Abstract
Drawing from economic sociology, this article argues that trade liberalization is never devoid of cultural and symbolic content. As such, when pursued by international entities, it can help affirm collective identities. The EU Commission’s recent external trade negotiations with the USA (TTIP) and Canada (CETA) over food quality offer excellent examples. Pitting itself against North American neoliberalism and business-oriented commercialism, the Commission has championed a European understanding of food integrity and social responsibility. In so doing, it has also emphasized its role as the institution protective of European values on the world stage. Internally, the Commission’s pursuit of a digital single market has in parallel revealed a different approach. Here, the Commission has stressed the values of efficiency, the transcending of national borders, and consumer and business freedom. In that context, the Commission has presented itself as the political entity capable of advancing a dynamic and competitive vision of Europe. These differences point to the complexity associated with crafting ‘European’ values. They also point to preexisting domestic regulatory traditions in certain sectors as key factors influencing the Commission. We close by reflecting on the fact that the Commission’s rhetoric has not gone unchallenged externally or internally.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
The Commission’s 2002 European General Food Law laid the foundations on food and feed by stating that European citizens should ‘have access to safe and wholesome food of the highest standard’ (European Commission 2016b). This was preceded by a regulation proposal on feed, adopted by the Commission in December 2001, establishing ‘animal and public health as the primary objective of EU feed legislation’ (Commission of the European Communities 2000). Article 100a EEC of the Single European Act also mandated a ‘high level of protection’ in light of ‘any new development based on scientific facts’ (Coggi and Deboyser 2016) when it comes to environmental or consumer protection, health, and safety.
For a summary of the US approach, see http://sitn.hms.harvard.edu/flash/2015/same-science-different-policies/.
Estrogen, progesterone, testosterone, zeranol, melengestrol acetate, and trenbolone acetate.
See the transcript section of https://www.c-span.org/video/?c4608594/cecilia-malmstrom-says-tpp-negotiations-will-move-forward-brexit-vote&start=561.
In a white paper, the Commission stated that ‘the key principle for imported foodstuffs and animal feed is that they must meet health requirements at least equivalent to those set by the Community’ (Commission of the European Communities 2000).
See, for instance, the protests during the deal’s October 2016 signing (https://www.rt.com/news/364743-ceta-canada-eu-signed-protest/) and the months leading up to it (http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-37450742).
Thus, CETA granted Canada preferential access to the EU for its own hormone-free beef, with expanded export quotas and the elimination of a 20% tariff (Canadian Cattlemen’s Association 2013).
The EU’s initiatives on the DSM have largely been praised for their transparence and vision. However, some criticisms—albeit much less vocal than with food—have been raised. While the Open Science Cloud, for instance, has not attracted many objections (see https://www.nature.com/news/don-t-let-europe-s-open-science-dream-drift-1.22179), the choice of Elsevier—a for-profit company that has historically benefited from restricting access to scientific data unless users pay—as monitor of the database has irked some observers (see, for instance, Tennant 2018).
References
Acuti, E. 2009. EU Safey Policy and Public Debate. In The Search for a European Identity: Values, Policies and Legitimacy of the European Union, ed. F. Cerrutti and S. Lucarelli, 93–107. London: Routledge.
Appelbaum, R.P., William L.F. Felstiner, & V. Gessner (editors) 2001. Rules and Networs: The Legal Culture of Global Business Transactions. Portland, OR: Hart.
Balfour, R. 2012. Human Rights and Democracy in EU Foreign Policy. The Cases of Ukraine and Egypt. New York: Routledge.
Barrientos, S., and C. Dolan (eds.). 2006. Ethical Sourcing in the Global Food System. Sterling, VA: Earthscan.
Bernauer, T. 2003. Genes, Trade, and Regulation: The Seeds of Conflict in Food Biotechnology. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Börzel, T.A., and V. van Hüllen (eds.). 2015. Governance Transfer by Regional Organizations. Palgrave: Houndsmill.
Brown, K.R. 2013. Buying into Fair Trade: Culture, Morality, and Consumption. New York: New York University Press.
Canadian Cattlemen’s Association. 2013. Market access. http://www.cattle.ca/advocacy/lobbying-issues/market-access/. Accessed July 14, 2016.
Carbone, M. 2013. Between EU Actorness and Aid Effectiveness: The Logics of EU Aid to Sub-Saharan Africa. International Relations 27(3): 341–355.
Cerutti, F. 2003. A Political Identity of the Europeans? Thesis Eleven 72(1): 26–45.
Charlier, C., and M. Rainelli. 2002. Hormones, Risk Management, Precaution and Protectionism: An Analysis of the Dispute on Hormone-Treated Beef Between the European Union and the United States. European Journal of Law and Economics 14(2): 83–97.
Coggi, P.T., and P. Deboyser. 2016. The European Food Safety Authority: A View from the European Commission. In Foundations of EU Food Law and Policy: Ten Years of the European Food Safety Authority, ed. A. Alemanno and S. Gabbi, 195–205. Farnham: Routledge.
Commission of the European Communities. 2000. White paper on food safety [White paper]. http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/health_food-safety/library/pub/pub06_en.pdf. Accessed July 20, 2016.
Council of the European Union. 2009. 2009 negotiating directives for an economic integreation agreement with Canada. (Publication No. 9036/09). http://data.consilium.europa.eu/doc/document/ST-9036-2009-EXT-2/en/pdf. Accessed July 15, 2016.
da Conceição-Heldt. E. 2014. When Speaking with a Single Voice Isn’t Enough: Bargaining Power (a) symmetry and EU External Effectiveness in Global Trade Governance. Journal of European Public Policy 21(7): 980–995.
Directorate-General for Agriculture and Rural Development. 2013. Report on the results of the public consultation on the review of the EU policy on organic agriculture (Public Consultation) [Report]. http://ec.europa.eu/agriculture/organic/documents/eu-policy/of-public-consultation-final-report_en.pdf. Accessed July 20, 2016.
Dudek, C. 2015. GMO Food Regulatory Frameworks in the US and the EU. In The New and Changing Transatlanticism: Politics and Policy Perspectives, ed. L. Buonanno, N. Cuglesan and K. Henderson, 214–232. New York: Routledge.
Duina, F. 2011. Institutions and the Economy. Cambridge: Polity Press.
Elsig, M. 2013. The EU as an Effective Trade Power? Strategic Choice of Judicial Candidates in the Context of the World Trade Organization. International Relations 27(3): 325–340.
European Commission. 2014a. “Stepping up a gear”: Press statement by EU Trade Commissioner Karel De Gucht following the stocktaking meeting with USTR Michael Froman on the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) [Press Release]. http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_STATEMENT-14-12_en.htm. Accessed June 2016.
European Commission. 2014b. The Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership: Where do we stand on the hottest topics in the current debate? [Press Release]. http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_SPEECH-14-52_en.htm, accessed June 2016.
European Commission. 2015a. A Digital Single Market for Europe—One year on [Fact Sheet]. http://ec.europa.eu/priorities/sites/beta-political/files/dsm-1-year_en.pdf. Accessed August 18, 2016.
European Commission. 2015b. Commission welcomes agreement to end roaming charges and to guarantee an OPEN INTERNET [Press Release]. http://ec.europa.eu/priorities/announcements_en?priorities=29. Accessed July 28, 2016.
European Commission. 2015c. Commission proposes modern digital contract rules to simplify and promote access to digital content and online sales across the EU [Press Release]. http://ec.europa.eu/priorities/announcements_en?priorities=29. Accessed July 30, 2016.
European Commission. 2015d. Bringing down barriers in the digital single market: No roaming charges as of June 2017 [Press Release]. http://ec.europa.eu/priorities/announcements_en?priorities=29. Accessed July 29, 2016.
European Commission. 2015e. Agreement on Commission’s EU data protection reform will boost digital single market [Press Release]. http://ec.europa.eu/priorities/announcements_en?priorities=29. Accessed July 31, 2016.
European Commission. 2016a. Traceability and labeling. http://ec.europa.eu/food/plant/gmo/traceability_labelling/index_en.htm. Accessed July 15, 2016.
European Commission. 2016b. General food law. http://ec.europa.eu/food/safety/general_food_law/index_en.htm. Accessed July 20, 2016.
European Commission. 2016c. Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement (CETA). http://ec.europa.eu/trade/policy/in-focus/ceta/index_en.htm. Accessed July 15, 2016.
European Commission. 2016d. Digital single market: Bringing down barriers to unlock online opportunities. http://ec.europa.eu/priorities/digital-single-market_en. Accessed July 26, 2016.
European Commission. 2016e. Commission sets out path to digitize European industry [Press Release]. http://ec.europa.eu/priorities/announcements_en?priorities=29. Accessed August 4, 2016.
European Commission. 2016f. Commission proposes new e-commerce rules to help consumers and companies reap full benefit of single market [Press Release]. http://ec.europa.eu/priorities/announcements_en?priorities=29. Accessed August 5, 2016.
European Commission. 2016g. Boosting e-commerce in the EU [Fact Sheet]. http://ec.europa.eu/priorities/announcements_en?priorities=29. Accessed August 6, 2016.
European Commission. 2016h. Commission updates EU audiovisual rules and presents targeted approach to online platforms [Press Release]. http://ec.europa.eu/priorities/announcements_en?priorities=29. Accessed July 30, 2016.
European Commission. 2016i. Joint statement on the final adoption of the new EU rules for personal data protection [Statement]. http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_IP-15-5265_en.htm. Accessed August 1, 2016.
European Commission. 2016j. Digital single market—Commission updates EU audiovisual rules and presents targeted approach to online platforms [Fact Sheet]. http://ec.europa.eu/priorities/announcements_en?priorities=29 Accessed August 7, 2016.
European Commission. 2016k. European cloud initiative to give Europe a global lead in the data-driven economy [Press Release]. http://ec.europa.eu/priorities/announcements_en?priorities=29. Accessed August 3, 2016.
European Parliament. 2015. Eight things you should know about GMOs. http://www.europarl.europa.eu/news/en/news-room/20151013STO97392/Eight-things-you-should-know-about-GMOs. Accessed July 15, 2016.
Geelohed, Miranda. 2016. ‘Divided in Diversity: Reforming The EU’s GMO Regime’. Cambridge Yearbook of European Legal Studies. Available on CJO2016. https://doi.org/10.1017/cel.2015.21.
Gehring, T., S. Oberthür, and M. Mühleck. 2013. European Union Actorness in International Institutions: Why the EU is Recognized as an Actor in Some International Institutions, But Not in Others. Journal of Common Market Studies 51(5): 849–865.
Goff, P.M. 2007. Limits to Liberalization: Local Culture in a Global Marketplace. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
Harvey, F. 2014. EU Under Pressure to Allow GM Food Imports from US and Canada. The Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2014/sep/05/eu-gm-food-imports-us-canada.
Hass, J. 2007. Economic Sociology: An Introduction. New York: Routledge.
Inman, P. 2015. Prospect of TTIP already Undermining EU Food Standards, Say Campaigners. The Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/business/2015/oct/18/prospect-ttip-deal-undermining-eu-food-standards-gmos.
Jacobsen, H. 2015. US Trade Negotiator ‘very disappointed’ at European GM food ban. EurActiv.com: http://www.euractiv.com/section/agriculture-food/news/us-trade-negotiator-very-disappointed-at-european-gm-food-ban/. Accessed July 22, 2016.
Johnson, R. 2015. The U.S.-EU Beef Hormone Dispute. Congressional Research Service.
Kerr, W.A., and J.E. Hobbs. 2002. The North American-European Union Dispute Over Beef Produced Using Growth Hormones: A Major Test for the New International Trade Regime. World Economy 25(2): 283–296.
Kurzer, P., and A. Cooper. 2007. What’s for Dinner: European Farming and Food Traditions Confront American Biotechnology. Comparative Political Studies 40(9): 1035–1058.
Lenz, T. 2012. Spurred emulation: The EU and regional Integration in Mercosur and SADC. West European Politics 35(1): 155–174.
Library of Congress. 2015. Restrictions on genetically modified organisms. https://www.loc.gov/law/help/restrictions-on-gmos/eu.php. Accessed July 13, 2016.
Lucarelli, S., F. Cerutti, and V.A. Schmidt (eds.). 2011. Debating Political Identity and Legitimacy in the European Union. New York: Routledge.
Macaj, G., and K. Nicolaïdis. 2014. Beyond ‘One Voice’? Global Europe’s Engagement with Its Own Diversity. Journal of European Public Policy 21(7): 1067–1083.
Malstrom, C. 2016. Negotiating TTIP [Web log post]. http://ec.europa.eu/commission/2014-2019/malmstrom/blog/negotiating-ttip_en. Accessed July 18, 2016.
Marsh, S., and H. Mackenstein. 2005. The International Relations of the European Union. Harlow: Pearson Longman.
Meunier, S., and K. Nicolaïdis. 2006. The European Union as a Conflicted Trade Power. Journal of European Public Policy 13(6): 906–925.
Nicolaïdis, K., and M. Egan. 2001. Transnational Market Governance and Regional Policy Externality: Why Recognize Foreign Standards? Journal of European Public Policy 8(3): 454–473.
Potter, Pitman B., and Ljiljana Biukovic (eds.). 2011. Globalization and Local Adaptation in International Trade Law. Vancouver: University of British Columbia Press.
Schmidt, V.A. 2014. Economic Ideas and the Political Construction of the Financial Crash of 2008. The British Journal of Politics and International Relations 16(1): 189–209.
Scholderer, J. 2005. The GM Foods Debate in Europe: History, Regulatory Solutions, and Consumer Response Research. Journal of Public Affairs 5(4): 263–274.
Scott, M. 2015. Europe moving toward single digital market. The New York Times, May 4. http://www.nytimes.com/2015/05/05/business/international/europe-moving-toward-single-digital-market.html. Accessed July 25, 2016.
Senti, R. 2002. The Role of the EU as an Economic Actor Within the WTO. European Foreign Affairs Review 7(1): 111–117.
Spillman, L. 1999. Enriching Exchange: Cultural Dimensions of Markets. The American Journal of Economics and Sociology 58(4): 1047–1071.
Strange, M. 2015. Power in Global Trade Governance: Is the EU a Unitary Actor, a Tool for Dominance, or a Site of Contestation? GATS and the TTIP Negotiations. International Journal of Public Administration 38(12): 884–894.
Tennant, J. 2018. Elsevier are corrupting open science in Europe. The Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/science/political-science/2018/jun/29/elsevier-are-corrupting-open-science-in-europe.
Thomas, R., and P. Turnbull. 2017. Talking Up a Storm? Using Language to Activate Adherents and Demobilize Detractors of European Commission Policy Frames. Journal of European Public Policy 24(7): 931–950.
Vogel, D. 2003. The Hare and the Tortoise Revisited: The New Politics of Consumer and Environmental Regulation in Europe. British Journal of Political Science 33: 557–580.
Young, A.R. 2016. Not Your Parents’ Trade Politics: The Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership Negotiations. Review of International Political Economy 23(3): 345–378.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Duina, F., Smith, E. Affirming Europe with trade: deal negotiations and the making of a political identity. Comp Eur Polit 17, 491–511 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1057/s41295-019-00180-7
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/s41295-019-00180-7