Conditionality, separation, and open rules in multilateral institutions

We examine the implications for the viability of multilateral cooperation of different legal principles governing how separate international agreements relate to each other. We contrast three alternative legal regimes: conditionality - making cooperation in one area a condition for cooperation in another - separation - forbidding sanctions in one area to be used to enforce cooperation in others - and open rules, i.e. absence of any restriction on the patterns of cross-issue cooperation arrangements and sanctions. As an example, we focus on a scenario where countries can enter into selective and separate binding trade and environmental agreements with different partners. Our analysis suggests that conditionality is more likely to facilitate multilateral, multi-issue cooperation in situations where the environmental policy stakes are small relative to the welfare effects of trade policies; when the costs of environmental compliance are high, a conditionality rule can hinder multilateral cooperation. Separation can undermine cooperation by limiting punishment, but can also promote broad cooperation by making partial cooperation more diffcult to sustain. Thus, how different linkage regimes affect multilateral negotiations depends on the structure of cooperation incentives for the countries involved

A post-Brexit agreement for research and innovation Outcomes from a simulated negotiation process. Bruegel Special Report 28 January 2020

The UK will leave the European Union on 31 January 2020. Negotiators and commentators have spent more than three years discussing the terms on which the UK will withdraw, but comparatively little attention has been paid to the future relationship between the UK and the EU after Brexit at a sectoral level. Withdrawing is merely the first stage of the process, and the UK and the EU will soon begin to think about negotiating a new relationship and decide which issues to prioritise. Research and innovation is one of the key areas in which the UK and the EU will need to establish a post-Brexit relationship. Over the past two decades, the UK and the EU have been at the forefront of that enterprise through the development of the European Research Area (ERA). Together, European nations have created a world-leading research base. Six of the world’s top twenty universities are in the ERA, and Europe produces a third of the world’s scientific publications with just 7% of the global population. A new post-Brexit relationship on research and innovation will need to be negotiated to ensure we sustain and grow this valuable and mutually beneficial partnership. Research and innovation are critical to achieving lasting competitiveness and economic development, especially with the dominance of the USA and the rising challenge of China in this field. An early agreement providing for cooperation on research and innovation would reflect the economic and social importance of research and innovation to the people of the UK and the EU. This report sets out what the Wellcome Trust and Bruegel have learned from a project to simulate a negotiation process between the UK and EU to create a post-Brexit research and innovation agreement. Our negotiating scenario assumed that the UK had left the EU with a withdrawal agreement, and that the negotiation was taking place during a ‘standstill’ transition period. Our exercise demonstrated that it is possible to reach agreement among experts on the terms of an EU-UK research and innovation deal. However, the project also revealed that some elements of an agreement may be harder to negotiate than expected. A shared purpose and belief in the importance of research and innovation is not enough to see a deal come to fruition. It is also necessary to overcome a number of political and technical challenges that are spelled out in this report. The process must start now to ensure an agreement is reached as soon as possible. We hope that this report will provide inspiration and guidance for that process

WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control

Annotated and edited transcript of a Witness Seminar in collaboration with the Department of Kowledge Management and Sharing, WHO, held in Geneva, 26 February 2010. Introduction by Professor Virginia Berridge, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine. First published by Queen Mary, University of London, 2012. ©The Trustee of the Wellcome Trust, London, 2012. All volumes are freely available online at www.history.qmul.ac.uk/research/modbiomed/ wellcome_witnesses/Annotated and edited transcript of a Witness Seminar in collaboration with the Department of Kowledge Management and Sharing, WHO, held in Geneva, 26 February 2010. Introduction by Professor Virginia Berridge, London School of Hygiene and Tropical MedicineAnnotated and edited transcript of a Witness Seminar in collaboration with the Department of Kowledge Management and Sharing, WHO, held in Geneva, 26 February 2010. Introduction by Professor Virginia Berridge, London School of Hygiene and Tropical MedicineAnnotated and edited transcript of a Witness Seminar in collaboration with the Department of Kowledge Management and Sharing, WHO, held in Geneva, 26 February 2010. Introduction by Professor Virginia Berridge, London School of Hygiene and Tropical MedicineAnnotated and edited transcript of a Witness Seminar in collaboration with the Department of Kowledge Management and Sharing, WHO, held in Geneva, 26 February 2010. Introduction by Professor Virginia Berridge, London School of Hygiene and Tropical MedicineAnnotated and edited transcript of a Witness Seminar in collaboration with the Department of Kowledge Management and Sharing, WHO, held in Geneva, 26 February 2010. Introduction by Professor Virginia Berridge, London School of Hygiene and Tropical MedicineAnnotated and edited transcript of a Witness Seminar in collaboration with the Department of Kowledge Management and Sharing, WHO, held in Geneva, 26 February 2010. Introduction by Professor Virginia Berridge, London School of Hygiene and Tropical MedicineThe World Health Organization (WHO)’s Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (FCTC) is the first global convention on public health. Comprehensive tobacco control had been the subject of 20 resolutions – consensus statements of all the member states – passed by the World Health Assembly beginning in 1970. This was 20 years after Sir Richard Doll and Sir Austin Bradford Hill suggested a link between smoking and cancer. The idea of a legally binding international convention, proposed by the late Dr Ruth Roemer and supported by a report from Dr Judith Mackay, was given priority by the new WHO Director-General Dr Gro Brundtland in 1998 when she elevated tobacco control as one of WHO’s three flagship programmes and created the Tobacco Free Initiative. The idea took wing with the publication of a review of tobacco company strategies to undermine tobacco control activities at WHO, which drew on 13 million documents released by the US courts to the public in 1998. This Witness Seminar, held in Geneva on the fifth anniversary of the WHO FCTC in 2010, heard from key individuals actively involved with the treaty negotiations, held between 2000 and 2003, and which came into force on 27 February 2005.The History of Modern Biomedicine Research Group is funded by the Wellcome Trust, which is a registered charity, no. 210183

Playing Three-Level Games in the Global Economy. Case Studies from the EU. College of Europe EU Diplomacy Paper 4/2008, May 2008

The case studies in this paper are a selection of essays that have been written in the framework of the compulsory first-semester course The EU in a Global Political Economy Context, taught by Professor Sieglinde Gstöhl, in the academic year 2007-2008 in the EU International Relations and Diplomacy Studies programme at the College of Europe. They all address recent cases of two- or three-level games played by the European Union in different policy fields of the global economy (reflecting the state of affairs at the end of 2007)

An economic theory of GATT

GATT;economic theory

Economic Cooperation Between The European Union And Japan

The aim of the paper is to show the history of economic relations between the European Union and Japan. This economy is very important to the EU and the countries of the EU are interested in further deepening areas of cooperation. Therefore it seems important to indicate the political will to continue mutual economic relations through the signing of contracts and bilateral agreements, as well as meetings at various levels, including SPA and EPA negotiations and summits. The course of the current economic cooperation will be shown through trade volume and foreign direct investment outflows from the European Union to Japan