EPAs: the state of play
By the end of 2007, the 15 CARIFORUM states initialled a "full" EPA, 18 African and two Pacific states initialled interim EPAs, and 42 ACP countries did not initial EPAs at all. These countries are trading with the EU since 1 January 2008 on the basis of the GSP.
Out of the 30 African countries without EPA, 26 countries are LDCs, and benefit from the Everything But Arms (EBA) scheme, which gives almost duty free and quota free access (DFQF) to the EU market. Only Gabon, Nigeria and Congo are non-LDCs and their exports to the EU are now subject to the normal GSP tariffs or to MFN treatment (Most favoured nation clause), in case that items are not covered by the standard GSP. There will be no effect in terms of increase in tariffs compared to the Cotonou preferences for LDCs (except possible problems with the technical adaptation of customs requirements to EBA treatment). In the case of Nigeria, about 1.2% of exports will be subject to new tariffs, for Congo 3.5% and for Gabon 6%. Most of the tariff rates will be relatively low, but some may hurt exports in specific sectors, i.e. shrimps, prawns and crabs exports for all three countries, cane sugar and tobacco from Congo, plywood from Gabon, and cocoa and goat products as well as cotton and polyester from Nigeria. The fourth African non-LDC not having concluded an EPA is South Africa, which is already implementing WTO-compatible Trade, Development and Cooperation Agreement (TDCA).
In the Pacific region, only Papua New Guinea (PNG) and Fiji, both non-LDCs, initialled an interim EPA. For the remaining Pacific ACP states, the effects are limited due to limited trade relations to the EU, although 7 out of 13 EPA non-signatory states are non-LDCs.
The interim agreements should be signed and subsequently transmitted to the European Parliament for assent by August 2008. EU officials concede there is a strong likelihood they will take place in 2009 as well.
An updated calendar can be reached @ the link: http://www.acp-eu-trade.org/index.php?loc=events/
Slipping deadlines are nothing new in the EPA process, as in any trade negotiation. It reflects the difficulties, technical and administrative, in finalising the interim agreements (so-called ‘legal scrubbing’ in negotiators’ jargon) to be signed, hurdles made all the higher given that many of the agreements were concluded in haste. It probably also reflects some uneasiness by certain African countries regarding the content of these interim agreements. The Caribbean, the only region to have concluded a full-EPA, is due to sign in July. For the rest, negotiations towards a full EPA continue at the technical level. While on the surface regions appear to be making good progress, several factors could prevent a smooth and speedy conclusion of comprehensive EPAs.
To start with, there seems to be a difference between the technical discussions, which have restarted and seem to be going in the right direction, and the political mood, which still seems to be lacking leadership and a sense of direction. As many decisions will be political in nature there is a need to avoid the pre-2008 mistake of leaving many contentious issues to the end of negotiations and to rely solely on the technical experts. African countries need ministers to make effective political decisions on what products to liberalise and by how much, as well as choosing which reforms and accompanying measures are necessary.
This web site is produced with the financial assistance of the European Union by Amici dei Popoli NGO in cooperation Cestas, CMO, Hegoa and Risc. The contents of this web site are the sole responsability of Amici dei Popoli NGO and can under no circumstances be regarded as reflecting the position of the European Union.