Title: EU Policies Trade Policy
1EU Policies Trade Policy
- EC329 Economics of the European Union
- Holger Breinlich
- University of Essex
2Plan of Talk
- An overview of EU trade patterns
- EU institutions and legal framework for trade
policy - The EUs external trade policy
- The European Mediterranean trade area
- Preferential arrangements with former colonies
- Preferences for poor nations GSP
- Non-regional free trade arrangements
- The EUs Common External Tariff
- Summary and Learning Outcomes
3EU Trade Patterns
4Trade Patterns - Destinations
- Export destinations
- Over 2/3rds EU27 exports are to other EU27
nations (of which 90 is among EU15) - Add all other European nations, 3/4th of Europes
trade is within Europe - North America and Asia are the EU27s main
markets outside Europe, each accounts less than
1/10th EU exports. - Africa, Latin America and the Middle East are not
very important - Import destinations
- The pattern on the import side is very similar to
the export side - Main difference is trade deficit with Asia (12
imports vs. 7 exports) - Rounding off, 3/4ths of EU imports are from
Europe, with the fourth quarter split into two
more or less even groups of nations Asia, and
all other nations. - Extra-EU trade patterns vary considerably across
member states (imports as example).
5Source Eurostat
6Source Eurostat
7Composition of Imports Exports
Machinery, transport
- Manufactured goods 90 (half of all exports being
machinery and transport equipment). - Import side, 2/3rds on manufactured goods.
- EU27 is a big importer of fuel.
- Other types of goods play a relatively minor part
in the EUs trade.
equipment
Other manufactured
Manufact. Goods, 87
Manufact. Goods, 69
Chemical products
Fuel products
Other raw materials
Food live animals
Exports, 2004
Imports, 2004
45
34
Machinery, transp. eq.
26
26
Other manufactured
16
9
Chemical products
3
18
Fuel products
2
5
Other raw materials
Food live animals
5
6
2
3
Misc.
8Trade Destinations Composition
9EU Trade Institutions
10Trade in Goods
- Trade policy one of the main supranational
policies in the European Union - Treaty of Rome Commission responsible for goods
trade negotiations - Council of Ministers sets Directives for
Negotiation - Council accepts/rejects final deal by QMV
- European Parliament has no explicit role (but
will change with Lisbon Treaty) - Commission also in charge of surveillance and
enforcement of 3rd nation commitments to EU (?
trade disputes with US, China, etc.)
11Newer Trade Issues
- At the time of the Treaty of Rome, barriers to
goods trade (mainly tariffs) were of primary
concern. - Since the 1980s, GATT negotiations have also
included - Trade in services (GATS)
- Intellectual property rights (TRIPs)
- Trade-related investment measures (TRIMs)
- Initially, EU Commission had no authority to
negotiate in these new areas (change with the
Treaty of Nice) - But expansion of unanimity requirements due to
principle of parallelism
12Antidumping Antisubsidy Measures
- Normally, no tariff increases allowed for most
goods under GATT/WTO - But temporary exceptions (safeguards) granted
for - Avoiding unfair competition (dumping) through
anti-dumping duties - Offsetting foreign trade-distorting subsidies
through countervailing duties (CVDs) - EU Commission in charge of investigating dumping
complaints - Any decision must be confirmed by Council of
Ministers - Anti-dumping duties imposed for five years
(renewable) - Often prevented through price undertakings by
exporter - Traditionally CVDs rarely used in the EU
13The EUs External Trade Policy
14European-Mediterranean Area
- West, Central and East Europe Single market in
industrial goods (EU EEA Swiss bilateral
agreements) - Euro-Med Association Agreements
- Morocco, Algeria, Tunisia, Egypt, Israel, the
Palestinian Authority, Lebanon, Jordan, Syria and
Turkey. - Asymmetric FTAs in manufactures (EU cuts its
tariffs faster) - Turkey unilaterally in Customs Union in
manufactures - Asymmetric dependence (e.g. 70 of Moroccos
exports to EU, but lt1 of EU to Morocco) - EFTAs FTA union with EU EFTAns mimic EU to
avoid discrimination against EFTA-based exporters
15Former Soviet Republics Western Balkans
- Partnership and Cooperation Agreements (PCAs)
- Concluded with all CIS nations Russia, Ukraine,
Georgia, Belarus, Armenia, Azerbaijan,
Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Moldova and Uzbekistan - These are in essence generous GSP versions (GSP
Generalised System of Preference, see below) - EFTAns and Turkey usually extend same preferences
- Stabilisation and Association Agreements (SAAs)
- Granted to former Yugoslavian states and Albania
- Basically GSP preferences with additional
elements (financial assistance, trade in services
etc.) - Unofficial first step towards EU membership
(unlike the PCAs)
16Preferential Trade Arrangements in Europe
17Preferential Arrangements with Former Colonies
- Colonial preferences conflicted with Common
External Tariff - EU made exception for these nations to avoid
imposing new tariffs signed unilateral PTAs (?
Yaoundé Convention and Arusha Agreement) - When UK joined 1974 extended to many Commonwealth
nations - ACP nations (Africa, Caribbean Pacific) the
new agreement Lomé Convention. - Duty-free but subject to quota for sensitive
items (sugar, banana, etc.). - These didnt help the ACP nations (e.g., Asian
countries more successful without preferences) - When Lomé Convention renewed in 2000, the EU and
the ACP nations agreed to modernise the deal ?
Cotonou Agreement, eventually reciprocal free
trade
18General System of Preferences (GSP)
- 1971 GATT provision allows for GSPs. EU quickly
grants GSP to almost all poor nations - General GSP
- Super-GSP more generous on market access but
usually conditions (compliance with EU views on
labour rights, environmental protection,
combating illegal drugs etc.) - Everything but Arms (EBA) for least developed
nations (49 nations in 2005) - On paper, EBA grants zero-tariff access on all
goods, except arms and munitions - But goods in which these nations are most
competitive are in fact excluded from the deal - Tariffs on bananas, rice and sugar products
where these poor nations could easily expand
their EU sales were only eliminated in 2009. - Moreover, even after the elimination of all
tariffs, the exports quantities are limited by
bilateral quotas.
19Non-Regional FTAs Non-Preferential Trade
- EU has negotiated FTAs with non-European nations
in recent years - So far Mexico, Chile, Mercosur, the Gulf
Cooperation Council, India, the ASEAN nations,
and South Africa - Ongoing negotiations with Colombia, Peru and
Ecuador. - All in all, only nine nations dont have
preferential access to EU market (i.e. face the
CET) - But make up 1/3 of EUs external trade (U.S.,
Japan etc.) - Structure of the CET (figure)
20The Common External Tariff
Textiles and clothing
12
Transport equipment
22
Average
Leather, rubber, shoes travel gds
17
Chemicals and photographic supplies
High
23
Electric machinery
14
Non-agricultural articles n.e.s.
14
Mineral products, precious stones
12
Metals
10
Non-electric machinery
10
Wood, pulp, paper and furniture
10
Dairy products
210
Grains
101
Live animals and products thereof
192
Tobacco
75
Coffee and tea, cocoa, sugar, etc.
114
Fruit and vegetables
150
Beverages and spirits
71
Fish and fishery products
26
Oil seeds, fats, oils and their products
76
Other agricultural products
76
Cut flowers and plants
19
0
50
100
150
200
250
Source WTOs Trade Policy Review, EU 2007
21Summary and Learning Outcomes
- Overview of EU trade patterns and trade policy
- Looked at
- General EU trade patterns
- EU institutions and legal framework for trade
policy - The EUs external trade policy
- The European Mediterranean trade area
- Preferential arrangements with former colonies
- Preferences for poor nations GSP
- Non-regional free trade arrangements
- The EUs Common External Tariff
22Location Effects, Economic Geography and Regional
Policy
- EC329 Economics of the European Union
- Holger Breinlich
- University of Essex
23Plan of Talk
- Facts on Europes economic geography
- Theoretical frameworks
- Comparative advantage
- Agglomeration and the New Economic Geography
- Implications
- EU regional policy
- Empirical evidence
- Summary and learning outcomes
24Facts on Europes Economic Geography
25Facts on EU Economic Geography
- Europe is highly centralised in
- terms of economic activity
- Core 14 of land area, but 33 of pop. and 47
of GDP - Intermediate 21 of land, 25 of pop., 32 of
GDP - Periphery 65 of land, 42 of population, 21
of GDP
26Facts on EU Economic Geography
- Periphery has lower standard of living
- More unemployment
- Higher share of low-income groups
Source European Commission (2001)
27Geographic Income Inequality
Lux.
DK
- Very uneven income distribution
- Use regional GDP/capita adjusted for price
differences (2002) - Luxembourg is 110 richer than average.
- Bulgaria only 26 of average
- Income distribution even more uneven at regional
level (next slide).
Ireland
NL
Austria
Belgium
German
Sweden
UK
Finland
Italy
France
Spain
Cyprus
Portugal
Slovenia
Greece
Czechia
Hungry
Slovakia
Poland
Estonia
Latvia
Lithuania
Romania
Bulgaria
0
50
100
150
200
250
EU27100. Source European Commission (2002)
28(No Transcript)
29Changes in Income Inequality
- Standard measure of income
- dispersion (standard deviation)
- in the EU15 has
- fallen across EU countries (large part due to
cohesion four) - but risen within most countries (next slide
example UK)
30Changes in Income Inequality UK
31Geographic Specialisation
- Do regions specialise in certain (manufacturing)
industries? - Use Krugman index of specialisation
- Shows which fraction of manufacturing has to
change sector to make a nations share line up
with EU15 average - Shows most EU nations becoming more specialised
Source Midelfart-Knarvik and Overman (2002)
32Summary of Facts
- Europes economic activity is highly concentrated
geographically (within and across countries) - Core enjoys higher incomes and lower
unemployment rates - Income inequality (in terms of per capita GDP)
has come down across nations but has increased
within nations - Manufacturing activity has become more
geographically dispersed (but only a little)
33Theory Comparative Advantage New Economic
Geography
34Theory Overview
- Two major approaches linking economic integration
to change in the geographic location of economic
activity - Theories of comparative advantage suggest nations
specialise in sectors in which they have a
relative ( comparative) advantage - The New Economic Geography (NEG) suggests that
integration tends to concentrate economic
activity spatially - General line of argument
- Comparative advantage will help to explain
cross-nation facts - NEG will help to explain within nation facts
35Theory Comparative Advantage
- Start by thinking about situation under autarky
- Since no trade, production and prices of goods
largely determined by available factors of
production (and technology levels) - Focus on labour supply three categories of
workers low, intermediate and high educational
attainment - Supply of these factors varies substantially
across the EU (figure) - Sectors use these at different levels of
intensity (e.g. textiles unskilled intensive,
pharmaceutical/finance high-skilled intensive) - Consequences for autarky prices?
- What happens with international trade (or EU
integration)? - Who exports what?
- Importance of relative factor abundance every
country must have a comparative advantage in
something! - Industrial structure in the EU should become more
specialised
36Levels of Educational Attainment in the EU15
Low-education labour
Medium-education labour
High-education labour
Portugal
83
Spain
58
Italy
44
Greece
25
Ireland
15
UK
13
Belgium
-4
France
-9
Netherlands
-16
Finland
-30
Austria
-35
Sweden
-42
Denmark
-50
Germany
-52
-80
-60
-40
-20
0
20
40
60
80
100
Figure shows share of workers as compared to EU15
average. Source Midelfart-Knarvik and Overman
(2002)
37Theory Agglomeration and the NEG
- When productive factors can cross borders
(international or inter-regional) integration may
have very different effects - Scale economies and trade costs generate forces
that encourage geographic clustering of economic
activity - "Overall clustering" some areas with lots of
economic activity, others empty ?
core-periphery - "Sectoral clustering" each sector clusters in
one region, but most regions get a cluster - Basic idea is that lowering trade costs affects
both - Agglomeration forces lead industry to cluster
geographically - Dispersion forces encourage industry to
disperse geographically
38Agglomeration Forces
- Many agglomeration forces
- Technological spillovers (e.g. Silicon Valley)
- Labour market pooling (e.g. City of London)
- Demand linkages (a.k.a. backward linkages)
- More firms mean more local demand (from firms and
workers) - Agglomeration increases consumer choice
- Supply or cost linkages (a.k.a. forward linkages)
- Larger choice of intermediates
- More competition among suppliers
- New Economic Geography focuses on demand supply
links since they are clearly affected by economic
integration (lower trade costs)
39Dispersion Forces
- Many forces lead to a tendency of firms to avoid
agglomerations of economic activity - Rents and land prices (City of London vs.
Docklands) - High cost of other non-traded services
- Competition with other firms
- The NEG focuses on the last one, local
competition - Clearly related to trade costs (why?)
40The Simplest Model
- Put agglomeration and dispersion forces into one
diagram - Only two countries or regions (e.g. North and
South) - Initially assume away all dispersion forces
except increased competition - Only agglomeration force is larger market size of
North (has more purchasing power) - The simplest agglomeration-and-dispersion-force
diagram - Equilibrium (E)
- Off-equilibrium points (A, E)
- Effects of freer trade?
- How would diagram change with more agglomeration
forces?
41The Simplest Model
Strength of forces
42Putting the Two Approaches Together
- Facts on mobility of factors of production in the
EU - Cross-country labour mobility within the EU is
very low - Within-country labour mobility somewhat higher
- Capital mobility generally high within nations,
lower across nations (despite the SMP) - Broadly speaking, factors mobile within nations
but immobile across nations. Thus - Agglomeration forces weak across countries but
comparative advantage active - Agglomeration forces stronger at the regional
level - Can this help explain our stylised facts?
- What about unemployment?
- Can explain regional differences (need low
mobility wage rigidities) - Harder to explain general core-periphery
differences
43EU Regional Policy
44EU Regional Policy
- EU always had poor regions (Mezzogiorno, etc.)
- Much spending on poor EU regions by national
governments - Very little spending by EU/EEC before 1973 (1970
3 of budget) - Some indirect aid through CAP
- Some increase in 1973 (Ireland joined) but no
major reorientation of EU spending priorities
(1980 budget share 11) - Accession of Greece (1981) and especially Spain
and Portugal (1986) changed situation - Shift in voting power in Council of Ministers
towards poor countries - Parallel increase in budget share (figure)
45Increase in Regional Spending
46The Three Objectives
- Convergence Objective
- Aimed at reducing income disparities between
regions - About 80 of cohesion spending (283 bill.
between 2007-2013) - Eligibility
- Less than 75 of average EU income
- Phasing out regions
- Cohesion Fund spending allocated to member
states with below 90 of average EU27 GDP - Regional Competitiveness and Employment Objective
(18) - Aimed at strengthening attractiveness of region
and employment - Eligibility all non-convergence regions
- European Territorial Co-operation Objective (2)
- Aimed to reinforce cross-border, transnational
co-operation.
47Convergence and Competitiveness Objective
Regions 2007-2013
48Guiding Principles
- Specific choice of projects financed by regional
policy funds is solely responsibility of national
governments - But spending is subject to five basic rules or
guiding principles (plus the general principle
of additionality) - Concentration
- Coherence
- Coordination
- Monitoring and evaluation
- Consistency and complementarity
- Details on national allocation of funds decided
by Commission (but overall outline major decision
of Council of Ministers and European Council)
49Empirical Evidence
- Stressed three determinants of location of
economic activity - Comparative advantage
- Agglomeration economies
- Regional policy (objective 12, in particular)
- Empirical research suggests all three matter (see
BW for references) - Importance of factor endowments seems to increase
over time - Supply linkages become more important, demand
linkages less - Only significant EU structural spending since
mid-1980s but location of high-skilled industry
seems to be affected
50Learning Outcomes
- Know basic facts about Europes economic
geography - Understand theoretical frameworks
- Comparative advantage
- Agglomeration and the New Economic Geography
- How and to what extent can these frameworks
explain the initial stylised facts? - Cornerstones of the EUs regional policy
- History
- Objectives and guiding principles
- Empirical evidence