Free Trade, Environment, Agriculture, and Plurilateral Treaties: The Ambivalent Example of Mercosur, CETA, and the EU–Vietnam Free Trade Agreement

Katharine Heyl, Felix Ekardt, Paula Roos, Jessica Stubenrauch and Beatrice Garske
Additional contact information
Katharine Heyl: Research Unit Sustainability and Climate Policy, 04229 Leipzig, Germany
Felix Ekardt: Research Unit Sustainability and Climate Policy, 04229 Leipzig, Germany
Paula Roos: Research Unit Sustainability and Climate Policy, 04229 Leipzig, Germany
Jessica Stubenrauch: Research Unit Sustainability and Climate Policy, 04229 Leipzig, Germany
Beatrice Garske: Research Unit Sustainability and Climate Policy, 04229 Leipzig, Germany

Sustainability, 2021, vol. 13, issue 6, 1-24

Abstract: Transnational trade holds opportunities for prosperity and development if accompanied by a robust political and legal framework. Yet, where such a framework is missing, transnational trade is frequently associated with, among others, negative impacts on the environment. Applying a legal comparison, this article assesses if recent free trade agreements, i.e., the Mercosur Agreement, CETA and the EU–Vietnam Free Trade Agreement, negotiated by the European Union, have been underpinned with effective environmental standards so that they are in line with global environmental goals and avoid detrimental effects on climate and biodiversity. Besides that, we evaluate the extent to which these agreements at least enable and incentivise environmental pioneering policies in the trading Parties. In particular, we discuss the likely impacts of the agreements on the agricultural sector. The analysis finds that, while a few mandatory standards concerning, e.g., deforestation have been established, overall, the agreements lack a comprehensive legal framework to uphold/enhance environmental protection. Moreover, weak dispute settlement mechanisms to ensure compliance with sustainability measures limits their effectiveness. In addition, the provisions on regulatory cooperation and investor-state dispute settlement are likely to negatively affect the decision-making processes and (thus) discourage ecological pioneering policies in the trading Parties. Hence, there is a long way to go so that transnational trade is compatible with global environmental goals.

Keywords: trade; globalisation; Paris agreement; convention on biological diversity; agriculture; free trade agreements; CETA; Mercosur; EU–Vietnam free trade agreement; climate change (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: O13 Q Q0 Q2 Q3 Q5 Q56 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2021
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (3)

Downloads: (external link)
https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/6/3153/pdf (application/pdf)
https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/6/3153/ (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:13:y:2021:i:6:p:3153-:d:516228

Access Statistics for this article

Sustainability is currently edited by Ms. Alexandra Wu

More articles in Sustainability from MDPI
Bibliographic data for series maintained by MDPI Indexing Manager ().