THE EU CORPORATE TRADE AGENDA: THE ROLE AND THE INTERESTS OF CORPORATIONS AND THEIR LOBBY GROUPS IN TRADE POLICY-MAKING IN THE EUROPEAN UNION. By Christina Deckwirth. The Seattle to Brussels Network, November 2005. This non-governmental organisation report claims that EU trade policy is "being driven by the demands of European businesses for new markets rather than by the needs of developing countries, European citizens or the environment." While the Doha Round is titled the ‘Doha Development Round,’ the author of the report says that the facts behind the rhetoric do not support the agenda. Indeed, far from promoting development in non-EU countries, the real agenda of the EU, led by the big business lobby, is to force open the markets in these countries for exploitation by European and trans-national corporations. The report discusses issues related to trade in services, non-agricultural market access (NAMA), the nature of political lobbying in Brussels and the lack of transparency in EU trade policy negotiations. Available online at http://www.s2bnetwork.org/EU_corporate_trade_agenda.pdf.
POWER-CRACY IN WTO, A CASE STUDY: ARM TWISTING OF PAKISTAN. By Syed Wajid H. Pirzada. ActionAid Pakistan, 2005. This paper contends that today, national policies are embedded deeply in the framework of international treaties, agreements, covenants and understandings reached with multilateral institutions. One such framework, the multilateral trading system being crafted by the WTO agreements, is heralding a new era of international trade. The WTO has emerged as a powerful multilateral institution, for its regimes affect not only markets but national policies and people’s lives. In this context, Clare Short, Britain’s International Development secretary, has argued that the principle of non-discrimination on which WTO rules are based needs to be changed, since it can be anti-development in practice — it prohibits developing countries from taking measures which they believe would help their development efforts. For example, they cannot insist that foreign investors use local materials and nationals. The author stresses the need to understand the workings of WTO, from the perspective that its current shortcomings must be understood in order to attempt to make it more participatory and democratic. The study seeks to address this goal, help understand the nature of power politics in the WTO, and the role arm-twisting plays in its functioning. Available online at http://www.actionaid.org/pakistan/images/Power%20Caracy%20final%20%20file…pdf.
THE TRADE AND ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS OF ECOLABELS: ASSESSMENT AND RESPONSE. By Tom Rotherham. UN Environment Programme, 2005. This report discusses the trade and environmental effects of ecolabels through a literature review and includes five case studies of specific labels: the Blue Angel programme in Germany, and the programmes associated with the Forest Stewardship Council (FSC), the Marine Stewardship Council (MSC), Fairtrade Labelling Organizations International (FLO) and the International Federation of Organic Agriculture Movements (IFOAM). Furthermore, the interaction between trade and environmental policies, as well as that between public policies and market forces are examined in some depth. The paper asserts that identifying the effects of ecolabelling is difficult due to a limitation in available data. Thus, further research and multi-stakeholder exchange is required to support the design and application of Ecolabels that support sustainable development. The report’s ultimate aim is to identify specific issues and policy integration challenges that need to be addressed in order for this to happen. Available online at http://www.unep.ch/etb/publications/Ecolabelpap141005f.pdf.
THE GATS AND SOUTH AFRICA’S NATIONAL HEALTH ACT: A CAUTIONARY TALE. By Scott Sinclair. Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives, November 2005. This new study asserts that South Africa’s flagship health legislation conflicts with binding commitments the former apartheid regime negotiated under the WTO’s General Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS). This trade treaty conflict threatens to undermine the legislation and, if left unresolved, would make meeting the health needs of the majority of the population far more difficult. The study explores several options that South Africa has for resolving this conflict in favour of its health policy imperatives, but each entails risk. Sinclair believes that South Africa’s dilemma should serve as a world-wide warning that health policy-makers, governments and citizens need to be far more attentive to negotiations to expand the reach of the GATS. The paper also discusses the possible developmental impacts that might arise from services liberalisation commitments in the current Doha Round negotiations. The study includes a foreword by David Sanders, Professor and Director, School of Public Health, University of the Western Cape. Available online at http://www.policyalternatives.ca/Reports/2005/11/ReportsStudies1244/index.cfm?pa=BB736455.
MAKING IT WORK: WHY THE KIMBERLEY PROCESS MUST DO MORE TO STOP CONFLICT DIAMONDS. By Global Witness, November 2005. This Global Witness report is the product of research undertaken in 2005 to assess the effectiveness of the Kimberly Process Certification Scheme, an agreement designed to prevent trade in conflict diamonds. The investigations were undertaken to assess the effectiveness of government controls, and to consider whether the Kimberley Process is a system that succeeds in preventing trade in conflict diamonds or is simply a rubber-stamping exercise. Investigators looked at how conflict diamonds enter the legitimate diamond trade and identified weaknesses in government regulations that enable this to happen. The report strongly criticises the Kimberly Process members for "lack of action." It argues that controls in the diamond trade from mining to polishing are still inadequate and poorly enforced due to the lack of effective monitoring capacity and political will. Furthermore, some members of the diamond industry continue to trade in conflict diamonds. The paper offers suggestions intended to be taken into consideration when the Kimberly Process is reviewed in 2006. Available online at http://www.globalwitness.org/reports/show.php/en.00082.html.