Alternative (to) EPAs: Possible Scenarios for the Future ACP Trade Relations with the EU

Since 1996, when regional, reciprocal free-trade agreements were suggested to replace the Lomé regime on non-reciprocal trade preferences granted by the European Union (EU) to the African, Caribbean and Pacific (ACP) States, the possibility of alternative trading arrangements to these economic partnership agreements (EPAs) has been considered. The Cotonou Partnership Agreement (CPA), which defines the new framework for the relationship between the EU and the ACP over the period 2000-2020, explicitly provides for the negotiation of EPAs, due to enter into force by 2008, as well as for the consideration, if necessary, of alternatives arrangements. With the preparation for the EPA negotiations and their formal launching in September 2002, most attention has been focused on the possible framework, configuration, content and impact of such EPAs. Although some progress has been achieved since the start of the negotiations, the prospect of EPAs has also raised serious concerns related to a range of issues, including the development dimension of these EPAs and their impact on poverty, on the regional integration process of the various ACP regional groupings, on the unity of the ACP Group, as well as the merits of reciprocal market opening, the capacity of ACP countries and regions to negotiate and implement EPAs and the linkages and coherence with parallel trade initiatives, notably at the World Trade Organization (WTO) with the ongoing Doha Round. Addressing these concerns in the context of EPA negotiations has proved a difficult challenge, and increasing consideration has been given to possible alter- natives to EPAs, mainly (but not only) from actors in civil society. What would happen if some ACP countries or regions chose not to conclude an EPA with the EU? What trade regime could the EU offer to accommodate their needs and interests? Even in the case of ACP states interested in entering into an EPA, how can they assess whether the EPA negotiated is a good one or not? To what can the newly negotiated regime be compared, to which alternative? To address these questions, ACP countries, as well as the EU, should consider alternatives to EPAs for two main reasons: (1) as a fallback position in case an EPA is not concluded, and/or (2) as a benchmark scenario against which the outcome of EPA negotiations can be evaluated. Although the former is the case most commonly referred to, EPA negotiators need to consider possible alternatives as benchmarks to assess their efforts.