European Yearbook of International Economic Law 2017

Table of Contents

1. Frontmatter

2. Special Focus External Economic Relations of the European Union

   1. Frontmatter

   2. Distinguished Essay: A Quiet Revolution—The Changing Nature of the EU’s Common Commercial Policy

      Marise Cremona

      Abstract

      This paper assesses the development of the EU’s Common Commercial Policy (CCP) since the coming into force of the Lisbon Treaty. It argues that we have witnessed a “quiet revolution” in EU trade policy. Three major changes are identified. First, the extension of the CCP to include trade in services, the commercial aspects of intellectual property and foreign direct investment. Second is the embedding of EU trade policy into the Union’s overall principles and objectives, providing a framework for the broad discretion left by the Treaty to trade policy-makers. Third is the change to the decision-making structures of trade policy. The Commission still plays a key strategic role, but the Commission’s key interlocutors now include the European Parliament as well as the Council. The European Parliament has the power to consent to—or to withhold consent from—trade agreements and has proved willing to use its power.

      Working together with a renewed political and public interest in trade policy, in the wake of several contentious agreements, this new dynamic has led to calls for, and significant progress towards, greater transparency in the negotiation of trade agreements.

   3. Front-Loading Trade Policy-Making in the European Union: Towards a Trade Act

      Thomas Cottier

      Abstract

      The shift to non-tariff measures and regulatory behind-the-border issues in commercial policy—and thus to matters traditionally pertaining to domestic law of Member States and the European Union—call for enhanced inclusiveness in policy-making. Such inclusiveness, under current rules of exclusive powers and mixed agreements, mainly focuses on the final stages of negotiations. It undermines the authority and treaty-making powers of the Union, frustrating legitimate expectations and trust of trading partners. Instead, major issues and debates on trade policy should be front-loaded and not taking place at the stage of consent and signature, prior to ratification and the adoption of implementing legislation. In assessing current procedures and its shortcomings under the practice of mixed agreements, the paper suggest developing and introducing a European Trade Act, perhaps called International Trade, Investment and Co-operation Regulation (ITICR). In comparison with, and referring to, the United States Trade Act, the paper expounds the potential scope and functions of a European Trade Act under the Lisbon Treaties and its assistance in achieving the goal of front-loading trade policy and investment policy debates within the Union. A Trade Act reduces the risks under the bifurcated system of exclusive and mixed competences of the Union in international economic law. It bears the potential to enhance inclusiveness and thus democratic legitimacy while at the same time supporting effective treaty-making powers of the European Union.

   4. International Trade Agreements and Democratic Participation

      Mattias Wendel

      Abstract

      The following contribution focuses on the question whether the negotiations on the two major transatlantic free trade agreements CETA (EU-Canada) and TTIP (EU-US) have so far corresponded to the principles of democratic participation, transparency, and public accessibility. Specific attention is drawn to the citizen’s democratic participation through forms of participatory or direct democracy.

   5. Sincere Cooperation in the Common Commercial Policy: Lisbon, a “Joined-Up” Union, and “Brexit”

      Joris Larik

      Abstract

      The article elaborates on the significance of the duty of sincere cooperation as a legal principle in the Common Commercial Policy (CCP) of the European Union (EU), in particular as regards the relationship between the Union and its Member States. It argues that while the duty of sincere cooperation is a judicially enforceable duty vis-à-vis the Member States, it is losing some of its relevance in the context of the CCP. This is due to the fact that the Lisbon Treaty, as confirmed by the case law of the Court of Justice of the EU, expanded the scope of the CCP and clearly identifies it as an exclusive competence of the Union. Loyalty in the CCP, therefore, is mainly covered by the obligation to respect the exclusivity of the Union’s international powers in this area. While this does not equate to the disappearance of the Member States as actors in international economic governance, it does seriously constrain their leeway for autonomous action. In addition, the article applies this finding to a number of current developments surrounding the CCP. These include, firstly, the new Global Strategy for Foreign and Security Policy, which promotes the idea of a “joined-up” approach between different actors and policies; secondly, “Brexit” and the prospect of the United Kingdom negotiating new trade agreements of its own; thirdly, the position of the Member States in the WTO; and fourthly, the nature of the wave of new free trade agreements that the EU is negotiating and concluding.

   6. Article 21 TEU and the EU’s Common Commercial Policy: A Test of Coherence

      Alessandra Asteriti

      Abstract

      This contribution investigates the role of Article 21 TEU in the context of the EU’s common commercial policy (CCP), with specific reference to its new investment competence. Article 21, introducing non-commercial objectives in the CCP, has been both hailed for rebalancing and expanding the EU’s foreign policy and criticised for needlessly politicising the external action of the EU. This article is an attempt to assess the true import of the changes introduced by the Lisbon Treaty in this area, for what is possible given the limited temporal extent of their application. Section 2 will briefly review the role of foreign investment in the CCP, while Section 3 will do the same for the non-commercial objectives pursued by the EU in the context of its CCP competences. Section 4 is dedicated to an analysis of Article 21 TEU and its legal value. In doing so, the section will consider issues such as to what extent Article 21 TEU constrains the foreign policy of the EU and its effect with specific reference to the CCP. Further, the article will consider the relationship between Article 21 TEU and other programmatic articles of the TEU, such as Article 3 TEU, and the incorporation of non-commercial objectives in the EU’s Free Trade Agreements (FTAs) and Preferential Trade Arrangements (PTAs). In Section 5, there will be a review and implications of the recent Front Polisario case, in which the General Court determined the EU’s scope of responsibility for what concern non-commercial objectives in a trade agreement, taking also into account the latest developments on the case in the Court of Justice of the EU’s Judgment. Finally, Section 6 will offer some concluding remarks.

   7. The Perception of the EU Legal Order in International Law: An In- and Outside View

      Christina Binder, Jane A. Hofbauer

      Abstract

      The EU is a strange phenomenon, whether regarded from the perspective of international or domestic law. It evokes many questions on the relationship of its legal order with international law and domestic law, respectively. Despite the increasing trend by the CJEU to emphasize the EU’s autonomy—both, internally and externally—, from an international law perspective, there is no reason to per se “detach” the EU from the international legal framework. This is in part also evident in how international dispute settlement bodies address questions touching upon the EU legal order and its relation to international law. This contribution focuses on the nature of the EU legal order as designated by international dispute settlement bodies, and particularly its relationship with the international legal order. On the basis of examples from four different fields—general international law, trade law, human rights law and investment law—, theoretical, jurisdictional and substantive reconciliatory techniques are identified. In particular, it is shown that the classification of the EU legal order as a subsystem of international law, as a de facto domestic order or as a sui generis legal order predetermines which conflict rules and reconciliatory techniques find application.

   8. The EU’s Trade Defence Instruments: Recent Judicial and Policy Developments

      Wolfgang Müller

      Abstract

      The European Union’s Trade Defence Instruments consist of the Basic Anti-Dumping Regulation (Regulation (EU) 2016/1036, OJ 2016 L 176/21.), the Basic Anti-Subsidy Regulation (Regulation (EU) 2016/1037, OJ 2016 L 176/55.) as well as the safeguard instruments (Regulation (EU) 2015/478 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 March 2015 on common rules for imports, OJ 2015 L 83/16; Regulation (EU) 2015/755 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 April 2015 on common rules for imports from certain countries, OJ 2015 L 123/33.). In particular the anti-dumping instrument is currently very much in the public focus because of the steel crisis and the widely discussed question of how to treat exports from China in anti-dumping investigations. The latter issue is usually (and somewhat misleadingly) referred to as China's market economy status. However, the issue is only about the calculation of the normal value in anti-dumping investigations against imports from China, see in detail Annex S of the Staff Working Document, SWD(2016) 330 final, that is published together with the Commission’s Annual Report on the EU’s Anti-Dumping, Anti-Subsidy and Safeguard Activities. This contribution describes recent salient developments in the EU’s trade defence instruments in the light of rulings by the Courts in Luxembourg and in relation to possible changes of the Basic Anti-Dumping and Anti-Subsidy Regulations.

   9. Democratic Legitimacy and the Rule of Law in Investor-State Dispute Settlement under CETA

      Christoph Ohler

      Abstract

      In recent years only, investor-state dispute settlement has come into the focus of public debate. In particular in Germany and Austria, but also in other EU Member States its democratic legitimacy is questioned. Arbitral tribunals, the argument goes, would intrude into the exercise of sovereign powers by democratically elected parliaments while the tribunals themselves would not possess a similar level of legitimacy. As a consequence, the European Parliament adopted a resolution on 8 July 2015 that it would not approve of an investment treaty which is based on the traditional model of international investment arbitration. This article analyses the fundamentals of legal legitimacy and applies them to the mechanics of investor-state dispute settlement. It argues that issues of legality and legitimacy must be seen in their interdependency. Insofar, the most outstanding deficits of investor-state dispute settlement are not of procedural but of substantive nature. Arbitral tribunals interpret and apply substantive standards under bilateral investment treaties which in most cases are too vague and, therefore, translate into too much power of the tribunals. In contrast thereto, the Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement between Canada and the European Union and its Member States will considerably change the standards of international investment protection. It strengthens the rule of law in substantive and procedural terms which also translates into a higher level of democratic legitimacy.

   10. The EU and Investor-State Dispute Settlement: WTO Litigators Going “Investor-State Arbitration” and Back to a Permanent “Investment Court”

       August Reinisch

       Abstract

       With acquiring powers to conclude investment treaties in the field of the common commercial policy, the EU has entered the scene as a regional actor in investment treaty law-making. Since the Commission, the EU’s trade negotiating arm, has refrained from adopting a Model BIT or Model IIA, the contours of investment agreements and investment chapters in the EU’s trade agreements remained vague and uncertain for a while. Meanwhile the first finalized texts of such investment standards have emerged. Most prominent are the 2015 draft TTIP investment chapter and the 2016 CETA text. This contribution focuses on the role of investor-State dispute settlement in the negotiation of these agreements. It shows that the Commission initially adopted the traditional European view that an effective investment protection required the enforcement mechanism of investor-State arbitration. With the increasing public criticism of this form of investor-State dispute settlement, however, various attempts have been made to correct the perceived deficiencies of investor-State arbitration. In addition to fine-tuning and limiting the scope of the substantive investment protection standards in the new EU treaties, the Commission has equally inserted a number of changes to investor-State arbitration, such as broad transparency rules, the possibility of amicus curiae submissions, strict rules on arbitrator independence and impartiality, the power to dismiss frivolous claims, etc. Then, in a September 2015 TTIP text, the Commission proposed to the US-side the adoption of an investment court system with standing judges on two levels.

   11. Competition Law in EU Free Trade and Cooperation Agreements (and What the UK Can Expect After Brexit)

       Florian Wagner-von Papp

       Abstract

       Free trade and competition law, for the most part, mutually reinforce each other by breaking up entrenched positions of market power and creating competitive constraints on any entities with market power. Competition law enforcement still adheres mostly to the nineteenth century paradigm of enforcement by sovereign nation states, albeit with extended extraterritorial prescriptive jurisdiction. At the same time national competition law enforcers face an increasingly transnational economy. The increase in free trade and competition advocacy has resulted in a proliferation of national competition law regimes. The patchwork of multiple national enforcement leads to enforcement gaps and enforcement overlaps (Guzman). While some call for global solutions to global problems and advocate a global competition agency (or appointing a lead jurisdiction), it is questionable if such centralisation would be desirable and at any rate it does not seem politically feasible. The intermediate path between pure unilateral enforcement and a centralised global enforcer consists in unilateral enforcement tempered by cooperation and coordination of enforcement activities. Regional cooperation leads to internally relatively homogeneous clusters, and reduces complexity on the global scale. The extremely close cooperation in such regional cooperation agreements is supplemented by a second layer of reciprocal cooperation links, which are characterised by a slightly lower but still high degree of internal homogeneity, and accordingly cooperation that does not go quite as far as the one in the central region. As we move in concentric circles further away from the centre, heterogeneity of competitive conditions or interests increases and the depth of cooperation decreases. This results in regional clusters. Within each cluster, issues of gaps and overlaps can be reduced to the greatest possible extent. Some of the clusters are interconnected among each other by bilateral links (such as CETA between the EU and Canada). Between clusters, the weaker cooperation and coordination may not resolve all gaps and overlaps, but as global heterogeneity of views on competition policy decreases through the work of international organisations (such as the OECD, the ICN or APEC), gradual progress is made here as well.

       This contribution exemplifies the concentric circles of cooperation around the EU by examining the intergovernmental and inter-agency agreements concluded by the EU to face the complexities of the transnational economy of the twenty-first century. It then turns to a development that does not fit this neat picture of ever-increasing cooperation at all: Brexit and its implications.

   12. The European Union’s Policy on Public Procurement in Preferential Trade Agreements

       Stephen Woolcock

       Abstract

       The European Union’s policy on public procurement in the preferential trade agreements (PTAs) has to be seen against the broader EU aims of shaping international trade rules and ensuring market access to key markets. The EU policy on procurement has both shaped and has been shaped by international norms. Initially pressure from the United States (US) led to international discussions in the OECD. These shaped the initial EU Directives aimed at creating a Europe wide procurement market in the early 1970s. But it was not until the late 1980s, as part of the EU Single Market programme, that EU moved to create a competition based, comprehensive regional procurement market. From this point on the EU became a proponent of stronger international rules on procurement. This shift by the EU paved the way for a significant extension of the international rules in the 1996 revision of the World Trade Organisation’s Government Procurement Agreement (GPA). EU policy now has two main components. First, to achieve an equally comprehensive international regime that can ensure access to other major economies, including the emerging markets. Second, to promote the adoption of international best practice in the government procurement, which accounts for a important share of GDP in all economies but it too often subject to a lack of transparency and due process and thus a potential source of abuse and corruption. In these efforts the EU has had partial success in the face of significant opposition. The EU pressed for multilateral negotiations on procurement rules in the WTO’s Doha Development Agenda (DDA), but without success. It had some more success in the plurilateral negotiations to extend the coverage of the (non-MFN) GPA, but this was very largely in the form of greater commitments by existing developed signatories to that agreement. Preferential trade agreements (PTAs) have offered an alternative means of fulfilling the EU’s objectives and in these the EU has had some success, but there remains considerable opposition. Public procurement arguably marks the high tide mark for the extension of the liberal paradigm of an open, rules-based order into national policy autonomy. It remains to be seen whether recent developments in leading OECD economies, such as the call for more Buy America policies by the incoming Trump Administration will threaten the scope of the existing rules.

   13. Good Raw Materials Governance: Towards a European Approach Contributing to a Constitutionalised International Economic Law

       Karsten Nowrot

       Abstract

       The European Union is currently in the process of adopting a regulation on so-called “conflict minerals”. Against this background, the contribution provides some thoughts on this evolving European approach towards the promotion of good raw materials governance. For that purpose, it first assesses the concept of good global governance stipulated as one of the foreign policy objectives in Article 21 TEU with particular emphasis on its regulatory content and the respective scope of application. Subsequently, the contribution specifically addresses the normative steering relevance of this principle for the regulatory design of international trade in raw materials. In the third part an attempt will be made to outline and evaluate the respective EU governance processes aimed at translating the abstract concept of good governance into specific legal instruments and practices, thereby primarily taking recourse to the ongoing deliberations among EU institutions on the said conflict minerals regulation. Finally, the concluding section of the contribution provides a kind of bird’s-eye view on some of the expected implications of the European good raw materials governance for the future development of what is here referred to as a constitutionalised international economic law.

3. Regions: Ongoing Bi- and Multilateral Negotiations of the European Union

   1. Frontmatter

   2. Bilateral Developments in EU Trade Policy Seven Years After Lisbon: A Look into the Spaghetti-Bowl à la Bruxelloise (2010–2016)

      Frank Hoffmeister

      Abstract

      The author reviews the EU’s bilateral free trade agenda since the entry into force of the Lisbon Treaty. He shows that the number of partner countries has grown significantly, nowadays covering all major regions of the world. The review covers neighbourhood countries, emerging economies, G-7 partners, ASEAN and ACP countries, as well as Latin American countries plus Australia and New Zealand. Afterwards, he describes the major trends in a typical EU FTA on trade in goods, services, investment protection, public procurement, IPRs, competition and sustainable development. In his conclusion, the author argues that EU trade policy has become increasingly politicised over the past 7 years and is regularly dealt with nowadays at the level of Heads of States and Governments.

   3. Negotiating CETA with the European Union and Some Thoughts on the Impact of Mega-Regional Trade Agreements on Agreements Inter Partes and Agreements with Third Parties

      Armand de Mestral

      Abstract

      The negotiation of the CETA between the EU and Canada took a surprisingly long time given the many common interests of the two parties. The final stages of the negotiation involved last minute changes, the decision to agree on provisional application and the threat of a veto from Belgium. This was in part due to public concerns concerning investor-state arbitration, to the political decision to treat CETA as a mixed agreement under EU law and due to the rather surprising understanding that even the decision to adopt CETA on a provisional basis was subject to a rule of unanimity. The second part of this paper considers the legal consequences of CETA and other mega-regional trade agreements on relations between parties inter se, relations with third party states and the complex implications of a decision to withdraw.

   4. Characteristics of EU Free Trade Agreements in a Legal Context: A Japanese Perspective

      Yumiko Nakanishi

      Abstract

      The European Union (EU) has concluded; it is currently negotiating Free Trade Agreements (FTAs) with third countries and has been negotiating an FTA with Japan since 2013. These FTAs have certain specific characteristics (related to competences, values and objectives) emerging from the EU’s legal order. Bilateral and multilateral FTA negotiations are occurring all over the world and these negotiations and transactions are all influencing one another. Global multilateral negotiations form a soft coherence of the agreement texts, which in turn leads to a kind of approximation of the text of FTAs worldwide. The EU is an important trade partner that accounts for 10% of Japanese total import and export values (the third largest value after China and USA). In the negotiations regarding the EPA between the EU and Japan the specific characteristics of the EU can be permeated. The content of negotiations are influenced by other FTAs of the EU.

   5. The China-EU BIT as a Stepping Stone Towards a China-EU FTA: A Policy Analysis

      Manjiao Chi

      Abstract

      China and EU are negotiating a BIT while envisaging an FTA as a long term goal for deepening bilateral economic relations. The two parties are determined to negotiate a comprehensive BIT that will provide a high level of investment protection and feature broad market access and deep investment liberalisation commitments. Although China has not developed a clear FTA-making strategy, a brief empirical study of the relationship between China’s BITs and its existing FTA investment chapters suggests that China has adopted the “from BIT to FTA” approach. In recent years, China has also sped up its FTA-making and tried to engage in making high level and multilateral FTAs. The negotiation and conclusion of the China-EU BIT may, when considered from various different perspectives, serve as a “stepping stone” for a China-EU FTA. It is helpful in terms of providing a methodological reference, in furnishing an important source of substantive content as well as in building a favourable political and legal environment for the negotiation of the FTA. Further, the making of a China-EU FTA can be a sensible strategic option in order for China to enhance its engagement in global trade governance.

   6. The Proposed European and Australian Free Trade Agreement: And the Importance for Small and Medium-Sized Enterprises

      Leon Trakman, Robert Walters, Bruno Zeller

      Abstract

      This chapter investigates how Free Trade Agreements (FTAs) can assist the small and medium-sized enterprise sector (SME) to benefit from reduced tariffs and opening overseas markets. It identifies the importance of SMEs when negotiating the proposed European Union Australian Free Trade Agreement (EU-Australian FTA) which commenced in 1995 when the EU and Australia agreed on a political framework to establish an FTA. This chapter argues how promoting SME trade emanating from Australia into the EU can strengthen economic ties with the EU and benefit Australian SMEs and that, just as the single EU market has benefitted SME’s across member states, Australian SMEs can benefit significantly through an EU-Australian free trade agreement that encourages and stimulates bilateral SME trade.

   7. EU-Taiwan: New Partners in International Trade Negotiations

      Roy Chun Lee

      Abstract

      This paper examines the possible trade negotiation agendas between the EU and Taiwan in lieu of a comprehensive Free Trade Agreement (FTA). The EU and Taiwan are both important trade and investment partners to each other; trade in goods, for example, shows a strong production network relationship. A number of notable impediments also exist, arising mainly in the areas of TBT, SPS and domestic regulatory practices. Ideally, an FTA following the EU standards would underpin further enhancement of the already robust relationship, yet such an undertaking is barred by the EU’s political constrains in light of China’s likely opposition. A Bilateral Investment Agreement (BIA) has been considered as a substitution, but there are questions regarding the value of a BIA in terms of substance and timing. This paper argues that if the EU and Taiwan intend to capture the benefits of deep integration, it would require “out-of-the-box” thinking. Taking into account the nature of the bilateral barriers, this paper puts forward proposals in pursuing bilateral TBT and SPS Agreement as the priority, with collaboration in the Trade in Services Agreement (TiSA) as well as in the sectoral initiatives in the WTO.

4. The European Union in International Organizations/Institutions

   1. Frontmatter

   2. The European Union in United Nations Economic Governance Fora

      Anna-Luise Chané, Jan Wouters

      Abstract

      Despite being one of the “heavyweights” in international trade, finance and development, the European Union’s (EU) presence in the economic governance fora of the United Nations (UN) continues to be fraught with difficulties. Faced with the legal and political hurdles of multilateral diplomacy in a state-centric environment, the EU has had to deal with a lack of status and participation rights, the complexities of an internal coordination process involving 28 Member States, and the challenges of ensuring a cohesive external representation. This contribution provides a brief overview of the legal basis for EU engagement in the UN, the Union’s internal coordination process, as well as the framework governing its external representation. To highlight the patchwork of legal statuses and modes of engagement, we subsequently take a closer look at the EU’s relations with a select number of UN bodies in the area of economic governance. This allows us to illustrate the respective challenges in three scenarios: UN fora where the EU and the EU Member States hold membership rights, where we look at FAO; UN fora where the EU holds an observer or full participant status while its Member States have membership rights, where we look at ECOSOC, its subsidiary bodies, and UNCTAD; and UN fora where the EU Member States are members but where the EU has no formal status: here we look at the World Bank.

   3. On the Duty of Cooperation, Consistency and Influence in the External Relations of the Euro-Zone: Representation of EU and EU Member States in the International Monetary Fund

      Päivi Leino

      Abstract

      The question of unified representation by the euro area in international financial institutions has been discussed more or less since the introduction of the common currency. In 2015 the Commission adopted a new proposal for a Council decision laying down measures in view of progressively establishing unified representation of the euro area in the IMF. This paper introduces the IMF and its key functions in light of the EU Member State competence division. Second, it discusses the IMF decision-making structures and EU participation in them following the 2010 IMF governance reforms. It explores the current arrangements for ensuring EU coherence and the current proposals for their improvement in light of the broader legal framework relating to external competence, with a focus on EU influence and its meaning in the IMF context. The Commission proposal focuses largely on the political justifications relating to unified representation while disregarding the legal arguments that would support the objective. While focusing on unified representation of the euro area, the proposal disregards the question of Member States outside the euro. Finally, the paper argues that the mechanisms of unified representation should build on the realistic understanding that often there will not be a common position, and there might not even be justified reasons to aim for one.

   4. Overview of WTO Jurisprudence in 2015 Involving the EU as a Main Party and Selected Cases with Third-Party Participation by the EU

      Jan Bohanes, Kholofelo Kugler

      Abstract

      This article presents an overview of the World Trade Organization (WTO) disputes resolved in 2015 in which the EU participated as the complaining party or the defending party. These disputes were China – Measures Imposing Anti-Dumping Duties on High-Performance Stainless Steel Seamless Tubes (“HP-SSST”), Argentina – Measures Affecting the Importation of Goods (in both cases the EU as complainant) and EC – Definitive Anti-Dumping Measures on Certain Iron or Steel Fasteners from China (EU as defendant). On each of these cases, this article provides an overview of the key Panel and Appellate Body findings, and a few observations. The article also addresses two cases in which the EU participated as third party, namely, Peru – Additional Duty on Imports of Certain Agricultural Products and US – Country of Origin Labelling (COOL) Requirements (Article 21.5). For the latter two cases, the article highlights the facts of those disputes, the key rulings by the WTO Panel (and the Appellate Body, where relevant), as well as the most salient positions expressed by the EU as third party.

5. Book Reviews

   1. Frontmatter

   2. Marise Cremona and Hans-W. Micklitz (eds.), Private Law in the External Relations of the EU

      Oxford University Press, 2016, ISBN 9780198744566 Peter Rott

      Abstract

      Hans-W. Micklitz has been one of the most prominent writers on EU private law in all its substantive, procedural and constitutional facets in the past decades, whilst Marise Cremona is among the leading authors on EU external relations; an area that has attracted much attention recently, with the EU Commission’s negotiations of highly controversial trade agreements, such as CETA, TTIP and TISA. With their edited volume on “Private Law in the External Relations of the EU”, Marise Cremona and Hans-W. Micklitz combine their expertise by making the bold attempt to bring these seemingly unconnected areas of law together. The book presents a number of sub-disciplines and complements them with structural themes such as the competences of the EU in concluding international agreements with effect on internal EU law.

   3. Hedwig Kavasch, Unterschiedliche Zollpräferenzen für unterschiedliche Entwicklungsländer

      Mohr Siebeck, 2016, ISBN 9783161542947 Charlotte Sieber-Gasser

      Abstract

      The legal interdependence between economic development policy, WTO law and the General System of Preferences (GSP) is the topic of the book of Hedwig Kavasch, Unterschiedliche Zollpräferenzen für unterschiedliche Entwicklungsländer. Kavasch focuses on the relatively recent GSP Plus preferences schemes developed and applied by the European Union (EU). The EU uses the GSP as a tool to encourage compliance with obligations in international law in the fields of human and labour rights, environment and good governance. Countries complying with this particular set of policy objectives will be granted more preferential market access to the EU than developing and least-developed countries disregarding said policy objectives. Besides the insights on the GSP Plus scheme of the EU and the legal challenges coming along with economic development policies and “aid for trade”, this book provides a powerful example for the crucial role of the WTO system in shaping the economic prospects of developing and least-developed countries in the global market.

   4. Billy A. Melo Araujo, The EU Deep Trade Agenda: Law and Policy

      Oxford University Press, 2016, ISBN 9780198753384 Wolfgang Weiß

      Abstract

      The Chapter reviews the book The EU Deep Trade Agenda written by Melo Araujo that provides a comprehensive analysis of the legal and political issues of the EU deep trade agenda which started with the pronouncement of the new Global Europe trade strategy of the European Commission in 2006. The overall message of the research presented by the author is the statement of the ambiguous, double-faced character of the EU’s trade policy after 2006. For, the then rather new trade policy strategy initiated a turn of the EU towards the interests of EU trade stakeholders in saving the global position of the EU economy amidst the gravitational shifts of World trade since the 1990s, and opening up markets for EU goods and services. The former generally rather altruistic attitude of favouring multilateral approaches in codifying common trade rules over selfish economic orientations has been amended, if not replaced by a much more pragmatic stance which seeks to sustain European shares in world trade by recourse to bilateral or regional FTA.

      The book by Melo Araujo is the first comprehensive analysis of the EU DCFTAs and their implementation of the EU Global Europe trade agenda. The author presents a thorough and convincing law and politics examination of the drivers of the formation of the new trade policy and its realisation by way of FTAs. Even though one might not agree with the author’s views in every respect, the structure of analysis and the way of argumentation makes the overall conclusions extremely compelling.

   5. Jan Ulrich Heinemann, Die Entwicklung der Außenkompetenzen der Europäischen Union im Vergleich der Rechtslagen vor und nach dem Reformvertrag von Lissabon: Unter besonderer Berücksichtigung der impliziten Außenkompetenzen

      Peter Lang, 2016, ISBN 9783631671672 Anja Trautmann

      Abstract

      The reviewed book provides a comprehensive analysis of the external competences of the European Union before and after the Treaty of Lisbon. Thereby, it also deals with the distinction between explicit powers, meaning those clearly defined in the relevant articles of the treaties, and the implicit powers, meaning the competences in external matters that derive from explicit internal competence. Moreover, it takes the intergovernmental competences into consideration.