ABSTRACT

In response to growing contestation and politicisation of trade policy, policy makers have aimed to enhance the ‘inclusiveness’ of trade policy through the institutionalisation of deliberative forums in which civil society organisations participate. However, it is not clear whether these processes actually enhance inclusiveness. This article adds to our understanding of this question by, first, developing an analytical framework (the ‘inclusiveness ladder’) and, second, applying it to the civil society mechanisms (CSMs) of European Union (EU) free trade agreements. The unique feature of CSMs is their focus on ensuring that the actual implementation of trade agreement does not run counter to sustainable development principles. Specifically, our empirical research involves a mixed methods analysis of primary and secondary sources and a survey of civil society participants. We find that CS is largely included at the level of logistics and partly at the level of information sharing, whereas monitoring capacities remain limited and impact on policy-making is quasi-absent. Moreover, results suggest differences between business participants, who seem largely satisfied with the lower steps on the ‘ladder’, and non-governmental actors who insist on policy impact. Finally, we outline avenues for further research and reflect on policy implications.

摘要

为应对贸易政策日益激烈的争论和政治化，政策制定者旨在通过将民间社会组织参与的审议论坛制度化来提高贸易政策的“包容性”。然而，尚不清楚这些过程是否真的增强了包容性。本文通过首先开发一个分析框架（“包容性阶梯”），其次将其应用于欧盟 (EU) 自由贸易协定的公民社会机制 (CSM)，增加了我们对这个问题的理解。CSM 的独特之处在于，它们专注于确保贸易协定的实际实施不违背可持续发展原则。具体来说，我们的实证研究涉及对主要和次要来源的混合方法分析以及对民间社会参与者的调查。我们发现，CS 主要包含在物流层面，部分包含在信息共享层面，而监控能力仍然有限，对政策制定的影响几乎不存在。此外，结果表明商业参与者与坚持政策影响的非政府参与者之间存在差异，他们似乎对“阶梯”上较低的步骤基本满意。最后，我们概述了进一步研究的途径并反思政策影响。结果表明，企业参与者似乎对“阶梯”上的较低台阶很满意，而非政府参与者则坚持政策影响。最后，我们概述了进一步研究的途径并反思政策影响。结果表明，企业参与者似乎对“阶梯”上的较低台阶很满意，而非政府参与者则坚持政策影响。最后，我们概述了进一步研究的途径并反思政策影响。