The EPA Negotiations in Africa & at the SADC level: some comments

Subtitle:

Presenter:

Date:

TIPS

Myriam Velia

5th March 2008

Reflection: Main points from yesterday?

Does the past matter?

Background: 1975: ACP Convention → Preferential treatment on exports to the EU (no/lower

duties and quotas) Issues with the WTO in 1995 – discrimination (GATT Art. XXIV) – banana trade

war; In parallel: Cotonou signed in June 2000.

Waiver to the WTO to the end of 2007 obtained by the EU → arrangement in “line” with WTO principles;

7 EPA groupings (regional configurations) with reciprocal FTAs. Considerations? But would be the reasons for uptake?

Aid/aid for trade; market access guarantees; Re-assessment of RI grouping coherence? Overlap with RI commitments

within single custom grouping? And are EPAs catalyst to redefine specific (RI) focus, priorities or alliances (e.g. Tanzania)?

What about integration into multilateral trading system and position around this?

Negotiations?- Understanding of the deal & common understanding of the deal?- details & scope of the deal? E.g. RI - DDA progress? Scope of liberalisation to

meet WTO comptatibility requirements vs. GSPs & EBA alternatives?

Focus: Negotiations – EPAs put on the table in 2002; Review:

Engaged by SAIIA (South African Institute of International Affairs) staff for ECOWAS, SADC, Central Africa (in draft)

& for CEMAC (Communauté Economique et Monétaire de l’Afrique Centrale), ESA (Eastern & Southern Africa [group]), ECOWAS (Economic Community of West African States) & SADC (final Review)

→ UN Economic Commission for Africa in 2006 & 2007ECA (2007) “EPA Negotiations, African Countries Continental Review”,

Review Report, African Trade Policy Centre (ATPC), Work in Progress No. 64.

Review & collect information & data (secondary & primary – examination of

documents & face to face interviews):- Examination of country specific material;- Approached representatives from National Development Trade Policy

Forums (NDTPF) – to be set up as specified in Cotonou and to “channel” the view of the “non-state actors” (NSAs – incl. civil society organisations – CSOs);

- Approached regional Negotiating Forums. NTDPFs report to these forums;

Focus: What do you think were the problem areas

associated with the negotiations?

Negotiations Process: Main Findings

From the ACP African Partners side: Not inclusive – severe under-representation & lack of

communication sought from NSAs (CSOs + private sector rep. & associations); Lack of representativity lack of awareness on the EPA process and

the details thereof vs. which NSA to involve in the discussion (selection by National Authorizing Officer)?

Lack of funds & no transparency on fund use in terms of engaging & managing the negotiation process – transparency important since EPAs approved by national parliaments;

Beyond LDCs/non-LDCs division, substantial economical, political, cultural divergences – LDCs possibly “more complacent about the process” & stakes are lower.*

Lack of efficiency around the regional preparatory task forces; lack of capacity [compounded by timing and regional & multilateral trade negotiations uncertainty - RI, DDA negotiations], & lack of co-ordination in terms of engaging with the consultations + getting feedback on those consulted & in terms of the reporting back process; Lack of preparedness;

Negotiations Process: Main Findings

Specifically commenting on general EU behaviour: Development Finance: details somewhat unclear & whilst EDF seen

as critical also commented upon as difficult to access in any case;

New issues brought under the EPAs & position or details on some issues not clarified (e.g. standards, services, ROO).

Generally: Sectoral impact: not detailed/established – agriculture & tourism;

Important variations in negotiation speed; Different arrangements, configurations etc.

SADC EU EPA Review: Main Findings

For SADC, main negotiator: Botswana’s Minister of Trade & Industry with EC;

Focus of the SADC-EC EPA (2005 at the meeting of SADC Trade Ministers):

- SPS;

- TBT;

- Technical Assistance;

- Information

Generally, disagreements on the modalities of the deal …

… but EPA seen as a natural follow up of RI.

SADC EU EPA Review: Issues

Lack of resources (which affected NSA involvement*);

Devt assistance & trade articulation? One of SADC pillar not guaranteed by the EC.

Lack of assessments carried out for some countries (e.g. sectoral analysis for Tanzania which was in the early stages in the SADC configuration - switch to the EAC);

Sensitive list of products with BLNS & link with SA (SACU & TDCA);

The problem of the SADC trade structure – (production &) trade diversification – production & trade structure similarities → tariff reductions incentives?;

Intra-Bloc Trade

Source: 2007 World Development indications

Intra-Bloc Trade Source: 2007 World Development indications

SADC EU EPA Review: Issues

Lack of resources (which affected NSA involvement*);

Devt assistance & trade articulation? One of SADC pillar not guarantee by the EC.

Lack of assessments carried out for some countries (e.g. sectoral analysis for Tanzania which was in the early stages in the SADC configuration - then switch to the EAC);

Sensitive list of products with BLNS & link with SA (SACU & TDCA);

The problem of the SADC trade structure – (production &) trade diversification – production & trade structure similarities → tariff reductions?;

Impact on consumers and on govt revenues for countries in the region;

Incoherent RI / EPA configuration & questions about EPA displacing RI development related resources; In parallel, SADC slow lib pace & lack of readiness to the move towards a CET.

Comments on the general pattern & Implications thereof? On the difference in “requirements” between

the SADC region & Africa?

On the importance of NSAs for the forthcoming negotiations and long-term progress of the EPAs

SADC-EPA Configuration and Continental Africa: Evaluation of the EPA negotiation pace (% of all responses)

16

34

56

0

917

74

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Ahe

ad o

fsc

hedu

le

On

trac

k

Slig

htly

Del

ayed

Ver

yD

elay

ed

Continental Africa [ECA(207)]

SADC

Source: ECA (2006) & ECA (2007)

SADC-EPA Configuration and Continental Africa: Outstanding Issues (% of responses – multiple responses allowed)

78

46 4861

5259

96

57

43 48

7057

0102030405060708090

100

Reg

iona

l Int

egra

tion

Trad

e in

Goo

ds

Trad

e in

Ser

vice

s

Trad

e R

elat

ed A

spec

ts

Inst

itutio

nal &

Leg

al Is

sues A

id

Continental Africa [ECA(2007)]

SADC

Source: ECA (2006) & ECA (2007)

SADC-EPA Configuration and Continental Africa: Coherence RI & EPA (%)

Source: ECA (2006) & ECA (2007)

40 35

4952

11 13

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Continental Africa [ECA (207)] SADC

No Comment

No

Yes

SADC-EPA Configuration and Continental Africa: Level of Reciprocity sought in the liberalisation (EPA) (% of responses)

2 4 39

19

11

45

04

9 9

30

1713

05

101520253035404550

Ful

l

90%

of v

olum

e of

trad

e

80%

of v

olum

e of

trad

e

70%

of v

olum

e of

trad

e

60%

of v

olum

e of

trad

e

50%

of v

olum

e of

trad

e

< 5

0% o

f vol

ume

of tr

ade

Continental Africa [ECA(207)]

SADC

Source: ECA (2006) & ECA (2007)

SADC-EPA Configuration and Continental Africa: Preferred Transition Period (% of responses)

Source: ECA (2006) & ECA (2007)

46

1418

46

1

7

26

9

39

9

04

9

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

Mo

re t

han

20

year

s

20

yea

rs

15

yea

rs

12

yea

rs

10

yea

rs

8 y

ear

s

< 8

yea

rs

Continental Africa [ECA(207)]

SADC