Is the European Union Trade Deal with Canada New or Recycled? A Text‐as‐data Approach
| DOI | http://doi.org/10.1111/1758-5899.12420 |
| Published date | 01 May 2017 |
| Date | 01 May 2017 |
Is the European Union Trade Deal with Canada
New or Recycled? A Text-as-data Approach
Todd Allee
University of Maryland
Manfred Elsig
University of Bern
Andrew Lugg
University of Maryland
Abstract
Are the rules in the Canada-European Union Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement (CETA) largely copied from past
trade agreements, or are they new and potentially groundbreaking? Some critics charge that CETA merely replicates the fail-
ures of past trade deals, while others worry that CETA is specifying new ‘behind the border’rules that threaten state sover-
eignty. Using text analysis we compare the contents in CETA to those in previous trade agreements signed by both parties.
Unlike many other recent trade deals, we find that much of the content in CETA is indeed novel. On average only about 7
per cent of CETA language is copied directly from any of the 49 previous trade agreements we analyze. This same pattern
holds across many of the most controversial issue areas, like investment. Some recent agreements like EU-Singapore (30%)
and Canada-South Korea (24%) are replicated in part in CETA, although recycled text is more likely to come from past Cana-
dian PTAs than EU ones. Our results suggest that fears that CETA is ‘more of the same’are overblown and indicate that if rati-
fied CETA likely will play an important role as a model in future trade agreements.
Introduction
The negotiations for a Comprehensive Economic and Trade
Agreement (CETA) between the European Union and
Canada were officially finalized on 1 August 2014 after five
years of talks. Since then we have witnessed heated debates
over the content of the treaty, particularly in European
countries. For instance, over 200,000 protesters took to the
streets in Berlin to oppose the trade agreement in October
2015, and in August 2016 German non-governmental orga-
nizations launched the largest-ever constitutional challenge
to CETA (Die Zeit, 2015, 2016). In light of this increasing con-
testation, the European Commission agreed to put the
treaty to an expanded form of ratification allowing national
(and some regional) parliaments to vote on CETA (European
Commission, 2016). In the most recent episode, the govern-
ment of the Belgian region of Wallonia vetoed the signing
and provisional application of CETA, a crisis that was only
resolved after many days of negotiations and further clarifi-
cations of specific CETA obligations, particularly with respect
to investor rights.
Opposition to CETA and other large preferential trade
agreements (PTAs) must be seen against a backdrop of
increasing discontent with globalization and market integra-
tion. While trade agreements long have been unpopular
with grass-roots environmental, human rights, and develop-
ment organizations, new opposition to international eco-
nomic agreements has come from a broader segment of
workers as well as voters who feel general unease about the
transformation of societies. This new opposition also has
been fueled by new and old populist movements on the
right, such as the Alternative f€
ur Deutschland (AFD) in Ger-
many, Front National in France, and the United Kingdom
Independence Party (UKIP).
What is lacking in this heightened debate is more system-
atic information about whether the legal obligations in
mega-regional pacts like CETA are truly novel or whether
they are largely imported from existing treaties. Put differ-
ently, does CETA follow the logic of ‘imitation’(language
taken from past agreements) or ‘innovation’(new lan-
guage)? The answer to this question can inform protest
movements as well as efforts to counter them, and is crucial
for understanding whether new globalization templates are
being created and which actors are doing so.
Therefore, in this research we address the important ques-
tions of whether CETA is ‘more of the same’and relatedly,
whether it is likely to serve as a template for both sides’
future trade agreements. Past agreements can serve as the
basis for new ones, but if landmark new agreements are
unique, they in turn can serve as new templates and
©2017 University of Durham and John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Global Policy (2017) 8:2 doi: 10.1111/1758-5899.12420
Global Policy Volume 8 . Issue 2 . May 2017
246
Survey Article
To continue reading
Request your trial