Actorness and trade negotiating outcomes: West Africa and the SADC Group in negotiations for Economic Partnership Agreements
| Author | Merran Hulse |
| Published date | 01 March 2018 |
| DOI | 10.1177/0047117817723065 |
| Date | 01 March 2018 |
| Subject Matter | Articles |
https://doi.org/10.1177/0047117817723065
International Relations
2018, Vol. 32(1) 39 –59
© The Author(s) 2017
Reprints and permissions:
sagepub.co.uk/journalsPermissions.nav
DOI: 10.1177/0047117817723065
journals.sagepub.com/home/ire
Actorness and trade
negotiating outcomes: West
Africa and the SADC Group
in negotiations for Economic
Partnership Agreements
Merran Hulse
Deutsches Institut für Entwicklungspolitik
Abstract
In 2014, the EU concluded Economic Partnership Agreements (EPAs) with several African,
Caribbean and Pacific (ACP) regions. These EPAs represent some of the most advanced
examples of interregional cooperation. Yet, the outcomes of EPA negotiations are not the same
across all regions. This article investigates differences in negotiated outcomes and argues that
regional actorness – the ability of regions to become identifiable, to aggregate the interests of
member states, to formulate collective goals and to make and implement decisions – influences
regions’ ability to navigate interregional trade negotiations. In a comparison of the actorness and
negotiated outcomes of West Africa and the SADC EPA Group, the article shows that actorness
matters for international negotiations: regions with higher levels of actorness can negotiate better
outcomes even under conditions of stark power asymmetry.
Keywords
Economic Partnership Agreements, interregionalism, negotiating outcomes, regional actorness,
southern Africa, trade negotiations, West Africa
Introduction
In February 2014, West Africa became the first African region to conclude an Economic
Partnership Agreement (EPA) with the European Union (EU). Five months later, the
Southern African Development Community (SADC) Group became the second African
region to conclude an EPA.1 In many respects, the West African EPA represents a better
Corresponding author:
Merran Hulse, Deutsches Institut für Entwicklungspolitik, Tulpenfeld 6, 53113 Bonn, Germany.
Email: Merran.Hulse@die-gdi.de
723065IRE0010.1177/0047117817723065International RelationsHulse
research-article2017
Article
40 International Relations 32(1)
agreement than the SADC one. It is a more unified and harmonized agreement, has a
lower level of liberalization on the African side and comes with a more substantial devel-
opment component. This outcome presents something of a puzzle: on average, southern
African states are more economically developed and internationally influential than mar-
ginalized West African states. The SADC Group even had among them a state – South
Africa – with previous experience of negotiating with the EU. How did the SADC Group
not manage to secure a better deal for themselves, while their less developed peers in
West Africa secured a comparatively good deal?
I argue that it is differences in regional actorness – the ability of regions to become iden-
tifiable, to aggregate the interests of member states, to formulate collective goals and poli-
cies, and make and implement decisions – that accounts for differences in EPA outcomes.
Actorness is translated into negotiated outcomes via the formulation of a common
regional position, the deployment of a coherent negotiating strategy, and the maintenance of
unity among member states until a deal can be concluded with the negotiating partner. West
Africa’s higher degree of actorness was the result of more homogeneous member state pref-
erences at the outset of the negotiations, and stronger and more autonomous regional institu-
tions with the mandate to negotiate on behalf of member states. The region was able to
formulate a common position early on in the process, deployed a negotiating strategy based
on stalling the negotiations, and was able to mitigate the fallout caused by member states
deviating from the regional position at key junctures in the negotiations. The 2014 outcome
was a coherent, region-wide agreement that granted West Africa several key concessions
and which complemented the region’s existing integration initiatives. On the other hand,
disparate member state preferences and a lack of strong regional institutions or leadership
for a long time undermined the SADC Group’s actorness, leaving the region unable to for-
mulate a common position for much of the negotiations. The SADC Group’s actorness
improved in the latter phases of the negotiations; however, it was too late to overcome dis-
parities caused by member states breaking rank to initial and later sign interim EPAs.
Empirically, the article investigates the interests and institutions of the weaker part-
ners involved in interregional negotiations with the EU, which has been neglected in
both the literature on EU-led interregionalism and EU trade negotiations.2 Although
most scholarly investigations of EPAs do consider the interests of the ACP, they tend to
focus either on a single region or on the ACP as a whole.3 Comparative case studies and
studies that compare the actual outcomes of the EPA process are rare.4 The findings pre-
sented here are based on desk research of primary and secondary sources, as well as on
interviews with 18 southern and western African trade policy experts that took place in
2013 and 2014. Conceptually, the article builds on the existing literature on the EU’s
actorness on the international stage by extending the concept to two cases of non-Euro-
pean regions. It shows that actorness matters for understanding the outcomes not only of
specific instances of interregional negotiation but also for understanding the contempo-
rary system of multilevel governance that characterizes contemporary international rela-
tions. As globalization erodes the territoriality of governance, and states increasingly
delegate competencies to international institutions, actorness beyond the confines of the
Westphalian state is allowed to develop, especially in regional forums characterized by
varying institutional structures and practises. As we move towards a world of regions, in
which ‘mega-regional’ cooperation between major regions becomes more prevalent, the
To continue reading
Request your trial