Internationally recognised core labour standards in Korea

노트 : Report for two general council review fo the trade policies of Korea (Geneva, 15 and 17 September 2004

The Basic Features of the EEA Agreement

Ref. 111209

The Asian 'Noodle Bowl': Is it Serious for Business

A lively debate is taking place over the impact of free trade agreements (FTAs) on East Asia's business between those who view the agreements as a harmful Asian noodle bowl - i.e., overlapping regional trade agreements - of trade deals and others who see net beneficial effects in terms of regional liberalization and a building block to multilateral liberalization. A lack of enterprise-level data has made it difficult to resolve the debate. Providing new evidence from surveys of 609 East Asian firms (in Japan, Singapore, Republic of Korea [hereafter Korea], Thailand, and Philippines), this paper seeks to address the critical question of whether the Asian noodle bowl of multiple overlapping FTAs is harmful to business activity, particularly for small- and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs). The surveys suggest that the Asian noodle bowl does not seem to have severely harmed the region's business activity to date. Use of FTA preferences is higher than expected from previous studies (22% of responding firms). Furthermore, only 27% of responding firms said that multiple rules of origin significantly added to business cost. However, as more currently under negotiation FTAs take effect and the complexity of the Asian noodle bowl increases, the business impact is likely to intensify. Implementation of key policies and closer publicprivate sector cooperation can help mitigate negative effects and facilitate a more SMEinclusive business response to FTAs. Suggestions include: encouraging most favored nation (MFN) liberalization, rationalization of rules of origin, upgrading origin administration, increased awareness of FTA provisions, improving business participation in FTA consultations, and SME support

Food, farm and rural policies after Brexit? Some knowns, and known unknowns

Brexit negotiations were triggered in March 2017 when the UK notified its intention to leave the EU. A year later, a draft Withdrawal Agreement was produced. It is hoped that this will result in a legally binding agreement when the European Council meets in autumn 2018, but this is not guaranteed. The draft provides for a transitional period, extending from March 2019 – when the UK will formally leave the EU – to the end of 2020, during which time EU law and policies – including the common agricultural policy – will continue to apply. The UK–EU‐27 trade arrangements that will apply from 1 January 2021 are yet to be determined. Both the UK and EU‐27 insist they are determined to keep the Irish border open, but how this outcome can be reconciled with the UK's stated ambition of forging new trade links around the world, is yet to be determined. Regulatory provisions, relating to food safety and animal and plant health for example, together with the high tariffs on many agri‐food products, put the agriculture and food sectors at the core of this debate. Direct payments will be phased out in England, but the scope for policy divergence between the various nations of the UK is uncertain