EPA Review Annex Documents - DFID

The main expectation of the process was one where the EU would significantly increase
financial aid over and above the traditional EDF funding, so as to enable ACP countries
to enhance their supply side capacities
Resource constraints impact on negotiations
The perception is that the constraints on negotiating capacity have affected EPA
negotiations significantly. It is believed that with more resources the country (and other
ACP/ESA countries) could have conducted more detailed sectoral studies to get in-depth
understanding of the merits and demerits of completing the EPA. Lack of resources was
especially important in the areas of trade in services and SPS.
Regional negotiation and integration
The perception is that at the beginning of the process negotiations at the regional level
were generally good, as most regional (ESA) member states had similar interests.
However, positions changed and the fact that some ESA member countries signed an
interim EPA with EU has weakened the outcome of ESA negotiations. This suggests that
the prospects of integration process after the IEPAs may become more challenging.
Intangibles
The main intangible benefits from the process can be summarised as follows:
• The country’s ability to negotiate in the area of trade has been sharpened
• Basic knowledge on Cotonou Agreement, the WTO rules, experiences of other
regional EPAs and awareness amongst wide spectrum have been created
• Useful national and sectoral studies have been undertaken
Incentives from assistance
There is the perception that since most of the negotiation process and studies have
been financed by the EU, it may do so expecting a positive return (i.e. concluding
agreement). However, the perception is that national interest prevails above and beyond
other issues, including the capacity created by donors. Funding by EU has instead
enhanced the understanding of EPA issues by ESA countries (through trainings, studies
etc), thus has facilitated effective negotiation positions from well informed Ethiopian
negotiators.
Lessons
According to the case study, the main lessons can be summarised as follows:
• The need for building in-house capacity
• The need for strengthening regional voices
• Civil society as partners to promote same cause
• It is not easy to come to consensus when negotiating as a large group especially with
varying interests
• More resources are required, especially in areas such as funding of sectoral studies
80