nach oben

Erschienen in:

2020 | OriginalPaper | Buchkapitel

Upping the Ante: The Movement of Natural Persons (Mode 4) and Non-Services Migration in EU and Asian PTAs

verfasst von : Marion Panizzon, Harjodh Singh

Erschienen in: Coherence and Divergence in Services Trade Law

Verlag: Springer International Publishing

Einloggen

Aktivieren Sie unsere intelligente Suche, um passende Fachinhalte oder Patente zu finden.

search-config

KI-gestützte Suche

Aus

Abstract

A cross-comparative mapping of the provisions on the temporary movement of natural persons (Mode 4, M4) Mode 4 (M4) with the non-services mobility provisions in select Asian (ChAFTA, India-Singapore PTA, EUSFTA, India-ASEAN) and EU PTAs towards non-Asian partners (CARIFORUM EPA, C&P FTA, Georgia DFTA) reveals that PTAs have advanced in GATS-plus and GATS-extra, but just how proximate the links between ‘migration’ and GATS Mode 4 mobility are, differs. In this chapter, we draw on the analytical fame of the migration-mobility nexus (MMN), being developed by nccr-on-the-move research network to better categorize the proximity and permeability between migration and mobility and the directionality of the links between both concepts between migration and mobility. We first observe that the EU and Asian countries make different use of M4 commitments in their PTAs. Common to both world regions is the trend to add the category of graduate trainees (GT) as a horizontal commitment in a M4 opening in a trade agreement, as well as opening that category of cross-border mobility in a bilateral setting. In this first section, we seek to understand why the migration and mobility narratives overlap, compete or conflict in a linear dimension of the MMN, within a PTA and across the PTA and bilateral migration agreements. In a second step, the MMN is conceived ‘as continuum’ on the vertical scale to explain how M4 chapters of PTAs are implemented differently in national immigration and regional integration labor migration norms, e.g. EU labor market directives: The EU makes liberalization advances preferably via horizontal, rather than sectoral commitments, countries or regions that are less multilevel opt for sectoral advances in M4. M4 develops GATS-plus sectorally in Asian PTAs, where e.g. a traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) professional sees her immigrant status directly regulated in a side letter attached to the PTA. In sum, the chapter offers some new evidence from the field of international trade, to contribute to further designing the interdisciplinary concept of the MMN. While the focus study builds on the corpus of legal and IR research on GATS M4, this chapter suggests to deepening the theoretical deliverables of the GATS M4 literature by anchoring the evidence from PTAs into the analytical frame of the MMN.

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 102.000 Bücher
über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Automobil + Motoren
Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 67.000 Bücher
über 340 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Vorheriges Kapitel Addressing Digital Services in PTAs: Only Convergence in the 11th Hour?

Nächstes Kapitel Telecommunications and Media Services in Preferential Trade Agreements: Path Dependences Still Matter

Carzaniga (2009), Chetail (2003), and Reyna (1999).

Kemekliene and Watt (2010).

Carzaniga (2009).

Tullao JR and Cortez (2006).

A strict reading of the language of Annex MNP of GATS reveals that WTO Members were not ready to relinquish their sovereign prerogative to decide who is to enter their territory and be admitted. Furthermore, Human demands of the service suppliers on the foreign market, including access to social welfare, inclusion, citizenship and residence are categorically exempt from the GATS with the exception of national treatment principle.

United States—Measures Concerning Non-Immigrant Visas, WT/DS503, Request for consultations of 3 March 2016. See: Panizzon M (2016) US—India Visa Fee Controversy before the WTO: A Migration-Mobility Nexus for the WTO? Blog post, nccr-on the move, https://blog.nccr-onthemove.ch/us-india-visa-fee-controversy-before-the-wto-a-migration-mobility-nexus-for-the-wto/?lang=de.

Cottier and Sieber-Gasser (2011), p. 14.

Chanda (2002).

This chapter uses the term ‘PTA’ and ‘FTA’ to refer to any trade agreement or trade arrangement between two or more countries.

Free movement regimes in RTAs or mega-regionals (e.g. AANZFTA 2009, TISA, ASEAN MNP Agreement 2012) and the interconnections between these and PTAs over labour migration is another field of research and is outside the scope of this chapter.

This label has been designed by Panizzon and Lavenex for the nccr-on the move’ work package ‘migration governance thru trade mobilities’, a 4-year research project funded by the Swiss National Science Foundation: https://nccr-onthemove.ch/projects/migration-governance-through-trade-mobilities/.

Roy M (2011) Services Commitments in Preferential Trade Agreements: An Expanded Dataset. WTO Staff Working Paper ERSD-2011-18, https://www.wto.org/english/res_e/reser_e/ersd201118_e.htm.

Hoekman, Assessing the General Agreement on Trade in Services. World Bank, World Bank Discussion Paper No. 307, 1995. see also Hoekman (1996).

Horn et al. (2010).

Found in Asian FTAs.

Found in Deep and Comprehensive Free Trade Agreements (DCFTAs) which the EU has signed. There are six DCFTAs with the eastern partners (Armenia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Georgia, Moldova and Ukraine (EaP) and four are being negotiated with Euromed countries, including Jordan, Morocco, Egypt and Tunisia.

See for instance: Tans (2017), Jurje and Lavenex (2018), and Shivakoti (2019).

Cottier and Sieber-Gasser (2015).

See generally on regulatory convergence in PTAs.

Chetail (2019), p. 92.

Mobility’ has acquired a distinct legal notion under EU law, in particular the concept was developed in the EU labor market directives (ICT, Blue Card, researchers). For example, the EU researcher Directive 2016/801/EU, combining the Study Directive (2004/114/EC) and the Research Directive (2005/71/EG) provides for intra-mobility for third-country students, researchers and their family members, and trainees and volunteers, of up to 180 or 360 days, respectively a year in another EU Member state without the TCN needing to apply for a separate residence permit from the Member State concerned (for TCN researchers requesting a long-term intra-EU mobility (360 days), need to apply for this separate residence permit from the MS concerned. In the, ICT directive 2004/66/EU, similar provisions (Arts. 20ss) provide for long- and short- term intra-EU mobility for TCN ICTs. For posted workers (or CSS) in GATS-speak, the Directive 2018/957/EU replacing 96/71/EC are no mobility rights, in contrast the Council Directive 2009/50/EC of 25 May 2009 on the conditions of entry and residence of third-country nationals for the purposes of highly qualified employment foresees mobility rights for highly qualified TCN as a first step to circular migration coming out of a longer-term residence of a highly qualified TCN in the EU and contributing to “sustain the EU’s competitiveness” and “economic growth”. Amongst others the intra-EU mobility is being achieved by fast-tracking the admission procedure and offering equal social and economic rights without prejudice to the EU MS reception capacities and labour market demand. EU PTAs have taken this point of fast-tracking admission up, but have not followed-through with guaranteeing economic and social rights parity. The occupational and geographical mobility of third-country highly qualified workers should be recognised as a primary mechanism for improving labour market efficiency, preventing skill shortages and offsetting regional imbalances.

For more information see: von Bernstorff (2015), p. 988.

In contrast in mode 1 like for trade in goods under GATT 1994 no physical cross-border movement of a natural person is involved. In contrast to mode 2, where the consumer moves to the service provider or mode 3 where the provider is a natural person from another country, in both cases, the natural person brings capital along when crossing the border and thus in many ways ‘securitizes’ her movement by the way of the collateral of ‘capital’, which is not the case for mode 4.

Chanda (2002), pp. 631–654; Carzaniga (2003), pp. 21–26.

Shi (2018), p. 115.

Vereinbarung durch Notenaustausch vom 23. Februar und 5. März 1999 zwischen der Regierung der Schweizerischen Eidgenossenschaft und der Regierung der Bundesrepublik Deutschland über die Erleichterung des grenzüberschreitenden Dienstleistungsverkehrs im Bereiche von Messestandbau- und Montagearbeiten, https://www.admin.ch/opc/de/official-compilation/2000/2664.pdf AS 2000 2664, SR 0.823.291.361.

Weisung ANAG Anhang 4/6 (Ziffern 431 und 433.23).

Council for Trade in Services Special Session, Communication from Switzerland: Temporary Admission of Installers and Maintainers under the GATS: A Case for Mode 4 Commitments. World Trade Organization, TN/S/W/61 2 April 2007.

Nonnenmacher (2012), p. 330.

Council for Trade in Services: Special Session (2007), Communication from Switzerland: Temporary Admission of Installers and Maintainers under the GATS: A Case for Mode 4 Commitments. World Trade Organization, TN/S/W/61, 2 April 2007.

For instance: State Secretariat for Economic Affairs (SECO), Free Trade Agreement between the Swiss Confederation and the People’s Republic Of China, 6 July 2013, https://www.seco.admin.ch/seco/en/home/Aussenwirtschaftspolitik_Wirtschaftliche_Zusammenarbeit/Wirtschaftsbeziehungen/Freihandelsabkommen/Partner_weltweit/china/Abkommenstexte.html, Appendix 1 of Annex VIII.

For instance: European Free Trade Association (EFTA), Free Trade Agreement between the EFTA States and the Republic of Korea. 15 December 2005, https://www.efta.int/free-trade/free-trade-agreements/korea.

Free Trade Agreement between the European Union and the Republic of Singapore, 14. November 2014, OJ L 294/3.

Directive 2014/66 OJ L 157/1; see also Peers (2013), pp. 388–389.

To-date, Switzerland has traineeship agreements with the following nations: Argentina, Australia, Chile, Japan, Canada, Monaco, New Zealand, the Philippines, Russia, S-Africa, Tunisia, Ukraine, USA; out of theses, it only has a PTA with Japan, Canada, Morocco, Tunisia, The Philippines, Chile, Monaco, S-Africa; but not with Argentina, Australia, the US, Russia nor New Zealand, see https://www.sem.admin.ch/sem/de/home/themen/arbeit/berufspraktikum.html. It would be worthwhile to identify for countries with whom Switzerland has a PTA, what the bilateral traineeship agreement offers that the PTA does not, besides expedited entry conditions or a stay decoupled from employment by a foreign ICT in Switzerland.

Panizzon (2010), pp. 923–956.

France has bilateral agreements on young professionals with Mauritius (2009), Macedonia (2009), Montenegro (2009) Serbia (2009) and Lebanon (under ratification since 2010); https://www.immigration.interieur.gouv.fr/Europe-et-International/Les-accords-bilateraux/Presentation-generale-des-accords-bilateraux.

Les Accords Relatifs a la Gestion Concertee des Flux Migratoires et au Codeveloppement, Version Actualisee Au 20 Octobre 2009, https://www.lacimade.org/wp-content/uploads/2009/01/note_cimade_accords_migration.pdf.

O.J. L294/362.

Tans (2017), p. 297.

Tans (2017), p. 301 noting that Dutch implementing M4 legislation treats key personnel, ICT and GT as one and the same category, a fact which lead to confusion and mistakes in application.

Panizzon (2013); Ndiaye-Coïc (2011).

Carzaniga (2009), p. 476, because the GT under an ICT contract is delivering the service to a domestic recipient and because the GT does work that is part of her education, which she consumes at home, and which is not cross-border.

Brettell and Hollifield (2019).

Gao (2017) China’s evolving approach to environmental and labour provisions in regional trade agreements. ICTSD, https://www.ictsd.org/opinion/china-3.

Lauder (2015) Chinese medicine’s mention in free trade deal ‘a tragedy for Australian science’, critic warns. ABC News, https://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-06-18/chinese-medicine-free-trade-agreement-critic/6556532.

Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade, Side Letter on Services. Thailand-Australia Free Trade Agreement, Australian Government, 05 July 2004, https://dfat.gov.au/trade/agreements/in-force/tafta/fta-text-and-implementation/Pages/fta-text-and-implementation.aspx.

Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Japan, Agreement between Japan and the Socialist Republic of Viet Nam for an Economic Partnership. 25 December 2008, https://www.mofa.go.jp/region/asia-paci/vietnam/epa0812/index.html, Annex 7.

Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Japan, Agreement between Japan and the Republic of the Philippines for an Economic Partnership. 09 September 2006, https://www.mofa.go.jp/region/asia-paci/philippine/epa0609/index.html, Annex 8.

Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Japan, Agreement between Japan and the Kingdom of Thailand for an Economic Partnership. 3 April 2007, https://www.mofa.go.jp/region/asia-paci/thailand/epa0704/index.html, Section 4 of Part 1 of Annex 7.

Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Japan, Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement between Japan and the Republic of India. 15 February 2011, https://www.mofa.go.jp/region/asia-paci/india/epa201102/index.html, Part 2 of Section 4 of Annex 7.

Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade, Agreement Establishing the ASEAN–Australia-New Zealand Free Trade Area. Australian Government, 27 February 2009, https://dfat.gov.au/trade/agreements/in-force/aanzfta/official-documents/Pages/official-documents.aspx, Para 5 of Philippines commitments in Annex 4.

Malaysia’s Free Trade Agreements, Malaysia – Pakistan Closer Economic Partnership Agreement. 8 November 2007, https://fta.miti.gov.my/index.php/pages/view/malaysia-pakistan, Para E of Services Schedules of Pakistan.

Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade, Australia – Chile Free Trade Agreement. Australian Government, 30 July 2008, https://dfat.gov.au/trade/agreements/in-force/aclfta/fta-text-implementation/Pages/fta-text-and-implementation.aspx, Para 1(c) and para 2 (c) of Annex 13-A.

Foreign Trade Information System, Free Trade Agreement between the Republic of Colombia and the Republic of Korea. Organization of American States, 21 February 2013, http://www.sice.oas.org/TPD/Col_kor/Draft_Text_06.2012_e/June_2012_Index_PDF_e.asp, Section E of Annex 10-A (Both Colombia and Korea).

Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Japan, Agreement between Japan and Mongolia for an Economic Partnership. 10 February 2015, https://www.mofa.go.jp/a_o/c_m2/mn/page3e_000298.html, Section 6 of Part 1 and Section 6 of Part 2, of Annex 7.

Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade, Side Letter on Traditional Chinese Medicine. Free Trade Agreement between the Government of Australia and the Government of the People’s Republic of China, Australian Government, 17 June 2015, https://dfat.gov.au/trade/agreements/in-force/chafta/official-documents/Pages/official-documents.aspx.

Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade, Side Letter on Skills Assessment and Licensing. Free Trade Agreement between the Government of Australia and the Government of the People’s Republic of China, Australian Government, 17 June 2015, https://dfat.gov.au/trade/agreements/in-force/chafta/official-documents/Pages/official-documents.aspx.

Official Journal of the European Union, Economic Partnership Agreement between the CARIFORUM States, of the one part, and the European Community and its Member States, of the other part. 15 October 2008, https://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2008:289:0003:1955:EN:PDF, Article 85, Article 114, and Article 121:2(b).

Sauvé and Roy (2016), p. 524.

Sauvé and Shingal (2016).

Association of Southeast Asian Nations, ASEAN Framework Agreement on Mutual Recognition Arrangements. 27 June 2012, https://asean.org/?static_post=asean-framework-agreement-on-mutual-recognition-arrangements.

Malaysia’s Free Trade Agreements, Agreement on Trade in Services under the Framework Agreement on Comprehensive Economic Cooperation between the Association of Southeast Asian Nations and the Republic of India (ASEAN-India Trade in Services Agreement). 13 November 2014, https://fta.miti.gov.my/index.php/pages/view/asean-india?mid=35, Article 6.

Trade and Industry Department, Mainland and Hong Kong Closer Economic Partnership Arrangement. Consolidated version, The Government of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, https://www.tid.gov.hk/english/cepa/legaltext/files/consolidated_main_text.pdf.

China FTA Network, Agreement on Trade in Services of the Framework Agreement on Comprehensive Economic Co-operation between China and ASEAN. 14 January 2007, http://fta.mofcom.gov.cn/topic/chinaasean.shtml, Article 6.

Office of the United States Trade Representative, US – Korea Free Trade Agreement. 30 June 2007, https://ustr.gov/trade-agreements/free-trade-agreements/korus-fta/final-text.

Group of Negotiations on Services. (1990) Communication from Argentina, Colombia, Cuba, Egypt, India, Mexico, Pakistan and Peru: Annex on Temporary Movement of Services Personnel. MTN.GNS/W/106, https://www.wto.org/gatt_docs/English/SULPDF/92100208.pdf.

Self and Zutshi (2003) and Chanda (2002).

Council for Trade in Services: Special Session (2000) Communication from India: Proposed Liberalization of Movement of Professionals under General Agreement on Trade in Services. World Trade Organization, S/CSS/W/12, https://docs.wto.org/dol2fe/Pages/FE_Search/FE_S_S009-DP.aspx?language=E&CatalogueIdList=45548,89465,45733,2933,3410,31485,15703&CurrentCatalogueIdIndex=6&FullTextHash=&HasEnglishRecord=True&HasFrenchRecord=True&HasSpanishRecord=True. According to Rupa Chanda, India’s proposal for a GATS visa was endorsed by other developing countries (see above), but was criticised by LDCs, who feared that the Indian proposal would target only medium-skilled service suppliers and leave out the lower-skilled services professions. Chanda R, Movement and Presence of Natural Persons and Developing Countries: Issues and Proposals for the GATS Negotiations. Trade-Related Agenda, Development and Equity Working Paper Series No 19, South Centre, May 2004, pp. 24–30.

Shiny and Tewari (2019) Domestic Regulation under GATS and the Legal Regime: An Unsustainable Interaction. Center for Trade and Investment Law, Discussion Paper 1/2019, https://ctil.org.in/cms/docs/Papers/Discussion/discussion4.pdf; Mukherjee A, Goyal T (2013) Examining Mode 4 Commitments in India and the EU’s Agreements: Implication for the India-EU BTIA. Indian Institute of Management, Working Paper 396; Schmitz (2015).

Czaika et al. (2018).

The E15 Initiative (2018) Dispute Settlement Mechanisms in RTAs. The E15 Initiative, http://e15initiative.org/events/rta-dispute-settlement-provisions-options-for-effective-enforcement/.

Crawford and Kotschwar (2018) Investment Provisions in Preferential Trade Agreements: Evolution and Current Trends. WTO Staff Working Paper ERSD-2018-14, https://www.wto.org/english/res_e/reser_e/ersd201814_e.pdf. Of the 230 PTAs analysed by this study, 111 contained substantive provisions on investment. (p. 3) Of these agreements, more than 90% contained provisions on State-to-State dispute settlement and 77% contained provisions on investor state dispute settlement (p.27).

For instance, see: Government of Canada, Consolidated TPP Text – Table of Contents. Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership (CPTPP), 08 March 2018, https://www.international.gc.ca/trade-commerce/trade-agreements-accords-commerciaux/agr-acc/tpp-ptp/text-texte/toc-tdm.aspx?lang=eng, Article 12.10.

See, for instance: Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement (CETA) between Canada, of the one part, and the European Union and its Member States, of the other part of30 October 2016, OJ L 11, 14.1.2017, p. 2.

Sometimes, exceptions are also observed. See, for instance: China FTA Network, Free Trade Agreement between the Government of the People’s Republic of China and The Government of New Zealand. 07 April 2008, http://fta.mofcom.gov.cn/topic/ennewzealand.shtml, Article 134.

For instance, see: Government of Canada, Chapter 12—Temporary Entry for Business Persons. Canada-Peru Free Trade Agreement, 29 May 2008, https://www.international.gc.ca/trade-commerce/trade-agreements-accords-commerciaux/agr-acc/peru-perou/fta-ale/12.aspx?lang=eng, Article 1206:1.

See, for instance, Government of Canada, Chapter 12—Temporary Entry for Business Persons. Canada-Peru Free Trade Agreement, 29 May 2008, https://www.international.gc.ca/trade-commerce/trade-agreements-accords-commerciaux/agr-acc/peru-perou/fta-ale/12.aspx?lang=eng, Article 1206:2.

See, for instance: Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Japan, Agreement between Japan and Australia for an Economic Partnership. 08 July 2014, https://www.mofa.go.jp/ecm/ep/page22e_000430.html, Article 12.6:2.

At times, access to dispute settlement is only allowed after the exhaustion of all local remedies. See, for instance: Centre for WTO and Economic Integration, ASEAN Agreement on Movement of Natural Persons. Vietnam Chamber of Commerce and Industry, 19 November 2012, http://aecvcci.vn/tin-tuc-n1648/asean-agreement-on-movement-of-natural-persons-mnp.htm, Article 11:2(b).

Further details of the dispute are available at: World Trade Organization (2019) DS 512: Russia — Measures Concerning Traffic in Transit. World Trade Organization, https://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/dispu_e/cases_e/ds512_e.htm.

Russia — Measures Concerning Traffic in Transit, Report of the Panel. WT/DS512/R, 05 April 2019, para 7.130.

For instance, see: Foreign Trade Information System, Free Trade Agreement between the Republic of Colombia and the Republic of Korea. Organization of American States, 21 February 2013, http://www.sice.oas.org/TPD/Col_kor/Draft_Text_06.2012_e/June_2012_Index_PDF_e.asp, Section E of Annex 10-A (Both Colombia and Korea), Article 10.3:1.

Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Japan, Agreement between the European Union and Japan for an Economic Partnership. 17 July 2018, https://www.mofa.go.jp/ecm/ie/page4e_000875.html, Para 7 of Annex 8 – C.

European Commission, Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament and to The Council: EU Action Plan on return. COM(2015) 453 Final, 9 September 2015, https://ec.europa.eu/home-affairs/sites/homeaffairs/files/what-we-do/policies/european-agenda-migration/proposal-implementation-package/docs/communication_from_the_ec_to_ep_and_council_-_eu_action_plan_on_return_en.pdf, p. 14.

European Commission, Trade for All: Towards a More Responsible Trade and Investment Policy. 14 October 2015, http://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/docs/2015/october/tradoc_153846.pdf, p. 12.

European Commission, Civil Society Dialogue: Meeting on TiSA. 3 May 2016, http://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/docs/2016/june/tradoc_154628.pdf.

European Union, Understanding on Movement of Natural Persons for Business Purposes. Services Chapter, EU Textual Proposal, EU-Mexico Free Trade Agreement, 25 January 2018, http://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/docs/2018/january/tradoc_156558.pdf, Article 3.

Brettell C, Hollifield J (2019) Migration theory: talking across disciplines. In: Brettell C, Hollifield J (eds) Migration theory, talking across disciplines, 3rd edn, pp 3–12

Carzaniga A (2003) The GATS, mode 4, and pattern of commitments. In: Mattoo A, Carzaniga A (eds) Moving people to deliver services. World Bank and Oxford University Press, Washington, DC, pp 21–26

Carzaniga A (2009) A warmer welcome? Access for natural persons under PTAs. In: Marchetti J, Roy M (eds) Opening markets for trade in services: countries and sectors in bilateral and WTO negotiations. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 475–502CrossRef

Rupa Chanda, (2002) Movement of Natural Persons and the GATS. The World Economy 24 (5):631-654

Chetail V (2003) Freedom of movement and transnational migrations: a human rights perspective. In: Aleinikoff A, Chetail V (eds) Migration and international legal norms. Asser Press, The Hague, pp 47–60CrossRef

Chetail V (2019) International migration law. Oxford University Press, Oxford

Cottier T, Sieber-Gasser C (2015) Labour migration, trade and investment: from fragmentation to coherence. In: Panizzon M, Zürcher G, Fornalé E (eds) The Palgrave handbook of international labour migration. Palgrave Macmillan, London, pp 41–60CrossRef

Czaika M, de Haas H, Villares-Varela M (2018) The global evolution of travel visa regimes. Popul Dev Rev 44(3):589–622CrossRef

de Lange T (2019) Intersecting policies of innovation and entrepreneurship migration in the EU and the Netherlands. In: Carrera S, den Hertog L, Kostakopoulou D, Panizzon M (eds) The external faces of EU migration, borders and asylum policies: intersecting policy universes, Brill, pp 224–243

Hoekman B (1996) Assessing the general agreement on trade in services. In: Martin W, Winters L (eds) The Uruguay Round and developing countries. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 88–124

Horn H, Mavroidis P, Sapir A (2010) Beyond the WTO: an anatomy of EU and US trade agreements. Bruegel Blueprint Series, 09 February 2009. https://bruegel.org/2009/02/beyond-the-wto-an-anatomy-of-eu-and-us-preferential-trade-agreements/

Jacobsson J (2015) GATS mode 4 and labour mobility: the significance of employment labour market. In: Pannizon M, Zürcher G, Fornalé E (eds) The Palgrave handbook of international labour migration. Palgrave Macmillan, London

Jurje F (2019) The EU’s external labour mobility and trade—a multilayered governance approach? In: Carrera S, den Hertig L, Panizzon M, Kostakopoulo D (eds) EU external migration policies in an era of global mobilities: intersecting policy universes. Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, Brill, pp 207–221

Jurje F, Lavenex S (2018) Mobility norms in free trade agreements: migration governance in Asia between regional integration and free trade. Eur J East Asian Stud 17(1):83–117CrossRef

Kemekliene G, Watt A (2010) GATS and the EU: impacts on labour markets and regulatory capacity, report 116, Brussels

Lavenex S, Jurje F (2019) Opening-up labor mobility? rising powers’ rulemaking in trade agreements. In: Regulation & governance. https://doi.org/10.1111/rego.12271

Nccr – on the move (2019) The migration-mobility nexus, Neuchâtel https://nccr-onthemove.ch/about-us/the-migration-mobility-nexus/, University of Neuchatel

Ndiaye-Coïc R (2011) Sénégal: le secteur privé dans les accords de gestion des flux migratoires signés avec l’Espagne et la France, nccr trade regulation. Working paper no 2011/09. World Trade Institute, Bern

Nonnenmacher S (2012) International trade law and labour mobility. In: Opeskin B, Perruchoud R, Redpath-Cross J (eds) Foundations of international migration law. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 312–335CrossRef

Panizzon M (2010) Art. 100. In: Caroni/Gächter/Turnheer (Hg.), Stämpflis Handkommentar zum Bundesgesetz über die Ausländerinnen und Ausländer, Bern, pp 923–956

Panizzon M (2013) Partenariats migratoires suisses et accords de coopération migratoire: gestion ou gouvernance des migrations internationales? Jusletter 24:2013

Peers S (2013) EU Justice and Home Affairs Law: EU Justice and Home Affairs Law: Volume II. Oxford University Press, Oxford

Reyna J (1999) Services. In: Stewart T (ed) The GATT Uruguay Round, a negotiating history (1986–1994), volume IV: the end game (part I). Kluwer Law International, The Hague, pp 775–828

Sauvé P, Roy M (2016) Introduction and overview. In: Sauvé P, Roy M (eds) Research handbook on trade in services. Research handbooks on the WTO. Edward Elgar, Cheltenham, pp 1–26

Sauvé P, Shingal A (2016) Why do countries enter into preferential agreements on trade in services? Asia Dev Rev 33(1):56–73CrossRef

Schmitz J (2015) The temporary movement of natural persons in the context of trade in services: EU trade policy under mode 4 (WTO/GATS). In: Panizzon M, Zürcher G, Fornalé E (eds) The Palgrave handbook of international labour migration. Palgrave Macmillan UK, Basingstoke, pp 382–383CrossRef

Self R, Zutshi B (2003) Mode 4: negotiating challenges and opportunities. In: Mattoo A, Carzaniga A (eds) Moving people to deliver services. Springer, Heidelberg, pp 27–58

Shi J (2018) Services liberalization in ChAFTA: progress assessment and the way forward. In: Picker CB, Weng H, Zhou W (eds) The China-Australia free trade agreement, a 21st century model. Hart, Oxford, pp 107–126

Shivakoti R (2019) Labor migration governance in Asia. In: Regional integration and migration in the global south. Springer, Heidelberg

Tans S (2017) Service provision and migration EU and WTO service trade liberalization and their impact on Dutch and UK immigration rules. Immigration and Asylum Law and Policy in Europe, vol 41. Brill/Nijhoff, Leiden

Tullao T Jr, Cortez M (2006) Enhancing the movement of natural persons in the ASEAN region: opportunities and constraints, ARTNeT working paper series, no. 23, Asia-Pacific Research and Training Network on Trade (ARTNeT), Bangkok

von Bernstorff J (2015) International legal scholarship as a cooling medium in international law and politics. Eur J Int Law 25(4):977–990CrossRef

Ward N (2011) Facilitating the temporary movement of natural persons. In: Kunz R, Lavenex S, Panizzon M (eds) Multilayered migration governance: the promise of partnerships. Routledge, pp 143–182

Titel: Upping the Ante: The Movement of Natural Persons (Mode 4) and Non-Services Migration in EU and Asian PTAs
verfasst von: Marion Panizzon
Harjodh Singh
Verlag: Springer International Publishing
Buch: Coherence and Divergence in Services Trade Law
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-46954-2

Electronic ISBN: 978-3-030-46955-9

Copyright-Jahr: 2020
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-46955-9_7