SADC AND ESA EXPERIENCES IN NEGOTIATING EPAS WITH THE EU CONFERENCE REPORT

The report details a September 2005 conference in Harare focusing on the divergent and convergent experiences of SADC and ESA in their EPA negotiations with the EU. Key discussions centered on the tension between the EU's push for reciprocal trade and the African regions' demand for development-oriented agreements, special and differential treatment, and the preservation of the Lome acquis. It highlights the marginalization of non-state actors, the complex role of South Africa, and the potential negative impacts of liberalization on poverty and regional integration.

• SADC and ESA regions share a common goal that EPAs must be sustainable, development-oriented, and preserve the Lome acquis, while recognizing special and differential treatment and supporting regional integration priorities.
• A primary point of divergence between SADC and the EU is the request for Special and Differential Treatment (S&DT), specifically regarding longer timeframes for SADC to comply with complex EU standards; the EU refuses to compromise on the health and safety of its citizens.
• SADC and ESA differ in their negotiation progress and priorities: SADC entered substantive negotiations in January 2005 focusing on SPS, TBT, and regional integration, whereas ESA's formal negotiations were scheduled for October 2005, prioritizing development, agriculture, market access, and fisheries.
• South Africa occupies a complex position as an observer in SADC EPA negotiations due to its existing Trade and Development Cooperation Agreement (TDCA) with the EU, leading to concerns that EPAs might detach BLNS countries from the Southern African Customs Union (SACU).
• Non-state actors (NSAs) and civil society are largely marginalized in the negotiation process, with limited participation in National Development Trade Policy Forums (NDTPFs) and a lack of access to the Regional Preparatory Task Force (RPTF).
• There is significant concern that the reciprocal nature of EPAs will favor the EU's economic superiority, potentially leading to 'jobless growth', the destruction of infant local industries, and increased poverty due to the flood of cheap imports.
• The UK's emerging position, as outlined in the Commission for Africa, is seen as more favorable than the general EU stance, suggesting that development should be the priority and that African countries should sequence their own trade reforms.
• Alternatives to EPAs were identified, including an improved Generalized System of Preferences (GSP), south-south cooperation, and the Everything But Arms (EBA) arrangement, though these require further study and pro-activity.

APA

Rusare, M. (2005). SADC AND ESA EXPERIENCES IN NEGOTIATING EPAS WITH THE EU CONFERENCE REPORT. South African Institute of International Affairs. https://saiia.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2008/04/SADC-AND-ESA-EXPERIENCES-EPAS.pdf

Chicago

Rusare, Masiiwa. SADC AND ESA EXPERIENCES IN NEGOTIATING EPAS WITH THE EU CONFERENCE REPORT. South African Institute of International Affairs, 2005. https://saiia.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2008/04/SADC-AND-ESA-EXPERIENCES-EPAS.pdf.

Wikipedia

{{cite report |last1=Rusare |first1=Masiiwa |title=SADC AND ESA EXPERIENCES IN NEGOTIATING EPAS WITH THE EU CONFERENCE REPORT |publisher=South African Institute of International Affairs |date=September 2005 |url=https://saiia.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2008/04/SADC-AND-ESA-EXPERIENCES-EPAS.pdf |access-date=17 August 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}

BibTeX

@techreport{rusare2005sadc, author = {Rusare, Masiiwa}, title = {{SADC AND ESA EXPERIENCES IN NEGOTIATING EPAS WITH THE EU CONFERENCE REPORT}}, institution = {South African Institute of International Affairs}, year = {2005}, month = sep, url = {https://saiia.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2008/04/SADC-AND-ESA-EXPERIENCES-EPAS.pdf}, urldate = {2026-08-17}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }