subscribe: Posts | Comments

Eu Association Agreements Mediterranean


2 Over the past fifteen years, important research has been conducted on EMFTA and how we can assess the development of a free trade area. Several studies have focused on “outcome indicators” and have examined the evolution of trade between the EU and MNMs or trade between LESMs. In general, these studies have shown that trade between the EU and the Mediterranean Region is less restrictive [5], which has led to an increase in trade between the two regions [6], but that trade between NCMs remains rather limited. [7] However, it is rather difficult to assess the EU`s impact on this evolution of trade through the ENP/ENP, as well as the WTO agreements – reforms in the CMCs and international and endogenous economic factors have played an important role in this regard. [8] Other studies have focused on the impact of EU trade measures on MFN economies, such as the Sustainability Impact Assessment (SIA) commissioned by the European Commission itself. This study showed that, both in the EU and in the Mediterranean region, an increase in economic prosperity can be expected due to the introduction of EMFTA, but that there can be negative social and environmental repercussions if no further action is taken, such as for example. B an increase in unemployment. [9] Unlike these studies, which focus primarily on the outcomes and effects of EMFTA and therefore focus on economic factors, this article will examine the political causes of the slow establishment of EMFTA. Consequently, the objectives set in 1995 are compared with actual results and the focus will be on output indicators, i.e.

on the free trade agreements currently in force. Decisions conclude agreements on behalf of the EU. 7In 2005, the Council decided to open negotiations on the liberalisation of agricultural products with the NCMs. . . .

Comments are closed.