Abstract
The European Union’s policy on public procurement in the preferential trade agreements (PTAs) has to be seen against the broader EU aims of shaping international trade rules and ensuring market access to key markets. The EU policy on procurement has both shaped and has been shaped by international norms. Initially pressure from the United States (US) led to international discussions in the OECD. These shaped the initial EU Directives aimed at creating a Europe wide procurement market in the early 1970s. But it was not until the late 1980s, as part of the EU Single Market programme, that EU moved to create a competition based, comprehensive regional procurement market. From this point on the EU became a proponent of stronger international rules on procurement. This shift by the EU paved the way for a significant extension of the international rules in the 1996 revision of the World Trade Organisation’s Government Procurement Agreement (GPA). EU policy now has two main components. First, to achieve an equally comprehensive international regime that can ensure access to other major economies, including the emerging markets. Second, to promote the adoption of international best practice in the government procurement, which accounts for a important share of GDP in all economies but it too often subject to a lack of transparency and due process and thus a potential source of abuse and corruption. In these efforts the EU has had partial success in the face of significant opposition. The EU pressed for multilateral negotiations on procurement rules in the WTO’s Doha Development Agenda (DDA), but without success. It had some more success in the plurilateral negotiations to extend the coverage of the (non-MFN) GPA, but this was very largely in the form of greater commitments by existing developed signatories to that agreement. Preferential trade agreements (PTAs) have offered an alternative means of fulfilling the EU’s objectives and in these the EU has had some success, but there remains considerable opposition. Public procurement arguably marks the high tide mark for the extension of the liberal paradigm of an open, rules-based order into national policy autonomy. It remains to be seen whether recent developments in leading OECD economies, such as the call for more Buy America policies by the incoming Trump Administration will threaten the scope of the existing rules.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
- 1.
See http://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/sites/gov_glance-2015-en/09/01/index.html (last accessed 1 March 2017).
- 2.
World Bank, Benchmarking Public Procurement, 2017, Assessing Public Procurement Regulatory Systems in 180 Economies, 2016, https://worldbank/Benchmarking-Public-Procurement-2017.pdf (last accessed 1 March 2017).
- 3.
UNEP, Sustainable Public Procurement: A Global View, December 2013, https://www.globalecolabelling.net/assets/Documents/unep-spp-report.pdf (last accessed 1 March 2017).
- 4.
See WTO Government Procurement Agreement, 2014 https://www.wto.org/english/news_e/news14_e/gpro_07apr14_e.htm (last accessed 1 March 2017).
- 5.
UNCITRAL Model Law on Public Procurement 2011 http://www.uncitral.org/uncitral/uncitral_texts/procurement_infrastructure/2011Model.html (last accessed 1 March 2017).
- 6.
OECD National Accounts Database and Eurostat. Data for Australia are based on a combination of Government Finance Statistics and National Accounts data provided by the Australian Bureau of Statistics.
- 7.
The GPA is reviewed at regular intervals. These reviews have generally increased coverage by the existing signatories rather than increasing membership. In the 2012 revision, which came into force in 2014 coverage was increased and a new provision added on special and differential treatment as an encouragement for more developing countries to sign up.
- 8.
European Commission, Global Europe: competing in the world, 2006, http://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/docs/2006/october/tradoc_130376.pdf (last accessed 1 March 2017).
- 9.
Clarke and Evenett (2003).
- 10.
Woolcock (2008).
- 11.
For text of the EU-Vietnam Agreement, see http://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/press/index.cfm?id=1437 (last accessed 1 March 2017).
- 12.
See the annex to the EU-Vietnam FTA specifying coverage, http://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/docs/2016/february/tradoc_154219.1.2016%20-%20for%20publication.pdf (last accessed 1 March 2017).
- 13.
European Commission, The economic impact of the EU-Singapore Free Trade Agreement, 2013, http://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/docs/2013/september/tradoc_151724.pdf (last accessed 1 March 2017).
- 14.
Woolcock (2011).
- 15.
See http://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/docs/2014/september/tradoc_152806.pdf (last accessed 1 March 2017).
- 16.
Appendices to CETA, http://www.international.gc.ca/trade-agreements-accords-commerciaux/agr-acc/ceta-aecg/text-texte/21_01.aspx?lang=eng (last accessed 1 March 2017).
- 17.
See Heilman Grier J, Update: EU-Canadian Trade Pact Now Public, Perspectives on Trade, 6 October 2014, http://trade.djaghe.com/?p=890 (last accessed 1 March 2017).
- 18.
Concrete data on the size of procurement markets and their degree of openness are difficult to get. These OECD figures are in the recent OECD work on procurement but they largely relate to 2008. This is an unsatisfactory basis for negotiating.
- 19.
See Prime Minister’s Office, Japan’s Government Procurement: Policy and Achievements Annual Report (FY 2012 version), http://japan.kantei.go.jp/96_abe/documents/2013/procurement2012_e.html (last accessed 1 March 2017).
- 20.
Prime Minister’s Office, Japan’s Government Procurement: Policy and Achievements Annual Report (FY 2012 version).
- 21.
European Commission, Trade Sustainable Impact Assessment of a Free Trade Agreement Between Japan and the European Union, Final Report, 2016, http://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/docs/2016/may/tradoc_154522.pdf (last accessed 1 March 2017).
- 22.
Messerlin P and Miroudot S, EU public procurement market: How open are they? Groupe d’Economie Mondiale, Policy Brief, 10 August 2012, http://gem.sciences-po.fr/content/publications/pdf/Messerlin-Miroudot_EU_public_procurement072012.pdf (last accessed 1 March 2017).
- 23.
European Commission, Proposal for a Regulation on the European Parliament and Council on the access of third-country goods and services to the Union’s internal market in public procurement and procedures supporting negotiations on access of Union goods and services to the public procurement markets of third countries, COM (2012) 124 final, 21 March 2012.
- 24.
For a discussion of the issues and options with regard to this proposed Regulation see European Parliament, Public Procurement in International Trade, PE 457.123, 2012.
- 25.
Directive 2004/17/EC of 31 March 2004 coordinating the procurement procedures of entities operating in the water, energy, transport and postal services sectors, OJ 2004 L 134/1.
- 26.
See COM (2012) 124 final.
References
Clarke JL, Evenett SJ (2003) The Singapore issues and the world trading system: the road to Cancun and beyond. Secrétariat d’Etat à l’économie (SECO), Bern
Woolcock S (2008) Government procurement provisions in CARIFORUM EPA and lessons for other ACP states. LSE, London
Woolcock S (2011) European Union trade policy: the Canada – EU comprehensive economic and trade agreement (CETA) towards a new generation of FTA’s? In: Huebner K (ed) Europe, Canada and the comprehensive economic partnership. Routledge, London, pp 21–40
Woolcock S (2012) Public procurement in international trade, European Parliament, Directorate-General for external policies of the Union, Brussels
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2017 Springer International Publishing AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Woolcock, S. (2017). The European Union’s Policy on Public Procurement in Preferential Trade Agreements. In: Bungenberg, M., Krajewski, M., Tams, C., Terhechte, J., Ziegler, A. (eds) European Yearbook of International Economic Law 2017. European Yearbook of International Economic Law, vol 8. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-58832-2_11
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-58832-2_11
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-58831-5
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-58832-2
eBook Packages: Law and CriminologyLaw and Criminology (R0)