Abstract
The EC recently created a new instrument of trade policy to deter illicit trade practices. A major part of its purpose is to strengthen the Community’s authority in the area of trade policy and counter the spread of international protectionism within the Community. The following article demonstrates, among other things, that protectionism in the Community cannot offer a workable alternative to this course.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
For a legal assessment, cf. H.-P. Ipsen: Europäisches Gemeinschaftsrecht, Tübingen 1979, p. 821; G. Nicolaysen: Europäisches Gemeinschaftsrecht, Berlin etc. 1979, p. 190.
The European Court allayed any final doubts as to the Community bodies’ sole authority in a judgement dated 15. 12. 76. Case 41/76 (Donckerwolcke v. Procureur de la République) 1976, p. 1921 ff. The Court at the same time recognised in the Donckerwolcke judgement that common trade policy is still incomplete.
Cf. M. Bronckers: A legal analysis of protectionist measures affecting Japanese imports into the European Community, in: E. Völker (ed.): Protectionism and the European Community, Deventer 1983, p. 60.
Cf. S. Page: The Increased Use of Trade Controls by the Industrial Countries, in: INTERECONOMICS, No. 3 (May/June) 1980, p. 149.
For the details cf. Yao-su Hu: Europe under Stress, London etc. 1982, p. 61.
On this point, cf. R. Langhammer: Nationaler Protektionismus im Rahmen der EG-Handelspolitik, dargestellt am Beispiel der Industriegüterimporte aus ASEAN-Ländern, in: Die Weltwirtschaft, No. 1, 1981, p. 79 ff.
Cf. Nicolaysen, op. cit., Europäisches Gemeinschaftsrecht, Berlin etc. 1979, p. 191.
Cf. EC Bulletin, No. 2, 1983, p. 9.
Cf. art. 1 of the Commission’s Decision 80/47/EEC, dated 20. 12. 79.
For more detail, cf. J. Steenbergen: Trade regulation after the Tokyo Round, in: E. Völker, op. cit., Protectionism and the European Community, Deventer 1983. p. 187 f.
Cf. on this point the examples in P. Nunnenkamp: Technische Handelshemmnisse—Formen, Effekte und Harmonisierungsbestrebungen, in: Außenwirtschaft, Vol. 38, 1983, No. 4, pp. 384 f. and 386 f.
Cf. W. von Dewitz: Die multilateralen GATT-Verhandlungen, in: Wirtschaftsdienst, No. 7, 1979, p. 347.
Cf. Europe, 21. 3. 84, p. 13.
Cf. Ausfuhrförderung: EG-Kommission verklagt Frankreich, in: Nachrichten für Außenhandel, 25. 1. 84.
On the harmful effects of Art. 115 cf. also P. Korn: Increasing Protectionism in Europe, in: INTERECONOMICS, No. 6, 1981, pp. 263 ff.
Cf. Intensivere Zusammenarbeit bei Exportförderung, in: Nachrichten für Außenhandel, 13. 4. 83.
Cf. G. Koopmann: Handelspolitik der EG: Durch Abstufung zu mehr Liberalität und weniger Verfälschungen des Wettbewerbs zwischen EG-Unternehmen?, in: E. Grabitz (ed.): Abgestufte Integration—eine Alternative zum herkömmlichen Integrationsrezept?, Kehl am Rhein (to appear shortly).
Cf. W. Hager: Protectionism and autonomy: how to preserve free trade in Europe, in: International Affairs, Vol. 58, No. 3, 1982, p. 413 ff.; by the same author: Free Trade Means Destabilization, in: INTERECONOMICS, No. 1 (Jan./Feb.) 1984, p. 28 ff.
On the advantages of an open Community trading system, cf. also J. Waelbrock: Politique commerciale commune, et théorie du commerce extérieur, in: Economie appliquée, Vol. 36, Nos. 2–3, 1983, p. 349 ff.
Cf. EC Bulletin, No. 7/8, 1980, p. 15.
Cf. R. van Dartel: The conduct of the EEC’s textile trade policy and the application of Art. 115 EEC, in: Völker, op. cit., Protectionism and the European Community, Deventer 1983, p. 119.
Cf. B. Hindley: Protectionism and autonomy: a comment on Hager, in: International Affairs, Vol. 59, No. 1, 1982/3, p. 79.
Cf. Commission Paper COM (83) 757 eng.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Koopmann, G. National protectionism and common trade policy. Intereconomics 19, 103–110 (1984). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02928302
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02928302