from acceptable to one or more of the strong advocacy interests in
the US that will pore over every small detail in the digital trade section of the agreement. </span></blockquote><p style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: times;">Such tensions are common in international trade negotiations. Whose interests is one pursuing in trade negotiations? How does one balance consumer interests, State regulatory control and business interests while pursuing a negotiating position? Does it depend on the sector and the weight of the business interests or does consumer interest override business interests. How do we take care of middle level and small business interests in trade negotiations? What role do business associations play in this canvas?</span></p><p style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: times;">Hat tip to <b><a href="http://R.V.Anuradha">R.V.Anuradha</a></b> for a reference to the above piece that caught my attention.</span></p><p style="text-align: justify;"><br /></p><p></p>Srikarhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17073379167588035440noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-920831647912894746.post-26982382453491337592023-09-10T11:59:00.000+05:302023-09-10T11:59:11.330+05:30Regulating big tech - Is there an ideal system?<p style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: trebuchet;">I have blogged earlier on big tech and the challenge of taxation in the context of the digital tax <b><a href="http://treadthemiddlepath.blogspot.com/2020/06/gafa-to-faang-will-digital-tax-measures.html">here</a></b> and <b><a href="http://treadthemiddlepath.blogspot.com/2020/06/gafa-tax-in-news-again-ustr-initiates.html">here</a></b>.</span></p><p style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: trebuchet;">Regulation of big tech, especially in the context of anti-trust (or anti-competition) laws, is a raging issue across continents. There are varying approaches, understanding and results of this regulation by he State. However, the intent to regulate and the desire to implement that regulation is visible across the US, EU and China.</span></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEg1H-j5WpiEjw1C-06am9ToVEYqXWGB0e04osmz5PJ74ihs1FRkt7DeEDJA6yFbH72i4NkflLkYhwUsDS-WU67fqmyS2Sze8UEySyxzxHz2c1zO9fYSn4yI8VOaEsqlK7xGnAfxajiw4h4MSE82QcDmfKrUyNWYyPAI0-MMwLAqqYpPLSL8chyJ4Gg7JGQ" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><span style="font-family: trebuchet;"><img alt="" data-original-height="467" data-original-width="700" height="213" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEg1H-j5WpiEjw1C-06am9ToVEYqXWGB0e04osmz5PJ74ihs1FRkt7DeEDJA6yFbH72i4NkflLkYhwUsDS-WU67fqmyS2Sze8UEySyxzxHz2c1zO9fYSn4yI8VOaEsqlK7xGnAfxajiw4h4MSE82QcDmfKrUyNWYyPAI0-MMwLAqqYpPLSL8chyJ4Gg7JGQ" width="320" /></span></a></div><div style="text-align: center;"><span style="font-family: trebuchet;"> (WSJ)</span></div><p style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: trebuchet;">This <b><a href="https://www.networklawreview.org/anu-authoritarian-governments/">piece on anti-trust regulation</a></b> by <b><a href="https://www.law.columbia.edu/faculty/anu-bradford">Anu Bradford</a></b> captures the varying approaches, results and implications of regulating big tech from different political systems. Comparing the US, EU and China's approach to big tech regulation in the context of anti-trust, including monopolistic tendencies, she concludes:</span></p><p><span style="background-color: #fcf9f4; color: #282828; text-align: justify;"></span></p><blockquote><i><span style="font-family: trebuchet;">This relative “success” of the Chinese regulatory model in obtaining compliance from tech companies stands in stark contrast with the repeated difficulties faced by European and American regulators in holding tech companies accountable. In the EU and the US, regulators are often forced to fight lengthy legal battles as tech companies contest, rather than acquiesce to, the regulatory actions targeting them. This makes the Chinese state-driven regulatory model attractive to many other governments that are reluctant to be drawn into these kinds of regulatory battles that the US and EU are struggling to win.</span></i></blockquote><p><span style="font-family: trebuchet;">What are the implications of democratic pressures and realities, judicial oversight and rule of law on anti-trust regulation? How should approach regulating big tech in the context of lengthy court battles and difficult enforcement? Are there any "ideal" models of implementing anti-trust? Do democratic institutions and processes impede enforcement or enhance transparency? Is democratic scrutiny and judicial oversight better in the long run than State-led regulation? is there too much regulation? Is there a balance? is there a middle path? </span></p><p></p>Srikarhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17073379167588035440noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-920831647912894746.post-82094173127210471032023-09-09T12:16:00.003+05:302023-09-09T12:16:45.258+05:30Global rule making in digital trade<p style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: georgia;">For those following ecommerce trade/digital trade rule making, one knows the glacial speed it takes to reach agreement due to the conflicting national positions, sensitivities and differing perceptions on the need for rules in this sphere.</span></p><p style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: georgia;">The World Trade Organization is the primary multilateral rule-making organization that results in enforceable, legal obligations. Rule making in ecommerce involve standard setting in cross border data flow, data localization, cyber security, esignatures and the governance of the internet. Business interests, national security and digital access are all issues that are impinged upon. Efforts to presently stitch a coalition is reflected in the J<b><a href="https://docs.wto.org/dol2fe/Pages/SS/directdoc.aspx?filename=q:/WT/L/1056.pdf&Open=True">oint Statement Initiative on Ecommerce</a></b> undertaken by a few WTO members.</span></p><p style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: georgia;">This <b><a href="https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=4547768">piece</a></b> titled "<span style="color: #222222;">The WTO Joint Statement Initiative on E-Commerce: Navigating Digital Trade Rules in a Fragmented World" </span>by Andrew D.Mitchell and Elizabeth Chin captures the state of play on the initiative, the advantages the initiative brings to the table, the significant challenge of perspectives that it faces and the bumpy road ahead. They conclude:</span></p><p style="text-align: justify;"><span style="text-align: left;"><i></i></span></p><blockquote><p style="text-align: justify;"><span style="text-align: left;"><i>The JSI remains a promising avenue for updating e-commerce trade rules. Within six years of its inception,
the JSI has made more progress than the WPEC has in 24 years. The Services Domestic Regulation's
conclusion represents the JSI's viability to conclude meaningful, plurilateral trade agreements. Moreover,
hopes that a similar success will emerge in the realm of e-commerce through the JSI are further bolstered
by the consensus which has already been achieved on several vital issues, including e-signatures and
paperless trading. </i></span></p><p style="text-align: justify;"><span style="text-align: left;"><i>Nevertheless, there remain significant hurdles that the JSI will have to overcome before the
conclusion of plurilateral digital trade rules can be realised. To resolve the negotiating deadlock on hotly
contested issues such as data localisation and market access, the JSI must find a way to balance its Members’
competing national interests against their trade obligations. Further, more would have to be done to bolster
the development dimension should the JSI hope to resolve the legal challenge of incorporating its digital
trade text into the WTO regime.</i></span></p></blockquote><p style="text-align: justify;"><span style="text-align: left;"><i></i></span></p><p style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: georgia;">While bilateral and plurilateral trade agreements have e-commerce chapters with binding commitments with varying degrees of ambition, no global solution is in sight yet. Will global trade rules ultimately enhance the digital economy or will digital growth across countries over the coming years fuel rule making at a later stage? Who sets the standards and when? Who benefits and how? Is there a global good we are missing or is it just national, business interests? Or is there a middle path?</span></p><p style="text-align: justify;"><br /></p><p><br /></p>Srikarhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17073379167588035440noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-920831647912894746.post-53104836128577238142023-05-10T21:03:00.002+05:302023-05-10T21:03:17.792+05:30Of strategies and FTAs<p style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: georgia;">Negotiation of trade agreements, whether multilateral or bilateral are undertaken by governments. They represent multiple stakeholders, including local businesses. Free Trade Agreement negotiations are not an end in itself. What it delivers to a negotiating party is critical. Ultimately, whoo benefits, what market access is obtained and how the global economy benefits are questions that one needs to ask.</span></p><p style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: georgia;">States often try to reach out to stakeholders to explain the benefits of FTAs and the opportunities that arise out of them. Found this piece by <b><a href="http://ssl.freshfields.com/noindex/documents/0423/Free-Trade-Agreements-A-Users-Guide-for-UK-Business.pdf">E&Y and FreshFields</a></b> on how UK businesses can benefit from UK FTAs and what they need to look at. Found this page on trade strategy interesting:</span></p><p></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: justify;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEgO9dZRATeLi0Gy5WmNYOcyJCzDPlYjU-dSstKVhxyaUQrvVkqQWfnan0mWB_R6CL-2xuYqHWRqc3ojt5HyCjXLUozO6A_jbaiYvPaPwJly9Gs8EbGQXAcFTBNmpeDdaN752rvy-9rgNzMguE5mXJVF2buMKaaRL1HMk59nHxI1RIGEcaZEFd6Nb8My" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><span style="font-family: georgia;"><img alt="" data-original-height="1159" data-original-width="1624" height="279" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEgO9dZRATeLi0Gy5WmNYOcyJCzDPlYjU-dSstKVhxyaUQrvVkqQWfnan0mWB_R6CL-2xuYqHWRqc3ojt5HyCjXLUozO6A_jbaiYvPaPwJly9Gs8EbGQXAcFTBNmpeDdaN752rvy-9rgNzMguE5mXJVF2buMKaaRL1HMk59nHxI1RIGEcaZEFd6Nb8My=w392-h279" width="392" /></span></a></div><p></p><p style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: georgia;">It applies equally to nations and businesses - need a strategy to benefit from trade!</span></p>Srikarhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17073379167588035440noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-920831647912894746.post-1111092427282145022023-03-18T20:00:00.002+05:302023-03-19T21:12:30.463+05:30A different tournament - of alleged protectionist measures and the ultimate winner<p><span style="font-family: georgia;">My tryst with infographics continues. </span></p><p><span style="font-family: georgia;">This one from <b><a href="https://www.cato.org/">CATO</a></b> is an insightful account of allegedly protectionist measures undertaken in the United States from tariffs to semiconductor subsidies. What is interesting is the format - a series of measures pitted against each other as the most protectionist and a live tournament with public voting to decide the finalist and eventual winner of the most protectionist measure! Very innovative.</span></p><p><span style="font-family: georgia;"><br /></span></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEiMsQRyk95ZXYaRPxJj3-aGadA0m_FufwouwxYOAXMwqTMGVPVJ6kID-0dBKOwQssMILMxy69NF6lzHJNZtprbF9itlFBxUi0ZLN7tbYyoGvHkHFYk_nRcG-UX2-oCl_tZu3eDfFReBY5qps7PJsQA4OchW6bjLo91R0uNR25H5rJJnByeE-9DMR8ud" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><span style="font-family: georgia;"><img alt="" data-original-height="1040" data-original-width="1848" height="180" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEiMsQRyk95ZXYaRPxJj3-aGadA0m_FufwouwxYOAXMwqTMGVPVJ6kID-0dBKOwQssMILMxy69NF6lzHJNZtprbF9itlFBxUi0ZLN7tbYyoGvHkHFYk_nRcG-UX2-oCl_tZu3eDfFReBY5qps7PJsQA4OchW6bjLo91R0uNR25H5rJJnByeE-9DMR8ud=w320-h180" width="320" /></span></a></div><span style="font-family: georgia;"><br /></span><p><span style="font-family: georgia;">For someone who wants to understand different trade measures as well as general policies in the United States that impact trade, competition and imports, this infograph is a must read!</span></p><p><span style="font-family: georgia;">It also gives an idea of what the different interests involved in trade policy are - ultimate consumers, large businesses and small entrepreneurs. Who are the winners and losers and who gets impacted. The explanations for each of the measures do indicate a plethora of tariff measures with legislation on transport services hogging the limelight too.</span></p><p><span style="font-family: georgia;">What is of particular interest too is the view that stricter intellectual property rights in FTAs as well as labour and environmental provisions in bilateral agreements is more protectionist than enhancing competition. </span></p>Srikarhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17073379167588035440noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-920831647912894746.post-67173685322490310062023-03-13T20:59:00.005+05:302023-03-13T20:59:49.636+05:30CP-TPP and RCEP - who is in, out and wannabe in<p><span style="font-family: georgia;">Have been out of the blogging scene for a while but have decided to get back, albeit for a start, with a few infographics I found interesting and informative.</span></p><p><span style="font-family: georgia;">This one from the <b><a href="https://www.piie.com/research/piie-charts/which-countries-are-cptpp-and-rcep-trade-agreements-and-which-want">Peterson Institute blog</a></b> beautifully shows the participation overlap of trading partners in the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership (CP-TPP) and Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP).</span></p><p><span style="font-family: georgia;">Two notable non-participants in both the trade agreements - India and the United States.</span></p><p><br /></p><p></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEje0URDyr2HrkO2H8kSLkd-iaVsR_YO5T3AHV7N4Tl7pKgadALo3LaHlGCl2Lw8CQOfS_NmDz7eVIqjpegUWlY6_LjuMywG5XVIYDvZaBha90Ho99zYQ2jtVTAg3uU0s21wbunqVyIJtEA7N5jlN9rH46aPR2UbEg95j2qAUQ25Uxfb-ldJ1DdkaGhw" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img alt="" data-original-height="832" data-original-width="1025" height="389" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEje0URDyr2HrkO2H8kSLkd-iaVsR_YO5T3AHV7N4Tl7pKgadALo3LaHlGCl2Lw8CQOfS_NmDz7eVIqjpegUWlY6_LjuMywG5XVIYDvZaBha90Ho99zYQ2jtVTAg3uU0s21wbunqVyIJtEA7N5jlN9rH46aPR2UbEg95j2qAUQ25Uxfb-ldJ1DdkaGhw=w480-h389" width="480" /></a></div><br /><br /><p></p>Srikarhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17073379167588035440noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-920831647912894746.post-52534932627406793282022-11-26T05:00:00.001+05:302022-11-26T05:00:00.191+05:30Some "anti-trust" academic resources<p>Anti-trust action across the world has gained traction and news due to action against Big Tech. India's recent Competition Commission of India <b><a href="https://cci.gov.in/images/pressrelease/en/pr-no-562022-231666698260.pdf">case</a></b> against Google is an example of a growing trend across the world. </p><p>Found this course by Yale School of Management on <b><a href="https://som.yale.edu/centers/thurman-arnold-project-at-yale/antitrust-law-course/teaching-materials">Anti-trust in the 21st century</a></b> to be quite a comprehensive guide to the issues on anti-trust.</p><p>The detailed course is <b><a href="https://som.yale.edu/sites/default/files/2022-07/Syllabus-All.pdf">here</a></b>. A good source!</p>Srikarhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17073379167588035440noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-920831647912894746.post-90917492098988723642022-11-24T05:00:00.002+05:302022-11-24T05:00:00.185+05:30Winners and Losers of trade - how does one assess the damage!<p><span style="font-family: times;">The impact of trade, trade policy and trade agreements on domestic economies has been a subject of debate for a long time. While the benefits of liberalisation are evident with the ability to export into hitherto protected markets, libealisation also leads to domestic economies being open to competition and imports. This leads to the now famous "<b><a href="https://www.hks.harvard.edu/centers/mrcbg/programs/growthpolicy/winners-and-losers-globalization-prosperity-and-inequality-dani">Winners and Loser</a></b>s" paradigm in trade - while trade does lead to many winners in terms of increased exports and cheaper products to consumers, it does also lead to loss of jobs, lower wages as well as disruption of local industries.</span></p><p><span style="font-family: times;"><b><a href="https://ielp.worldtradelaw.net/2022/11/the-itc-report-on-distributional-effects-of-us-trade-and-trade-policy-what-about-protectionism.html">Simon Lester</a></b>, while analysing the <b><a href="https://www.usitc.gov/publications/332/pub5374.pdf#page=13">USITC's Report</a></b> on the distributional impact of trade policy in the US focussed on the protectionism versus liberalisation debate. The post made me curious about the USITC report itself. Rather long, I stuck to the Executive Summary. However, for those interested in stakeholder views and academic discussion on how trade policy can impact local economies and what distributional impact it can have, this report is a good read.</span></p><p><span style="font-family: times;">During negotiations of trade agreements, there is often an analysis made on how much tariff reduction or opening up of service sectors to foreign competition will impact local jobs. Trade agreements also have fervent supporters in exporters who view market access to be a positive outcome. While the impact on the economy as a whole may be positive in terms of the terms of trade, it undoubtedly leads to local losers. While consumers may benefit from more choice and lower costs, loss of jobs to local manufacturing units may be more pronounced and electorally unpalatable. Many times the latter are a political constituency while consumers lack the political unity across the country to seek lower costs.</span></p><p><span style="font-family: times;">The report highlights, again, like the last post, the importance of looking at data, modelling and analysis. Can specific instances of opening up of the economy in certain sectors post a free trade agreement be analysed in terms of losers and winners? How has foreign competition impacted local businesses? Has local manufacturing in those products reduced? Have the businesses been more agile and shifted to different products? Have the employees moved to greener shores? Or has it impacted their wages and employment.</span></p><p><span style="font-family: times;">The Report is a great read to anyone interested in understanding trade policy from the wider purview of distributional impact. What was striking was the methodology used in terms of stakeholders, literature analysis and academic discussions.</span></p><p><br /></p>Srikarhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17073379167588035440noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-920831647912894746.post-15042882945308793872022-11-22T15:30:00.001+05:302022-11-22T15:30:42.039+05:30Assessing the impact of Free Trade Agreements - how does one deal with it?!<p><span style="font-family: georgia;">The Australia-India FTA was ratified by the Australian Parliament. News of it is <a href="https://www.news18.com/news/world/australian-parliament-ratifies-fta-deal-with-india-ahead-of-albaneses-march-visit-6441925.html">here</a> and <a href="https://www.ndtv.com/business/australian-parliament-approves-free-trade-agreement-with-india-3542762">here</a>.</span></p><p><span style="font-family: georgia;">If wants to get a thorough understanding of the scale, impact and nuances of the FTA, this <b><a href="https://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/download/committees/reportjnt/024979/toc_pdf/Report202.pdf;fileType=application%2Fpdf">Joint Standing Committee on Treaties Report</a></b> of the Australian Parliament is a must read. It outlines the liberalisation in goods and services as well as what has not been done in this early harvest.</span></p><p><span style="font-family: georgia;">What I found interesting in this report is the debate about modelling the benefits of FTAs. The Report goes into the differing views on whether it is possible to assess the impacts of a free trade agreement - the gains, losses and overall economic benefit it has brought to the country. Is there data that can be attributed to the free trade agreement? Can we assess the benefits to a sector/business/people as a result of liberalisation? Is modelling possible at all?</span></p><p><span style="font-family: georgia;">One view expressed was one of doubt, as explained in the report:</span></p><p></p><blockquote><p><span style="font-family: georgia;">By the
time the Committee began considering the Trans-Pacific Partnership
Agreement (TPP) in 2016, however, the Australian Government had stopped
economic modelling of trade agreements, arguing: </span></p><p><i><span style="font-family: georgia;"></span></i></p><blockquote><i><span style="font-family: georgia;">"We would note that modelling is one tool among many when you are
assessing a free trade agreement of this sort of character and dimensions ... We
also note in these models that there are some methodological limitations.
Models do not provide every fix in the world. This is broadly recognised by
economists. When we are modelling a dynamic, 12 party deal, there are some
real challenges. Modelling the impact of liberalising preferential supply chains
is very, very difficult to do. Modelling the value that traders and investors
place on certainty is very difficult to do."</span></i></blockquote><p></p></blockquote><p><span style="font-family: georgia;">However, the Report counters it with a different view:</span></p><p></p><blockquote><i><span style="font-family: georgia;">However, in the absence of an independent and thorough impact
assessment, that identifies the expected benefits, the direct and indirect
impacts, and the trade-offs inherent in any trade agreement, one is left to
merely accept the proposition that liberalised trade is beneficial without
being able to properly examine the detail of what are complex and carefully
designed agreements that make numerous changes, including with respect
to areas that are not always strictly concerned with trade and investment
(for example, the movement of natural persons, the treatment of intellectual
property, the capacity to regulate in the public interest). </span></i></blockquote><p><span style="font-family: georgia;">How does one do an impact assessment? What data points can one rely on? How easy is it in the services sector? Building a robust data base to analyse pre and post trade agreement scenarios is critical. Do all countries have that capacity? How does one assess in areas like intellectual property? Building trade capacity is not only about negotiating capacity - it also involves assessing the impact, benefits and pitfalls of what one has committed to!</span></p><p> </p><p> </p><p></p><p><i></i></p><blockquote></blockquote><p></p>Srikarhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17073379167588035440noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-920831647912894746.post-46622831963589241112022-11-10T11:36:00.002+05:302022-11-10T15:15:23.275+05:30WTO Negotiations and their context!<p><span style="font-family: georgia;">I haven't blogged about the Intellectual Property waiver that was agreed to in the WTO. The waiver is <a href="https://www.wto.org/english/news_e/news22_e/trip_08jul22_e.htm">here</a>. However, I had blogged about the US decision to support the waiver <a href="http://treadthemiddlepath.blogspot.com/2021/05/the-waiver.html">here</a>.</span></p><p><span style="font-family: georgia;">A recent piece in the Politico titled "<a href="https://www.politico.eu/article/covid-vaccine-poor-countries-waiver-killed/">Who killed the Covid vaccine waiver</a>" was a fascinating account of the negotiations leading upto the waiver. Hat tip to <a href="https://www.linkedin.com/in/thirukumaran-balasubramaniam-9b7b253/">Thiru Balasubramanian</a> for this lead.</span></p><p><span style="font-family: georgia;">Whichever side of the debate on IP and access to health one is on, the complex relationship between business, trade, intellectual property, public interest and national interest is laid bare in this piece. Whether "lobbying" is actually advancing one's national business interest or intellectual property protection actually benefits access to health in a pandemic are debatable and subject to contrarian, heated often strongly-held views, the fact that negotiations at the WTO are an amalgam of national positions, business interests, negotiating strength, public sentiment, pragmatic endings and sustainable coalitions is evidenced in the waiver negotiations. Actually, it is evidenced in all negotiations!</span></p><p><span style="font-family: georgia;">The piece brings out a number of facets of international trade negotiations:</span></p><p><span style="font-family: georgia;">1. How trade policy positions are arrived at by members and what considerations influence WTO negotiating positions - a strong business interest vis a vis interest in getting cheap access to medicines for one's citizens</span></p><p><span style="font-family: georgia;">2. Role of business in crafting those positions or influencing them as well as the ability of civil society organisations to influence public policy. The ability to do so would also largely depend on where the business is located and how much of it contributes to the national economy.</span></p><p><span style="font-family: georgia;">3. The actual business interest that needs to be protected and the resultant negotiating position - for example, if a member did not have a strong IP manufacturing base, the likelihood of support for the waiver would be greater though not inevitable.</span></p><p><span style="font-family: georgia;">4. The importance of coalitions and fear of not being boxed into the corner in any negotiations.</span></p><p><span style="font-family: georgia;">5. The importance of text based negotiations and legalese apart from the broad declaration of intent to negotiate</span></p><p><span style="font-family: georgia;">6. The inevitability of arriving at pragmatic solutions midway - what the middle point is, is often determined by negotiating strength and ability to craft rules</span></p><p><span style="font-family: georgia;">7. The existence of two narratives of the role of IP in the debate on public health - one that firmly believes that it fosters innovation and thus is a key enabler of public access to medicines and the other that believes that patent protection is a barrier to access to cheap medicines worldwide. That debate, with statistics and research is bound to continue.</span></p><p><span style="font-family: georgia;">Negotiations at the WTO are about a mix of domestic business interests, national strategies of growth, access to markets, benefit to consumers as well as the growth in trade across sectors. This piece brought out that potent mix.</span></p>Srikarhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17073379167588035440noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-920831647912894746.post-65852916230897353162022-10-16T12:02:00.002+05:302022-10-16T12:02:22.892+05:30Trade and Technology Council - the new forum for engagement?<p><span style="font-family: georgia;">Apart from engaging in the World Trade Organization, countries engage in a multitude of ways on trade and technology. A recent development is the formation of joint trade and technology councils (TTC) - the <a href="https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2021/06/15/u-s-eu-summit-statement/">EU and US</a> formed one in 2021. The EU and India formed <a href="https://www.mea.gov.in/press-releases.htm?dtl/35226/IndiaEU+Joint+Press+Release+on+Launching+the+Trade+and+Technology+Council">one</a> in 2022.</span></p><p><span style="font-family: georgia;">I was curious at the agenda and progress made in the <a href="https://www.piie.com/blogs/trade-and-investment-policy-watch/what-us-eu-trade-and-technology-council-five-things-you">EU-US TTC</a>. One of the working groups in the TTC is on Technology Standards. The importance of setting global standards cannot be understated. Similarly, collaborating and co-operating on setting international standards assumes significance to benefit industry. Who participates in setting standards is important as well as how open the process is to different stakeholders and businesses.</span></p><p><span style="font-family: georgia;">The EU-US TTC have set up a public consultation process for each of the working groups. Under the Technology Standards Working group consultation, a <a href="file:///Users/ksbcl-md/Downloads/Guiding%20Principles%20for%20US-EU%20Semi%20Standardisation%20Cooperation_09052022_0.pdf">joint representation</a> by the US and EU semiconductor industry on the importance of the role of the private sector in setting standards, preferring global standards to national standards and reducing regulatory divergences in their markets.</span></p><p><span style="font-family: georgia;">What I found striking was the following:</span></p><p><span style="font-family: georgia;">1. EU-US TTC had not only brought the governments together on the same platform to collaborate and co-operate, it had encouraged private players to act together in this case the semiconductor associations of the US and EU. This takes the debate beyond national interest to shared business interests. It is not only about market access but common goals. </span></p><p><span style="font-family: georgia;">2. The importance of sustained stakeholder consultation using technology - a digital platform for views from any interested business in the EU and the US to add to the conversation on trade and technology co-operation between the transatlantic partners.</span></p><p><span style="font-family: georgia;">On the trade front, this <b><a href="https://transatlanticbusiness.eu/wp-content/uploads/2022/02/Transatlantic-Agenda-for-Trade-and-Investment.pdf">document</a></b> by the Germany based Transatlantic Business Initiative, once again received in a public consultation, captured in a very simple, straightforward way the commonalities and differences between the US and EU on issues related to the WTO. The value of public consultation from varying levels of stakeholders is invaluable for governments to craft meaningful national policy. Most governments do engage in public consultation in varying degrees. There are perspectives that add value to public policy making. A range of business interests, from small to large conglomerates, need to be incorporated while crafting national strategies - while in some cases national interest may be to take a divergent stand from domestic business in the larger interest of the consumer.</span></p><p><i></i></p><p><br /></p>Srikarhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17073379167588035440noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-920831647912894746.post-59836614964689733352022-09-25T11:44:00.002+05:302022-09-25T11:44:25.436+05:30Get green, but locally!<p><span style="font-family: georgia;">About a decade ago I wrote a paper on renewable energy and local content requirements. It was in the context of compatibility with various provisions of WTO law. The paper is <a href="https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2179621">here</a> - titled "<span style="color: #222222;">Renewable Energy Programmes in the European Union, Japan and the United States - Compatibility with WTO Law".</span></span></p><p><span style="color: #222222; font-family: georgia;">Nearly a decade later, things don't seem to have changed. Came across this PIIE piece by <a href="https://www.piie.com/experts/research-analysts/megan-hogan">Megan Hogan</a> on the same theme. Writing in her piece "<b><a href="https://www.piie.com/blogs/trade-and-investment-policy-watch/local-content-requirements-threaten-renewable-energy-uptake">Local content requirements threaten renewable energy uptake</a></b>" she has argued that such domestic content requirements lead to increase in cost, reduce quality and effects the end consumer and power producers the most in terms of increased cost. Two interesting illustrations that buttress her case:</span></p><p><span style="color: #222222; font-family: georgia;"><br /></span></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEiKHeadK_z9IPi6NTgKkj1vEA6FMg71Qof3c2I7soelXQuZJMkeFeKVzPvWBJBAhy0uAdZdJ64phMu5Bu7ZBzpJCRdtARLDlFdM7hUPoYAL-I6edwSZ0muQ6k5yOljUsww1q9rEM0YTH7x2n6G6RdhNc8O8UKEhZgGP9GSpOxkao0kryJ7799x2OfjX" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><span style="font-family: georgia;"><img alt="" data-original-height="1223" data-original-width="1025" height="359" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEiKHeadK_z9IPi6NTgKkj1vEA6FMg71Qof3c2I7soelXQuZJMkeFeKVzPvWBJBAhy0uAdZdJ64phMu5Bu7ZBzpJCRdtARLDlFdM7hUPoYAL-I6edwSZ0muQ6k5yOljUsww1q9rEM0YTH7x2n6G6RdhNc8O8UKEhZgGP9GSpOxkao0kryJ7799x2OfjX=w301-h359" width="301" /></span></a></div><span style="font-family: georgia;"><br /></span><p><span style="background-color: white; color: #172a3a;"><span style="font-family: georgia;">She concludes: </span></span></p><p><span style="background-color: white; color: #172a3a; font-style: italic;"><span style="font-family: georgia;"></span></span></p><blockquote style="font-style: italic; text-align: justify;"><span style="font-family: georgia;"><span style="background-color: white; color: #172a3a;">"In the end, for all their well-meaning intentions, LCRs tend to </span><a class="ext" data-extlink="" href="https://www.nature.com/articles/s41560-020-0677-7" rel="noreferrer" style="background-color: white; border-bottom: 0px; box-sizing: inherit; color: #407ca7; outline-offset: 2px; outline: transparent solid 2px; text-decoration-line: none; transition-duration: 200ms; transition-property: background-color, border, color, opacity, outline-color; transition-timing-function: cubic-bezier(0.4, 0, 1, 1);">drive up cost</a><span style="background-color: white; color: #172a3a;">,</span><a class="ext" data-extlink="" href="https://www.greengrowthknowledge.org/sites/default/files/downloads/resource/local-content-requirements-renewable-energy-industry-ICTSD.pdf" rel="noreferrer" style="background-color: white; border-bottom: 0px; box-sizing: inherit; color: #407ca7; line-height: 1.75; margin-left: 2rem; outline-offset: 2px; outline: transparent solid 2px; text-decoration-line: none; transition-duration: 200ms; transition-property: background-color, border, color, opacity, outline-color; transition-timing-function: cubic-bezier(0.4, 0, 1, 1);">hamper international competitio</a>n<span style="background-color: white; color: #172a3a;">, and </span><a class="ext" data-extlink="" href="https://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/environment/overcoming-barriers-to-international-investment-in-clean-energy/local-content-requirements-in-the-solar-and-wind-energy-global-value-chains_9789264227064-6-en" rel="noreferrer" style="background-color: white; border-bottom: 0px; box-sizing: inherit; color: #407ca7; outline-offset: 2px; outline: transparent solid 2px; text-decoration-line: none; transition-duration: 200ms; transition-property: background-color, border, color, opacity, outline-color; transition-timing-function: cubic-bezier(0.4, 0, 1, 1);">increase investment risk and uncertaint</a><span style="background-color: white; color: #172a3a;">, inhibiting rather than encouraging local manufacturing. If the goal of renewable energy policy is to make solar PV and wind energy more affordable and widely used, local content requirements are an obstacle, not a solution."</span></span></blockquote><p><span style="font-family: georgia;">The trend seems to indicate an increase in local content requirements in renewable energy programs across geographies - developed and developing. Get green, but locally!</span></p><span style="background-color: white; color: #172a3a; font-family: "mercury text g1 a", "mercury text g1 b", Georgia, "times new roman", "dejavu serif", serif; font-style: italic;"></span><p></p>Srikarhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17073379167588035440noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-920831647912894746.post-72716000260963075572022-05-11T02:52:00.004+05:302022-05-11T02:52:29.680+05:30What kind of globalization would prevail?<p><span style="font-family: georgia;">A sobering piece by <b><a href="https://drodrik.scholar.harvard.edu/">Dani Rodrik</a></b> on a "better globalization" replacing the era of hyper globalization is here in <b><a href="https://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/after-hyperglobalization-national-interests-open-economy-by-dani-rodrik-2022-05">this Project Syndicate</a></b> piece. </span></p><p><span style="font-family: georgia;">He argues that the answer to the retreat to hyper-globalisation need not be autarky but a more equitable, distributive globalization that takes care of the losers of globalization.</span></p><p data-line-id="d3f44d1d1cae425d88af01e4ba3b073b" style="background-color: #fcfcfc; box-sizing: inherit; color: #333333; line-height: inherit; margin: 1.25rem 0px 0px; padding: 0px; position: relative;"><i><span style="font-family: georgia;"></span></i></p><blockquote><p data-line-id="d3f44d1d1cae425d88af01e4ba3b073b" style="background-color: #fcfcfc; box-sizing: inherit; color: #333333; line-height: inherit; margin: 1.25rem 0px 0px; padding: 0px; position: relative;"><i><span style="font-family: georgia;">"Yet, it is also possible to envisage a good scenario whereby we achieve a better balance between the prerogatives of the nation-state and the requirements of an open economy. Such a rebalancing might enable inclusive prosperity at home and peace and security abroad.</span></i><button aria-controls="comment__new" aria-expanded="false" aria-haspopup="true" aria-label="Paragraph comment" class="comment__caller comment__caller--no-comment" style="appearance: none; background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-size: initial; border-color: initial; border-radius: 0px; border-style: none; border-width: initial; bottom: 0px; box-sizing: inherit; color: #333333; cursor: pointer; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; opacity: 0.5; outline: none; overflow: visible; padding: 0px; position: absolute; right: -1.875rem;"><i><span style="font-family: georgia; font-size: small;"><span class="icon icon--small icon--comment add" style="box-sizing: inherit; color: transparent; cursor: pointer; display: inline-block; font-stretch: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; height: 1.5625rem; line-height: 0; position: relative; text-shadow: none; vertical-align: middle; width: 1.5625rem;"></span></span></i><span class="comment__count" style="box-sizing: inherit; left: 0px; line-height: 1.25rem; position: absolute; top: -1.25rem; width: 1.5625rem;"></span></button></p><p data-line-id="1eae93ebb2f3428194b42878512db83e" style="background-color: #fcfcfc; box-sizing: inherit; color: #333333; line-height: inherit; margin: 1.25rem 0px 0px; padding: 0px; position: relative;"><i><span style="font-family: georgia;">The first step is for policymakers to <a href="https://drodrik.scholar.harvard.edu/publications/fixing-capitalism%E2%80%99s-good-jobs-problem" style="background-color: transparent; box-sizing: inherit; color: #2499e0; text-decoration-line: none;" target="_blank">mend</a> the damage done to economies and societies by hyper-globalization, along with other market-first policies. This will require reviving the spirit of the Bretton Woods era, when the global economy served domestic economic and social goals – full employment, prosperity, and equity – rather than the other way around. Under hyper-globalization, policymakers inverted this logic, with the global economy becoming the end and domestic society the means. International integration then led to domestic disintegration."</span></i></p></blockquote><p><span style="font-family: georgia;">He also alludes to the importance of a multipolar world instead and new rule makers. <b><a href="https://www.hks.harvard.edu/faculty/graham-allison">Graham Allison</a></b> has talked about the <b><a href="https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2015/09/united-states-china-war-thucydides-trap/406756/">Thucydides Trap</a></b> when a rising power threatens to displace a ruling power, war is inevitable. Dani Rodrik opines:</span></p><p data-line-id="e35f9cb9257547d1a3c6c317bfe89aa0" style="background-color: #fcfcfc; box-sizing: inherit; color: #333333; line-height: inherit; margin: 1.25rem 0px 0px; padding: 0px; position: relative;"></p><blockquote><i><span style="font-family: georgia;">For great powers, and the US in particular, this means acknowledging multipolarity and abandoning the quest for global supremacy. The US tends to regard American predominance in global affairs as the natural state of affairs. In this view, China’s economic and technological advances are inherently and self-evidently <a href="https://www.belfercenter.org/sites/default/files/GreatTechRivalry_ChinavsUS_211207.pdf" style="background-color: transparent; box-sizing: inherit; color: #2499e0; text-decoration-line: none;" target="_blank">a threat</a>, and the bilateral relationship is reduced to a zero-sum game.</span></i></blockquote><p><span style="font-family: georgia;">How globalization will play out in terms of international economic law rule making will depend on what approaches to trade major economies would take in the coming decade? Would it based more in the region rather than global? Would there be different trading blocs? Would domestic concerns and priorities shape trade policy leading to tensions at the WTO? Would trade increase but trade rules stagnate? </span></p><p><span style="color: black; font-family: georgia;">I had the privilege of moderating a session recently with Prof.Dani Rodrik on avoiding one-size fits-all solutions. the video recording is <b><a href="https://drive.google.com/file/d/1kmYkSkC30ekWzbuImcqvmuE_URpWTt_3/view">here</a></b>. We find some answers here.</span></p><button aria-controls="comment__new" aria-expanded="false" aria-haspopup="true" aria-label="Paragraph comment" class="comment__caller comment__caller--no-comment" style="appearance: none; background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-size: initial; border-color: initial; border-radius: 0px; border-style: none; border-width: initial; bottom: 0px; box-sizing: inherit; color: #333333; cursor: pointer; font-family: "Noto Sans", sans-serif; font-size: 17px; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; opacity: 0.5; outline: none; overflow: visible; padding: 0px; position: absolute; right: -1.875rem;"><span class="icon icon--small icon--comment add" style="box-sizing: inherit; color: transparent; cursor: pointer; display: inline-block; font-family: a; font-size: 0px; font-stretch: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; height: 1.5625rem; line-height: 0; position: relative; text-shadow: none; vertical-align: middle; width: 1.5625rem;"></span><span class="comment__count" style="box-sizing: inherit; font-size: 0.9375rem; left: 0px; line-height: 1.25rem; position: absolute; top: -1.25rem; width: 1.5625rem;"></span></button><p></p><div class="textwidget textwidget--inherited" data-line-id="1c1b55527a53497885a585841fb0c502" id="article-widget" style="background-color: #fcfcfc; box-sizing: inherit; color: #333333; font-family: "Noto Serif", serif; font-size: 17px; margin-top: 1.25rem; position: relative;"><button aria-controls="comment__new" aria-expanded="false" aria-haspopup="true" aria-label="Paragraph comment" class="comment__caller comment__caller--no-comment" style="appearance: none; background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-size: initial; border-color: initial; border-radius: 0px; border-style: none; border-width: initial; bottom: 0px; box-sizing: inherit; color: #333333; cursor: pointer; font-family: "Noto Sans", sans-serif; font-size: 17px; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; opacity: 0.5; outline: none; overflow: visible; padding: 0px; position: absolute; right: -1.875rem;"><span class="icon icon--small icon--comment add" style="box-sizing: inherit; color: transparent; cursor: pointer; display: inline-block; font-family: a; font-size: 0px; font-stretch: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; height: 1.5625rem; line-height: 0; position: relative; text-shadow: none; vertical-align: middle; width: 1.5625rem;"></span><span class="comment__count" style="box-sizing: inherit; font-size: 0.9375rem; left: 0px; line-height: 1.25rem; position: absolute; top: -1.25rem; width: 1.5625rem;"></span></button></div><p data-line-id="1eae93ebb2f3428194b42878512db83e" style="background-color: #fcfcfc; box-sizing: inherit; color: #333333; font-family: "Noto Serif", serif; font-size: 17px; line-height: inherit; margin: 1.25rem 0px 0px; padding: 0px; position: relative;"><i></i></p>Srikarhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17073379167588035440noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-920831647912894746.post-14576052064356927152022-04-15T00:49:00.002+05:302022-04-20T23:45:11.318+05:30Animal welfare as subjects of trade agreements?<p><span style="font-family: georgia;">I had <b><a href="http://treadthemiddlepath.blogspot.com/2022/03/taahiraa-pai-how-innovative-can-ftas-get.html">blogged</a></b> a few weeks ago about chapters in FTAs that are usually not seen in traditional trade agreements. This was in the context of New Zealand.</span></p><p><span style="font-family: georgia;">This time it is "animal welfare" that has taken its position in an FTA chapter as a separate chapter. the new <b><a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/uk-new-zealand-fta-summary-of-chapters/uk-new-zealand-free-trade-agreement-chapter-explainers#animal-welfare">UK-New Zealand FTA</a></b> has, inter alia, a chapter on animal welfare. As per Article 6.1 of the FTA, the purpose of the <b><a href="https://www.mfat.govt.nz/assets/Trade-agreements/UK-NZ-FTA/Chapters/Chapter-6-Animal-Welfare.pdf">provisions on animal welfare</a></b> in a trade agreement is </span><i style="font-family: georgia;">"to enhance cooperation between the Parties
on animal welfare of farmed animals." </i><span style="font-family: georgia;">It states that animals are sentient beings and protection and welfare of animals may be in the interest of a party's trade objectives.</span></p><p><span style="font-family: georgia;">The chapter recognises the right of parties to regulate with respect to animal welfare, not derogate from their animal welfare laws, exchange information, expertise, and experiences in the
field of animal welfare with the aim of improving understanding of each
other’s regulatory systems, policies, and strategic approaches, and enhancing
animal welfare standards and also set up a working group to work on animal welfare issues.</span></p><p><span style="font-family: georgia;">The chapter is innovative in the sense that it places animal welfare as a "trade issue". It pretty much opens the door for any issue to be a trade agreement chapter. For those countries that are cautious about the scope of trade agreements, this can be problematic. For others, there is no limit to what trade can impinge upon.</span></p><p><span style="font-family: georgia;">The soft landing perhaps is the exclusion of the application of the dispute settlement provisions to the animal welfare chapter. One way of introducing innovative chapters in free trade agreements is to exclude it from the scope of dispute settlement. It takes enforcement out of the debate, but does push the agenda that both parties are interested in pursuing. Sensitivities on both sides taken care of perhaps?</span></p>Srikarhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17073379167588035440noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-920831647912894746.post-5382656306067425152022-04-12T01:29:00.002+05:302022-04-12T01:29:13.549+05:30Global norms, local initiations?<p><span style="font-family: georgia;">I had commented on the EU CBAM and it's potential challenge under the WTO dispute settlement system <b><a href="http://treadthemiddlepath.blogspot.com/2022/01/can-appealing-into-void-be-appealing-now.html">here</a></b>. The other question it raises is setting of standards outside multilateral fora. Since carbon tariffs or penalties on imports based on carbon content are not being negotiated in any multilateral fora, individual countries are going ahead with their own set of rules. While the compatibility to international trade rules is one issue, how these standards ultimately will become global norms is another interesting arena of research. Will these rules, ipso facto, force trade reliant emerging economies to adopt them despite no legal need to do so?</span></p><p><span style="font-family: georgia;">Harvard Law Review has this <b><a href="https://harvardlawreview.org/2022/04/the-promise-and-perils-of-carbon-tariffs/?utm_source=Harvard+Law+Review+Mailing+List&utm_campaign=186083c04e-Volume_131_January_2017_Number_3_2018_COPY_01&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_62fe9709f5-186083c04e-298830641">piece </a></b>on the reality of carbon tariffs and their impact on trade and how countries would react to them. Though carbon tariffs have an ambiguous status under international law, it argues that it seems to be the only way forward to address the issue of climate change. Pointing towards the indirect benefit carbon tariffs may have on other economies, it states:</span></p><p><span style="background-color: #fdfaf3; color: #333333; text-align: justify;"></span></p><blockquote><span style="font-family: georgia;"><i>As access to large and valuable markets like the United States and the European Union becomes predicated on a showing that comparable climate policies are at work in the exporting state, more and more trade-dependent economies that might not otherwise adopt rigorous climate policies will be compelled to show that they too are complying with the Paris targets, further expanding the body of state practice. These effects may not produce a critical mass of state practice and legal obligation and may not overcome the inertial effects of persistent objectors, but they will almost certainly move the needle in the right direction.</i></span></blockquote><p>Will the EU CBAM lead to the widespread adoption of carbon tariffs in emerging economies? Will they be challenged in the WTO? Will it lead to re-negotiation of the Paris Climate Agreement commitments? How ultimately are international standards set? My initial moves by large developed economies and inevitable adoption by others or in a more structured multilateral way? </p><p>What lessons does this have for internet governance and the rules around it? Who will set the rules for internet governance, digital tax, digital governance, privacy and trade? Will it take a similar route of a few taking the initiative and others following suit?</p><p></p>Srikarhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17073379167588035440noreply@blogger.com0