EPA Review Annex Documents - DFID

Resource constraints have impacted on this negotiation element through the inability to
conduct required studies. For example, SPS, how many ministry people know about this? And
how many laboratories does Nigeria have? Since this creates an inadequate negotiating
environment, SPS is difficult for Nigeria. From this stance it is preferred to negotiate these
outside the EPA.
In intangible benefits, EPA is shaping the regional integration process in West Africa by
bringing to the forefront for the countries in the region the reality of integration. Since creation of
ECOWAS in 1975, none of the protocols signed has been fully implemented. EPA has provoked
enquiries about West African regional institutions and the political exigencies of two regional
institutions, ECOWAS and UEMOA, coexisting; whether a custom union in the whole of West
Africa is possible with these two, and why there is no free movement in the real sense of goods,
services and people in the region.
In terms of capacity building, EPA has also created interest from people in international trade or
trade economics, international relations, who are trying to build up their own capacities in
different areas of trade. Another significant vague benefit of EPA is the involvement of NGOs,
many of which have emerged with interest and objectives in poverty reduction using the trade
channel, and mainstreaming women and gender issues in trade. At the regional level, it has
tasked the ECOWAS Commission to take up the serious challenge of ownership of the process.
This was done by the rejection of the EU’s initial plan to send consultants and economists to
ECOWAS Commission to help in the technical analysis for the process, where the interest of
whom they serve would be suspicious. The EPA has facilitated the awareness and use of
regional and national experts which prior to the process was lacking, in particular because of
scepticism regarding external consultants as the outcomes of their studies became
questionable.
The big four, Nigeria, Ghana, Cote d’Ivoire and Senegal, discussed their interests and aligned
themselves together. For instance, there was a meeting Nigeria did not attend and Cote d’Ivoire
knew the position of Nigeria and on its behalf, Cote d’Ivoire insisted on that position. However,
in some instances, the smaller countries’ negotiators could take the issues personally.
Therefore, the elusive benefits of negotiating EPA include provoking practical discussion
about West African regional integration, as well as deep reflection and assessment of the
impediments to regional trade. This reflection triggered suspicion that had not been identified in
the existing cooperation between the EU and West Africa, and as a result the genuineness of
the good intentions of the EU is now being painstakingly scrutinised, including the EU funding of
developmental projects. The pressure to sign an agreement to conclude is another negative
factor arising from EPA. The pressure to put on board all the issues including those initially
rejected at the multilateral level in disregard to the recommendation of UK parliamentary
committee on international trade. Despite these, there were viewpoints in Nigeria which believed
in the ability of the EPA to deliver positive results, perhaps indirectly. These viewpoints
supported that any concessions that Nigeria grants to countries such as China, India and Brazil
in future trade agreements should be accorded to the EU without further negotiations. The main
reasons for this stance is because the EU is a strategic and traditional trading partner and the
long years of trade relationship has created an environment of mutual trusts absent in more
recent trade partnerships.
Additional resources required to conclude EPA include resources to conduct more studies
and dissemination meetings/workshops. The relevance of this phase is ensure that people
understand the implication of EPA for their livelihoods and to create awareness in people to
139