IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/pugtwp/331098.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Implications of EU Accession of Ten New Members: The Copenhagen Agreement

Author

Listed:
  • Jensen, Hans G.
  • Frandsen, Søren E.

Abstract

At the Copenhagen European Council Meeting in December 2002 the European Union (EU) decided to enlarge the EU with ten new Member States. As anticipated negotiations on the appropriations for agriculture, structural operations and administration for the new Member States were difficult but a comprise was reached. In this study we present the economic impacts of the Accession for each of the EU-25 Member States. Results include impacts for agricultural production and trade, the EU budget, and economic welfare. The analysis shows that supply responses will be very different across acceding countries, and that there is solid potential for increasing agricultural production in a number of these countries. There will be marginal negative effects on EU-15 members’ agricultural production. Related to the WTO discussion, the enlargement of the EU seems primarily to be an intra European (distributional) story with minor impacts on countries outside Europe. It is found that the overall economic welfare losses in EU-15 member countries are minimal, despite increases in their budgetary contributions. Therefore in economic terms the enlargement of the EU with the CEECs is affordable even within the existing design of the Common Agricultural Policy. This does not, however, remove the need for reforming the CAP along the lines, as recently proposed by the EU Commission – reforms that would enhance economic efficiency in the enlarged European Union as well as being a constructive step towards compromise in WTO negotiations.

Suggested Citation

  • Jensen, Hans G. & Frandsen, Søren E., 2003. "Implications of EU Accession of Ten New Members: The Copenhagen Agreement," Conference papers 331098, Purdue University, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Global Trade Analysis Project.
  • Handle: RePEc:ags:pugtwp:331098
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/331098/files/1538.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Brown, D. & Deardorff & A. & Djankov, S. & Stern, R., 1995. "An Economic Assessment of the Integration of Czechoslovakia, Hungary and Poland into the European Union," Papers 8, American Institute for Contemporary German Studies-.
    2. Winters, L. Alan, 1994. "The Liberalization of European Steel Trade," CEPR Discussion Papers 1002, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    3. Anders Hoffmann, 2000. "The gains from partial completion of the single market," Review of World Economics (Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv), Springer;Institut für Weltwirtschaft (Kiel Institute for the World Economy), vol. 136(4), pages 601-630, December.
    4. Arjan Lejour & Ruud de Mooij & Richard Nahuis, 2001. "EU enlargement: economic implications for countries and industries," CPB Document 11, CPB Netherlands Bureau for Economic Policy Analysis.
    5. Harrison, Glenn & Rutherford, Thomas & Tarr, David & DEC, 1994. "Product standards, imperfect competition and completion of the market in the European Union," Policy Research Working Paper Series 1293, The World Bank.
    6. repec:oup:ecpoli:v:12:y:1997:i:24:p:125-176 is not listed on IDEAS
    7. Patrick A. Messerlin, 2001. "Measuring the Costs of Protection in Europe: European Commercial Policy in the 2000s," Peterson Institute Press: All Books, Peterson Institute for International Economics, number 102, October.
    8. Richard E. Baldwin & Joseph F. Francois & Richard Portes, 1997. "The costs and benefits of eastern enlargement: the impact on the EU and central Europe," Economic Policy, CEPR, CESifo, Sciences Po;CES;MSH, vol. 12(24), pages 125-176.
    9. Paul Brenton & John Sheehy & Marc Vancauteren, 2014. "Technical Barriers to Trade in the European Union: Importance for Accession Countries," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: INTERNATIONAL TRADE, DISTRIBUTION AND DEVELOPMENT Empirical Studies of Trade Policies, chapter 6, pages 105-124, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    10. Arjan M. Lejour & Ruud A. De Mooij & Richard Nahuis, 2001. "EU Enlargement: Economic Implications for Countries and Industries," CESifo Working Paper Series 585, CESifo.
    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. McDonald, Scott & Sonmez, Yontem, 2004. "Augmenting the GTAP Database with Data on Inter-Regional Transactions," Conference papers 331233, Purdue University, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Global Trade Analysis Project.

    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. Maryla Maliszewska, 2004. "EU Enlargement: Benefits of the Single Market Expansion for Current and New Member States," CASE Network Studies and Analyses 0273, CASE-Center for Social and Economic Research.
    2. Fritz Breuss, 2002. "Benefits and Dangers of EU Enlargement," Empirica, Springer;Austrian Institute for Economic Research;Austrian Economic Association, vol. 29(3), pages 245-274, September.
    3. Lúcio Vinhas de Souza, 2004. "A Wider Europe: Trade Relations Between an Enlarged EU and the Russian Federation," CASE Network Studies and Analyses 0279, CASE-Center for Social and Economic Research.
    4. Fritz Breuss, 2006. "Warum wächst die Wirtschaft in Österreich rascher als in Deutschland?," WIFO Working Papers 280, WIFO.
    5. Dimitris Kallioras & George Petrakos & Georgios Fotopoulos, 2005. "Economic integration, regional structural change and cohesion in the EU new member-states," ERSA conference papers ersa05p383, European Regional Science Association.
    6. Arjan Lejour & Vladimir Solanic & Paul Tang, 2009. "EU Accession and Income Growth: An Empirical Approach," Transition Studies Review, Springer;Central Eastern European University Network (CEEUN), vol. 16(1), pages 127-144, May.
    7. Arjan Lejour & Ruud de Mooij & Richard Nahuis, 2001. "EU enlargement: economic implications for countries and industries," CPB Document 11, CPB Netherlands Bureau for Economic Policy Analysis.
    8. Lee, Hiro & van der Mensbrugghe, Dominique, 2006. "Deep integration and its impacts on non-members: EU enlargement and East Asia," MPRA Paper 82286, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    9. Annekatrin Niebuhr, 2008. "The impact of EU enlargement on European border regions," International Journal of Public Policy, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 3(3/4), pages 163-186.
    10. Jutta Gunther & Gresa Latifi & Judyta Lubacha-Sember & Daniel Tobelmann, 2017. "Scientific Cooperation in a German-Polish Border Region in the Light of EU Enlargement," Foresight and STI Governance (Foresight-Russia till No. 3/2015), National Research University Higher School of Economics, vol. 11(1), pages 42-53.
    11. Eftychia Tsanana & Constantinos Katrakilidis, 2014. "Do Balkan economies catch up with EU? New evidence from panel unit root analysis," Empirica, Springer;Austrian Institute for Economic Research;Austrian Economic Association, vol. 41(4), pages 641-662, November.
    12. Veliko Dimitrov & Vladimir Dubrovskiy & Irina Orlova, 2007. "Institutional Harmonization in the Context of Relations Between the EU and Its Eastern Neighbours: Costs and Benefits and Methodologies of Their Measurement," CASE Network Reports 0075, CASE-Center for Social and Economic Research.
    13. Nuno Crespo & Maria Paula Fontoura & Frank Barry, 2004. "EU Enlargement and the Portuguese Economy," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 27(6), pages 781-802, June.
    14. José Manuel Martins Caetano & Aurora Galego & Elsa Vaz & Isabel Vieira & Carlos Vieira, 2002. "The Impacts of the Eurozone´s Eastward Enlargement on Trade and FDI: Survey of the Literature," Economics Working Papers 1_2002, University of Évora, Department of Economics (Portugal).
    15. Hagemejer Jan & Michałek Jan J. & Svatko Pavel, 2021. "Economic impact of the EU Eastern enlargement on New Member States revisited: The role of economic institutions," Central European Economic Journal, Sciendo, vol. 8(55), pages 126-143, January.
    16. Dmytro Boyarchuk & Inna Golodniuk & Mykyta Mykhaylychenko & Wojciech Paczynski & Anna Tsarenko & Vitaly Vavryschuk, 2006. "Prospects for EU-Ukraine Economic Relations," CASE Network Reports 0066, CASE-Center for Social and Economic Research.
    17. Doyle, Orla & Fidrmuc, Jan, 2006. "Who favors enlargement?: Determinants of support for EU membership in the candidate countries' referenda," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 22(2), pages 520-543, June.
    18. Katarzyna Zawalinska, 1999. "Agriculture of the Czech Republic, Hungary and Poland in Perspective of Joining Common Agricultural Policy - with Some Fiscal Remarks," CASE Network Studies and Analyses 0178, CASE-Center for Social and Economic Research.
    19. Wilfried Puwein & Fritz Breuss & Peter Huber & Peter Mayerhofer & Gerhard Palme & Fritz Schebeck & Jan Stankovsky, 2002. "Auswirkungen der EU-Erweiterung auf die Wirtschaft Österreichs," WIFO Studies, WIFO, number 23169, April.
    20. Scrieciu, Silviu Serban, 2004. "Assessing the Economic Impacts of Incorporating Romania's Agricultural and Food Sectors into EU's Customs Union: An Applied General Equilibrium Approach," Development Economics and Public Policy Working Papers 30543, University of Manchester, Institute for Development Policy and Management (IDPM).

    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:ags:pugtwp:331098. 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: AgEcon Search (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/gtpurus.html .

    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.