IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cog/poango/v5y2017i3p16-28.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

How Much Is Enough? Explaining the Continuous Transparency Conflict in TTIP

Author

Listed:
  • Niels Gheyle

    (Centre for EU Studies, Department of Political Science, Ghent University, Belgium)

  • Ferdi De Ville

    (Centre for EU Studies, Department of Political Science, Ghent University, Belgium)

Abstract

Transparency has been a central issue in the debate regarding the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP), especially on the side of the European Union (EU). The lack of transparency in the negotiating process has been one of the main criticisms of civil society organizations (CSOs). The European Commission (EC) has tried to gain support for the negotiations through various ‘transparency initiatives’. Nonetheless, criticism by CSOs with regard to TTIP in general and the lack of transparency in specific remained prevalent. In this article, we explain this gap between various transparency initiatives implemented by the EC in TTIP and the expectations on the side of European CSOs. We perform a content analysis of position papers on transparency produced by CSOs, mainly in response to a European Ombudsman consultation, complemented by a number of official documents and targeted interviews. We find that the gap between the TTIP transparency initiatives and the expectations of CSOs can be explained by different views on what constitutes legitimate trade governance, and the role of transparency, participation, and accountability herein.

Suggested Citation

  • Niels Gheyle & Ferdi De Ville, 2017. "How Much Is Enough? Explaining the Continuous Transparency Conflict in TTIP," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 5(3), pages 16-28.
    • Handle: RePEc:cog:poango:v:5:y:2017:i:3:p:16-28
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cogitatiopress.com/politicsandgovernance/article/view/1024
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Henrik Horn & Petros C. Mavroidis & André Sapir, 2010. "Beyond the WTO? An Anatomy of EU and US Preferential Trade Agreements," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 33(11), pages 1565-1588, November.
    2. Dãœr, Andreas & De Biãˆvre, Dirk, 2007. "Inclusion without Influence? NGOs in European Trade Policy," Journal of Public Policy, Cambridge University Press, vol. 27(1), pages 79-101, May.
    3. Keohane, Robert O. & Nye, Joseph S., Jr., 2001. "Between Centralization and Fragmentation: The Club Model of Multilateral Cooperation and Problems of Democratic Legitimacy," Working Paper Series rwp01-004, Harvard University, John F. Kennedy School of Government.
    4. Ruggie, John Gerard, 1982. "International regimes, transactions, and change: embedded liberalism in the postwar economic order," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 36(2), pages 379-415, April.
    5. Lang, Andrew, 2011. "World Trade Law after Neoliberalism: Reimagining the Global Economic Order," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780199592647.
    6. Hocking, Brian, 2004. "Changing the terms of trade policy making: from the ‘club’ to the ‘multistakeholder’ model," World Trade Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 3(1), pages 3-26, March.
    7. Vigjilenca Abazi & Johan Adriaensen, 2017. "Allies in Transparency? Parliamentary, Judicial and Administrative Interplays in the EU’s International Negotiations," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 5(3), pages 75-86.
    8. Zürn, Michael, 2014. "The politicization of world politics and its effects: Eight propositions," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 6(1), pages 47-71.
    9. Kristen Hopewell, 2015. "Multilateral trade governance as social field: Global civil society and the WTO," Review of International Political Economy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 22(6), pages 1128-1158, December.
    10. Christine Neuhold & Andreea Năstase, 2017. "Transparency Watchdog: Guarding the Law and Independent from Politics? The Relationship between the European Ombudsman and the European Parliament," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 5(3), pages 40-50.
    11. Grant, Ruth W. & Keohane, Robert O., 2005. "Accountability and Abuses of Power in World Politics," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 99(1), pages 29-43, February.
    12. Evelyn Coremans, 2017. "From Access to Documents to Consumption of Information: The European Commission Transparency Policy for the TTIP Negotiations," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 5(3), pages 29-39.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Daniel Naurin, 2017. "The Puzzle of Transparency Reforms in the Council of the EU," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 5(3), pages 87-90.
    2. Axel Marx & Guillaume Van der Loo, 2021. "Transparency in EU Trade Policy: A Comprehensive Assessment of Current Achievements," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 9(1), pages 261-271.
    3. Niels Gheyle, 2022. "Evading Vetoes: Exiting the Politicized Decision Trap in EU Trade Policy," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 60(6), pages 1723-1740, November.
    4. Anke Moerland & Clara Weinhardt, 2020. "Politicisation ‘Reversed’: EU Free Trade Negotiations with West Africa and the Caribbean," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 8(1), pages 266-276.
    5. Ferdi De Ville & Gabriel Siles-Brügge, 2019. "The Impact of Brexit on EU Trade Policy," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 7(3), pages 7-18.
    6. Thomas Jacobs & Niels Gheyle & Ferdi De Ville & Jan Orbie, 2023. "The Hegemonic Politics of ‘Strategic Autonomy’ and ‘Resilience’: COVID‐19 and the Dislocation of EU Trade Policy," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 61(1), pages 3-19, January.
    7. Evelyn Coremans, 2017. "From Access to Documents to Consumption of Information: The European Commission Transparency Policy for the TTIP Negotiations," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 5(3), pages 29-39.
    8. Päivi Leino, 2017. "Secrecy, Efficiency, Transparency in EU Negotiations: Conflicting Paradigms?," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 5(3), pages 6-15.
    9. Christine Neuhold & Andreea Năstase, 2017. "Transparency Watchdog: Guarding the Law and Independent from Politics? The Relationship between the European Ombudsman and the European Parliament," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 5(3), pages 40-50.
    10. Guri Rosén & Anne Elizabeth Stie, 2017. "Not Worth the Net Worth? The Democratic Dilemmas of Privileged Access to Information," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 5(3), pages 51-61.
    11. Vigjilenca Abazi & Johan Adriaensen, 2017. "EU Institutional Politics of Secrecy and Transparency in Foreign Affairs," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 5(3), pages 1-5.
    12. Vigjilenca Abazi & Johan Adriaensen, 2017. "Allies in Transparency? Parliamentary, Judicial and Administrative Interplays in the EU’s International Negotiations," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 5(3), pages 75-86.
    13. Christine Hackenesch & Julian Bergmann & Jan Orbie, 2021. "Development Policy under Fire? The Politicization of European External Relations," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 59(1), pages 3-19, January.
    14. van Schalkwyk, May C.I. & Barlow, Pepita & Siles-Brügge, Gabriel & Jarman, Holly & Hervey, Tamara & McKee, Martin, 2021. "Brexit and trade policy: an analysis of the governance of UK trade policy and what it means for health and social justice," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 110261, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    15. William Dinan, 2021. "Lobbying Transparency: The Limits of EU Monitory Democracy," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 9(1), pages 237-247.
    16. Patricia Garcia-Duran & Leif Johan Eliasson & Oriol Costa, 2020. "Managed Globalization 2.0: The European Commission’s Response to Trade Politicization," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 8(1), pages 290-300.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Vigjilenca Abazi & Johan Adriaensen, 2017. "EU Institutional Politics of Secrecy and Transparency in Foreign Affairs," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 5(3), pages 1-5.
    2. Jean-Baptiste Velut, 2023. "Trade Linkages or Disconnects? Labor Rights and Data Privacy in US Digital Trade Policy," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 11(1), pages 249-260.
    3. Maarten Hillebrandt, 2017. "Transparency as a Platform for Institutional Politics: The Case of the Council of the European Union," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 5(3), pages 62-74.
    4. Jean-Christophe Bureau & Sébastien Jean, 2013. "Trade liberalization in the bio-economy: coping with a new landscape," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 44(s1), pages 173-182, November.
    5. Wilde, Pieter de & Junk, Wiebke Marie & Palmtag, Tabea, 2016. "Accountability and opposition to globalization in international assemblies," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 22(4), pages 823-846.
    6. Johannes Urpelainen, 2012. "How Does Democratic Accountability Shape International Cooperation?," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 29(1), pages 28-55, February.
    7. Axel Dreher & Katharina Michaelowa, 2008. "The political economy of international organizations," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 3(4), pages 331-334, December.
    8. Iain Osgood & Yilang Feng, 2018. "Intellectual property provisions and support for US trade agreements," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 13(3), pages 421-455, September.
    9. Guri Rosén & Anne Elizabeth Stie, 2017. "Not Worth the Net Worth? The Democratic Dilemmas of Privileged Access to Information," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 5(3), pages 51-61.
    10. Robert Wolfe, 2018. "Learning about digital trade: Privacy and e-commerce in CETA and TPP," RSCAS Working Papers 2018/27, European University Institute.
    11. Jean-Christophe Bureau & Sébastien Jean, 2013. "International Agricultural Trade and Negotiations : Coping with a New Landscape [Commerce et négociations agricoles commerciales: s'ajuster au nouvel environnement]," Working Papers hal-01592099, HAL.
    12. Manfred Elsig, 2010. "The World Trade Organization at work: Performance in a member-driven milieu," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 5(3), pages 345-363, September.
    13. Adelle BLACKETT, 2020. "On social regionalism in transnational labour law," International Labour Review, International Labour Organization, vol. 159(4), pages 591-613, December.
    14. Rémi Bachand, 2023. "Class Struggle and International Economic Institutions: The Origins of the GATT and “Embedded Liberalism”," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 11(1), pages 193-202.
    15. Vigjilenca Abazi & Johan Adriaensen, 2017. "Allies in Transparency? Parliamentary, Judicial and Administrative Interplays in the EU’s International Negotiations," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 5(3), pages 75-86.
    16. Camille Parguel & Jean-Christophe Graz, 2021. "Food Can’t Be Traded: Civil Society’s Discursive Power in the Context of Agricultural Liberalisation in India," Indian Council for Research on International Economic Relations (ICRIER) Working Paper 405, Indian Council for Research on International Economic Relations (ICRIER), New Delhi, India.
    17. Dani Rodrik, 2018. "Populism and the economics of globalization," Journal of International Business Policy, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 1(1), pages 12-33, June.
    18. Vigvári, Gábor, 2022. "Transzformáció és a populizmus a visegrádi országokban [Transformation and populism in the V4 countries]," Közgazdasági Szemle (Economic Review - monthly of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences), Közgazdasági Szemle Alapítvány (Economic Review Foundation), vol. 0(3), pages 339-366.
    19. Cohen, Joseph N., 2008. "Managing the Faustian bargain: monetary autonomy in the pursuit of development in Eastern Europe and Latin America," MPRA Paper 22435, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    20. Alexander Kentikelenis & Erik Voeten, 2021. "Legitimacy challenges to the liberal world order: Evidence from United Nations speeches, 1970–2018," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 16(4), pages 721-754, October.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cog:poango:v:5:y:2017:i:3:p:16-28. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: António Vieira (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cogitatiopress.com/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.