Article 21 of the Treaty of Lisbon mandates the European Union (EU) to foster its values (democracy, the rule of law, social rights, gender equality, etc.) in its external relations. The core concern of the EU’s multi-faceted relations with Asia is economic relations with rising markets. EU relations with the region have focused on the facilitation of trade and investment through the negotiation of free trade agreements (FTAs) with a number of Asian partners. EU FTAs are accompanied by a Political Cooperation Agreement (PCA), which links core EU values to trade through the ‘standard clause’, whereby under certain circumstances, human rights’ abuses can trigger a suspension of trade preferences. Using a qualitative case study methodology, and drawing on policy documents and interviews, this paper addresses the question of whether, and how, the EU can balance its internal legal obligations with its economic interests and its partners’ demands. The article provides a legal background of the EU’s obligations in terms of international value promotion. It then reviews EU trade policy strategies and reveals an absence of a concerted approach to the inclusion of values. The article investigates the sources of resistance to EU attempts at linking its trade policy with broader values including social rights with Asian partners. The analysis reveals that Asian resistance is centred on the legalistic approach of the EU rather than the values and suggests that a more effective norm export might be achieved through other means. The article concludes that the EU’s failure to push forward social issues in FTAs ultimately casts serious doubts about the EU’s international ‘actorness’ in the area of social rights.
This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.
Buy single article
Instant access to the full article PDF.
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.
Subscribe to journal
Immediate online access to all issues from 2019. Subscription will auto renew annually.
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.
The member states of the European Union are members of the ILO and signatory parties to most of the ILO conventions.
These differences in approach have stymied various attempts to include labour standards at the WTO level. Instead, at the 1996 WTO Singapore Ministerial meeting, it was agreed that the ILO, and not the WTO, was the appropriate forum for discussions of labour standards. Unlike the WTO, the ILO lacks an enforceable dispute settlement mechanism.
The European Parliament has also stressed that in the interest of consistency and coherence the EU-Canada Framework Agreement and Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement (CETA) must also include the linkage, despite Canada’s aggressive opposition to this. At the time of writing, CETA’s conclusion has been announced but the documents have yet to be made public.
It is broadly interpreted that the clause will only be invoked in a case of a strong deterioration of the status quo at the time of the agreement. Singapore, for instance, still has the death penalty in the stature books, even though no execution has taken place since 2009.
As no cases have been brought forward yet, we cannot assess the level of commitment of the parties and how significant the issue of expert advice and peer pressure will be in enacting behavioural and policy change.
EU negotiators admit that they, and their counterparts, know from the outset of negotiations that the EU will have to ‘pay’ for the inclusion of social clauses and for the values ‘pasarelle clause’ by granting partners greater access to the EU’s agricultural market or accepting reduced EU market access to the partner and making concessions in other areas (various Interviews, Brussels, October 2013).
Aggestam L (2008) Introduction: ethical power Europe? Int Aff 84(1):1–11
Allwood G, Guerrina R, MacRae H (2013) Unintended consequences of EU policies: reintegrating gender in European studies. Women's Stud Int Forum 39:1–2
Bain J, Masselot A (2013) Gender equality law and identity building for Europe. Canterbury Law Rev 18:99–120
Bossuyt F (2009) The social dimension of the new generation of EU free trade agreements with Asia and Latin America: ambitious continuation for the sake of policy coherence. Eur Foreign Aff Rev 14(5):703–742
Chaban N, Kelly S, Holland M (2015) Perceptions of ‘Normative Power Europe’ in the shadow of the Eurozone debt crisis: public perspectives on European integration from the Asia Pacific. The value of gender equality in the EU-Asian Trade Policy: an assessment of the EU’s ability to implement its own legal obligations. In: Björkdahl A, Chaban N, Leslie J, Masselot A (eds) Importing EU Norms? Conceptual framework and empirical findings. Springer International Publishing Switzerland, Cham Heidelberg, New York, Dordrecht, London p 57–77
Cuyvers L, Kerremans B (eds) (1998) The international social issue. Social dumping and social competition in the global economy. Intersentia ECONOMISCHE Wetenschappen, Antwerpen
Elgström O (2007) Outsiders’ perceptions of the European Union in International Trade Negotiations. J Common Mark Stud 45(4):949–967
Eriksen EO (2006) The EU—a cosmopolitan polity? J Eur Public Policy 1(2):252–269
European Commission (2006) Communication from the Commission to the Council, the European Parliament, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions of 4 October 2006 “Global Europe: Competing in the world”. COM(2016) 567
European Economic and Social Committee (ECOSOC) (2011) Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on The role of civil society in the free trade agreement between the EU and India. REX/316 EESC-2011-1612, Brussels, 27.10.2011
European Parliament (2011) European Parliament Resolution of 11 May 2011 on the State of Play in the EU-India Free Trade Agreement Negotiations, Strasbourg, N. P7_TA_PROV (2011) 0224
Garcia M (2013) From idealism to realism: EU preferential trade agreement policy. J Contemp Eur Res 9(4):521–541
Garcia M, Masselot A (2015) The value of gender equality in the EU-Asian trade policy: an assessment of the EU’s ability to implement its own legal obligations. In: Björkdahl A, Chaban N, Leslie J, Masselot A (eds) Importing EU norms? Conceptual framework and empirical findings. Springer International Publishing Switzerland, Cham Heidelberg, New York, Dordrecht, London, p 191–209
Hafner-Burton E (2005) Trading human rights: how preferential trade agreements influence government repression. Int Organ 59(3):593–629
Hyde-Price A (2006) Normative power Europe: a realist critique. J Eur Public Policy 13(2):217–234
Kaber N (2004) Globalisation, labour standards and women’s rights: dilemmas of collective (in) action in an interdependent world. Fem Econ 10(1):3–35
Khorana S, Garcia M (2013) European Union-India negotiations: one step forward, one step back. J Common Mark Stud 51(4):684–700
Kolben K (2006) The new politics of linkage: India’s opposition to the workers’ rights clause. Indiana J Glob Leg Stud 13:225–258
Langan M (2012) Normative power Europe and the moral economy of Africa–EU ties. New Polit Econ 7(3):243–270
Lightfoot S, Burchell J (2005) The European Union at the world summit on sustainable development: normative power Europe in action. J Common Mark Stud 43(1):75–95
Manners I (2002) Normative power Europe: a contradiction in terms? J Common Mark Stud 40(2):235–258
Manners I (2006) The European Union as a normative power: a response to Thomas Diez. Millennium J Int Stud 35(1):167–180
Manners I (2008) The normative ethics of the European Union. Int Aff 84(1):45–60
Manners I, Whitman R (2003) The ‘difference engine’: constructing and representing the international identity of the European Union. J Eur Public Policy 10(3):380–404
McGuire S, Lindeque J (2010) The diminishing returns to trade policy in the European Union. J Common Mark Stud 48(5):1329–1349
Ohlin B (1956) Social aspects of european economic co-operation: report by a group of expert. Int Labour Rev 102
Orbie J et al (2005) EU trade policy and a social clause: a question of competences? Polit Eur 3(17):159–187
Orbie J, Khorana S (2015) Normative versus market power Europe? The EU-India trade agreement. Asia Europe Journal. doi:10.1007/s10308-015-0427-9 z
Schimmelfennig F (2001) The community trap: liberal norms, rhetorical actions, and the eastern enlargement of the European Union. Int Organ 55(1):47–80
Shen W (2015) ‘The EU’s Promotion of Human Rights: the case of Tibet’. In: Björkdahl A, Chaban N, Leslie J, Masselot A (eds) Importing EU norms? Conceptual framework and Empirical findings. Springer International Publishing Switzerland, Cham Heidelberg, New York, Dordrecht, London, p 231–246
Spaak P-H (1956) Intergovernmental Committee on European Integration. The Brussels Report on the General Common Market (abridged, English translation of document commonly called the Spaak Report) [June 1956]. Available online: http://aei.pitt.edu/995/ Accessed 08 June 2014
Van Roozendaal G (2002) Trade unions and global governance. The debate on a social clause. Continuum, London
Vogler J, Stephen H (2007) The European Union in global environmental governance: leadership in the making? Int Environ Agreements 7:389–413
Whitman R (ed) (2011) Normative power Europe: empirical and theoretical perspectives. Palgrave, Basingstoke
Youngs R (2004) Normative dynamics and strategic interests in the EU’s external identity. J Common Mark Stud 42(2):415–435
C-270/97 Deutsche Post /Sievers & Schrage  ECR I-929
About this article
Cite this article
Garcia, M., Masselot, A. EU-Asia Free Trade Agreements as tools for social norm/legislation transfer. Asia Eur J 13, 241–252 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10308-015-0423-0
- European Union
- Fair Trade
- World Trade Organisation
- International Labour Organisation
- Free Trade Agreement