Meillä ei ole ikuisia ystäviä eikä ikuisia vihollisia. Ikuisia ovat meidän omat etumme. : Suomen suhteet Kiinan kansantasavaltaan 1949 - 1989

"We have neither Eternal Friends nor Eternal Enemies. We have only Eternal Interests .Finland's Relations with China 1949-1989 The study focuses on the relations between Finland and the People s Republic of China from 1949-1989 and examines how a small country became embroiled in international politics, and how, at the same time, international politics affected Finnish-Chinese relations and Finland s China policy formulation. The study can be divided into three sections: relations during the early years, 1949-1960, before the Chinese and Soviet rift became public; the relations during the passive period during the 1960s and 1970s; and the impact of China s Open Door policy on Finland s China policy from 1978-1989. The diplomatically challenging events around Tiananmen Square and the reactions which followed in Finland bring the study to a close. Finland was among the first Western countries to recognise the People s Republic and to establish diplomatic relations with her, thereby giving Finland an excellent position from which to further develop good relations. Finland was also the first Western country to sign a trade agreement with China. These two factors meant that Finland was able to enjoy a special status with China during the 1950s. The special status was further strengthened by the systematic support of the government of Finland for China's UN membership. The solid reputation earned in the 1950s had to carry Finland all the way through to the 1980s. For the two decades in between, during the passive policy period of the 1960s and 1970s, relations between Finland and the Soviet Union also determined the state of foreign relations with China. Interestingly, however, it appeared that President Urho Kekkonen was encouraged by Ambassador Joel Toivola to envisage a more proactive policy towards China, but the Cultural Revolution cut short any such plan for nearly twenty years. Because of the Soviet Union, Finland held on to her passive China policy, even though no such message was ever received from the Soviet Union. In fact, closer relationships between Finland and China were encouraged through diplomatic channels. It was not until the presidency of Mauno Koivisto that the first high-level ministerial visit was made to China when, in 1984, Foreign Minister Paavo Väyrynen visited the People s Republic. Finnish-Chinese relations were lifted to a new level. Foreign Minister Väyrynen, however, was forced to remove the prejudices of the Chinese. In 1985, when the Speaker of the Finnish Parliament, Erkki Pystynen visited China he also discovered that Finland s passive China policy had caused misunderstandings amongst the Chinese politicians. The number of exchanges escalated in the wake of the ground-breaking visit by Foreign Minister Väyrynen: Prime Minister Kalevi Sorsa visited China in 1986 and President Koivisto did so in 1988. President Koivisto stuck to practical, China-friendly policies: his correspondence with Li Peng, the attitude taken by the Finnish government after the Tiananmen Square events and the subsequent choices made by his administration all pointed to a new era in relations with China.

Turing and the Trans-Pacific Partnership: Intellectual Property, Public Health, and Access to Essential Medicines

A recent controversy in the United States over drug pricing by Turing Pharmaceuticals AG has raised larger issues in respect of intellectual property, access to medicines, and the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP). In August 2015, Turing Pharmaceuticals AG – a private biopharmaceutical company with offices in New York, the United States, and Zug, Switzerland - acquired the exclusive marketing rights to Daraprim in the United States from Impax Laboratories Incorporated. Martin Shkreli, Turing’s Founder and Chief Executive Officer, maintained: “The acquisition of Daraprim and our toxoplasmosis research program are significant steps along Turing’s path of bringing novel medications to patients with serious disorders, some of whom often go undiagnosed and untreated.” He emphasised: “We intend to invest in the development of new drug candidates that we hope will yield an even better clinical profile, and also plan to launch an educational effort to help raise awareness and improve diagnosis for patients with toxoplasmosis.” In September 2015, there was much public controversy over the decision of Martin Shkreli to raise the price of a 62 year old drug, Daraprim, from $US13.50 to $US750 a pill. The drug is particularly useful in respect to the treatment and prevention of malaria, and in the treatment of infections in individuals with HIV/AIDS. Daraprim is listed on the World Health Organization’s (WHO) List of Essential Medicines. In the face of much criticism, Martin Shkreli has said that he will reduce the price of Daraprim. He observed: “We've agreed to lower the price on Daraprim to a point that is more affordable and is able to allow the company to make a profit, but a very small profit.” He maintained: “We think these changes will be welcomed.” However, he has been vague and ambiguous about the nature of the commitment. Notably, the lobby group, Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America (PhARMA), disassociated itself from the claims of Turing Pharmaceuticals. The group said: “PhRMA members have a long history of drug discovery and innovation that has led to increased longevity and improved lives for millions of patients.” The group noted: “Turing Pharmaceutical is not a member of PhRMA and we do not embrace either their recent actions or the conduct of their CEO.” The biotechnology peak body Biotechnology Industry Organization also sought to distance itself from Turing Pharmaceuticals. A hot topic: United States political debate about access to affordable medicines This controversy over Daraprim is unusual – given the age of drug concerned. Daraprim is not subject to patent protection. Nonetheless, there remains a monopoly in respect of the marketplace. Drug pricing is not an isolated problem. There have been many concerns about drug pricing – particularly in respect of essential medicines for HIV/AIDS, tuberculosis, and malaria. This recent controversy is part of a larger debate about access to affordable medicines. The dispute raises larger issues about healthcare, consumer rights, competition policy, and trade. The Daraprim controversy has provided impetus for law reform in the US. US Presidential Candidate Hillary Clinton commented: “Price gouging like this in this specialty drug market is outrageous.” In response to her comments, the Nasdaq Biotechnology Index fell sharply. Hillary Clinton has announced a prescription drug reform plan to protect consumers and promote innovation – while putting an end to profiteering. On her campaign site, she has emphasised that “affordable healthcare is a basic human right.” Her rival progressive candidate, Bernie Sanders, was also concerned about the price hike. He wrote a letter to Martin Shkreli, complaining about the price increase for the drug Daraprim. Sanders said: “The enormous, overnight price increase for Daraprim is just the latest in a long list of skyrocketing price increases for certain critical medications.” He has pushed for reforms to intellectual property to make medicines affordable. The TPP and intellectual property The Daraprim controversy and political debate raises further issues about the design of the TPP. The dispute highlights the dangers of extending the rights of pharmaceutical drug companies under intellectual property, investor-state dispute settlement, and drug administration. Recently, the civil society group Knowledge Ecology International published a leaked draft of the Intellectual Property Chapter of the TPP. Knowledge Ecology International Director, James Love, was concerned the text revealed that the US “continues to be the most aggressive supporter of expanded intellectual property rights for drug companies.” He was concerned that “the proposals contained in the TPP will harm consumers and in some cases block innovation.” James Love feared: “In countless ways, the Obama Administration has sought to expand and extend drug monopolies and raise drug prices.” He maintained: “The astonishing collection of proposals pandering to big drug companies make more difficult the task of ensuring access to drugs for the treatment of cancer and other diseases and conditions.” Love called for a different approach to intellectual property and trade: “Rather than focusing on more intellectual property rights for drug companies, and a death-inducing spiral of higher prices and access barriers, the trade agreement could seek new norms to expand the funding of medical research and development (R&D) as a public good, an area where the US has an admirable track record, such as the public funding of research at the National Institutes of Health (NIH) and other federal agencies.” In addition, there has been much concern about the Investment Chapter of the TPP. The investor-state dispute settlement regime would enable foreign investors to challenge government policy making, which affected their investments. In the context of healthcare, there is a worry that pharmaceutical drug companies will deploy their investor rights to challenge public health measures – such as, for instance, initiatives to curb drug pricing and profiteering. Such concerns are not merely theoretical. Eli Lilly has brought an investor action against the Canadian Government over the rejection of its drug patents under the investor-state dispute settlement regime of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA). The Health Annex to the TPP also raises worries that pharmaceutical drug companies will able to object to regulatory procedures in respect of healthcare. It is disappointing that the TPP – in the leaks that we have seen – has only limited recognition of the importance of access to essential medicines. There is a need to ensure that there are proper safeguards to provide access to essential medicines – particularly in respect of HIV/AIDs, malaria, and tuberculosis. Moreover, there must be protection against drug profiteering and price gouging in any trade agreement. There should be strong measures against the abuse of intellectual property rights. The dispute over Turing Pharmaceuticals AG and Daraprim is an important cautionary warning in respect of some of the dangers present in the secret negotiations in respect of the TPP. There is a need to preserve consumer rights, competition policy, and public health in trade negotiations over an agreement covering the Pacific Rim.

The Trans-Pacific partnership protects old companies at the expense of the new

Under this trade agreement, intellectual property will be transformed into a means of protecting the investments of multinational companies in culture, advertising, and medicine, writes Matthew Rimmer. The Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) is a blockbuster trade deal, which will transform the intellectual property of the Pacific Rim. The Australian Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull has argued the trade agreement is a "gigantic foundation stone" for the country's future prosperity. Nonetheless, though the final text remains unreleased, it's clear from what we do know that the Intellectual Property Chapter is set to protect legacy intellectual property industries - rather than support disruptive technologies and dynamic innovation.

The Trans-Pacific Partnership, Copyright Law and Education

There is much concern across the Pacific rim about the impact of the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) upon public education. The secretive trade agreement involves a dozen nations across the Pacific, including Australia, New Zealand, Canada and the United States, and Indonesia may soon join. Although the text was finalised at the Atlanta talks in October 2015, the Agreement has not yet been made public. (The NTEU has joined with other unions and civil society organisations in calling for the agreement to be revealed to facilitate public debate before any decisions are made by Parliament.) So whilst we cannot examine all the text that may impact on public educations, WikiLeaks has published the final version of the Intellectual Property Chapter of the TPP. The Intellectual Property Chapter of the TPP alone, with its copyright term extension, limits on copyright exceptions, and enforcement measures, will have a significant impact for educators and public education.

Greenwashing the Trans-Pacific Partnership: Fossil fuels, the environment, and climate change

There has been much controversy over the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) – a plurilateral trade agreement involving a dozen nations from throughout the Pacific Rim – and its impact upon the environment, biodiversity, and climate change. The secretive treaty negotiations involve Australia and New Zealand; countries from South East Asia such as Brunei Darussalam, Malaysia, Singapore, Vietnam, and Japan; the South American nations of Peru and Chile; and the members of the 1994 North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), Canada, Mexico and the United States. There was an agreement reached between the parties in October 2015. The participants asserted: ‘We expect this historic agreement to promote economic growth, support higher-paying jobs; enhance innovation, productivity and competitiveness; raise living standards; reduce poverty in our countries; and to promote transparency, good governance, and strong labor and environmental protections.’ The final texts of the agreement were published in November 2015. There has been discussion as to whether other countries – such as Indonesia, the Philippines, and South Korea – will join the deal. There has been much debate about the impact of this proposed treaty upon intellectual property, the environment, biodiversity and climate change. There have been similar concerns about the Trans-Atlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) – a proposed trade agreement between the United States and the European Union. In 2011, the United States Trade Representative developed a Green Paper on trade, conservation, and the environment in the context of the TPP. In its rhetoric, the United States Trade Representative has maintained that it has been pushing for strong, enforceable environmental standards in the TPP. In a key statement in 2014, the United States Trade Representative Mike Froman insisted: ‘The United States’ position on the environment in the Trans-Pacific Partnership negotiations is this: environmental stewardship is a core American value, and we will insist on a robust, fully enforceable environment chapter in the TPP or we will not come to agreement.’ The United States Trade Representative maintained: ‘Our proposals in the TPP are centered around the enforcement of environmental laws, including those implementing multilateral environmental agreements (MEAs) in TPP partner countries, and also around trailblazing, first-ever conservation proposals that will raise standards across the region’. Moreover, the United States Trade Representative asserted: ‘Furthermore, our proposals would enhance international cooperation and create new opportunities for public participation in environmental governance and enforcement.’ The United States Trade Representative has provided this public outline of the Environment Chapter of the TPP: A meaningful outcome on environment will ensure that the agreement appropriately addresses important trade and environment challenges and enhances the mutual supportiveness of trade and environment. The Trans-Pacific Partnership countries share the view that the environment text should include effective provisions on trade-related issues that would help to reinforce environmental protection and are discussing an effective institutional arrangement to oversee implementation and a specific cooperation framework for addressing capacity building needs. They also are discussing proposals on new issues, such as marine fisheries and other conservation issues, biodiversity, invasive alien species, climate change, and environmental goods and services. Mark Linscott, an assistant Trade Representative testified: ‘An environment chapter in the TPP should strengthen country commitments to enforce their environmental laws and regulations, including in areas related to ocean and fisheries governance, through the effective enforcement obligation subject to dispute settlement.’ Inside US Trade has commented: ‘While not initially expected to be among the most difficult areas, the environment chapter has emerged as a formidable challenge, partly due to disagreement over the United States proposal to make environmental obligations binding under the TPP dispute settlement mechanism’. Joshua Meltzer from the Brookings Institute contended that the trade agreement could be a boon for the protection of the environment in the Pacific Rim: Whether it is depleting fisheries, declining biodiversity or reduced space in the atmosphere for Greenhouse Gas emissions, the underlying issue is resource scarcity. And in a world where an additional 3 billion people are expected to enter the middle class over the next 15 years, countries need to find new and creative ways to cooperate in order to satisfy the legitimate needs of their population for growth and opportunity while using resources in a manner that is sustainable for current and future generations. The TPP parties already represent a diverse range of developed and developing countries. Should the TPP become a free trade agreement of the Asia-Pacific region, it will include the main developed and developing countries and will be a strong basis for building a global consensus on these trade and environmental issues. The TPP has been promoted by its proponents as a boon to the environment. The United States Trade Representative has maintained that the TPP will protect the environment: ‘The United States’ position on the environment in the TPP negotiations is this: environmental stewardship is a core American value, and we will insist on a robust, fully enforceable environment chapter in the TPP or we will not come to agreement.’ The United States Trade Representative discussed ‘Trade for a Greener World’ on World Environment Day. Andrew Robb, at the time the Australian Trade and Investment Minister, vowed that the TPP will contain safeguards for the protection of the environment. In November 2015, after the release of the TPP text, Rohan Patel, the Special Assistant to the President and Deputy Director of Intergovernmental Affairs, sought to defend the environmental credentials of the TPP. He contended that the deal had been supported by the Nature Conservancy, the International Fund for Animal Welfare, the Joint Ocean Commission Initiative, the World Wildlife Fund, and World Animal Protection. The United States Congress, though, has been conflicted by the United States Trade Representative’s arguments about the TPP and the environment. In 2012, members of the United States Congress - including Senator Ron Wyden (D-OR), Olympia Snowe (R-ME), and John Kerry (D-MA) – wrote a letter, arguing that the trade agreement needs to provide strong protection for the environment: ‘We believe that a '21st century agreement' must have an environment chapter that guarantees ongoing sustainable trade and creates jobs, and this is what American businesses and consumers want and expect also.’ The group stressed that ‘A binding and enforceable TPP environment chapter that stands up for American interests is critical to our support of the TPP’. The Congressional leaders maintained: ‘We believe the 2007 bipartisan congressional consensus on environmental provisions included in recent trade agreements should serve as the framework for the environment chapter of the TPP.’ In 2013, senior members of the Democratic leadership expressed their opposition to granting President Barack Obama a fast-track authority in respect of the TPP House of Representatives Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi said: ‘No on fast-track – Camp-Baucus – out of the question.’ Senator Majority leader Harry Reid commented: ‘I’m against Fast-Track: Everyone would be well-advised to push this right now.’ Senator Elizabeth Warren has been particularly critical of the process and the substance of the negotiations in the TPP: From what I hear, Wall Street, pharmaceuticals, telecom, big polluters and outsourcers are all salivating at the chance to rig the deal in the upcoming trade talks. So the question is, Why are the trade talks secret? You’ll love this answer. Boy, the things you learn on Capitol Hill. I actually have had supporters of the deal say to me ‘They have to be secret, because if the American people knew what was actually in them, they would be opposed. Think about that. Real people, people whose jobs are at stake, small-business owners who don’t want to compete with overseas companies that dump their waste in rivers and hire workers for a dollar a day—those people, people without an army of lobbyists—they would be opposed. I believe if people across this country would be opposed to a particular trade agreement, then maybe that trade agreement should not happen. The Finance Committee in the United States Congress deliberated over the Trans-Pacific Partnership negotiations in 2014. The new chair Ron Wyden has argued that there needs to be greater transparency in trade. Nonetheless, he has mooted the possibility of a ‘smart-track’ to reconcile the competing demands of the Obama Administration, and United States Congress. Wyden insisted: ‘The new breed of trade challenges spawned over the last generation must be addressed in imaginative new policies and locked into enforceable, ambitious, job-generating trade agreements.’ He emphasized that such agreements ‘must reflect the need for a free and open Internet, strong labor rights and environmental protections.’ Elder Democrat Sander Levin warned that the TPP failed to provide proper protection for the environment: The TPP parties are considering a different structure to protect the environment than the one adopted in the May 10 Agreement, which directly incorporated seven multilateral environmental agreements into the text of past trade agreements. While the form is less important than the substance, the TPP must provide an overall level of environmental protection that upholds and builds upon the May 10 standard, including fully enforceable obligations. But many of our trading partners are actively seeking to weaken the text to the point of falling short of that standard, including on key issues like conservation. Nonetheless, 2015, President Barack Obama was able to secure the overall support of the United States Congress for his ‘fast-track’ authority. This was made possible by the Republicans and dissident Democrats. Notably, Oregon Senator Ron Wyden switched sides, and was transformed from a critic of the TPP to an apologist for the TPP. For their part, green political parties and civil society organisations have been concerned about the secretive nature of the negotiations; and the substantive implications of the treaty for the environment. Environmental groups and climate advocates have been sceptical of the environmental claims made by the White House for the TPP. The Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand, the Australian Greens and the Green Party of Canada have released a joint declaration on the TPP observing: ‘More than just another trade agreement, the TPP provisions could hinder access to safe, affordable medicines, weaken local content rules for media, stifle high-tech innovation, and even restrict the ability of future governments to legislate for the good of public health and the environment’. In the United States, civil society groups such as the Sierra Club, Public Citizen, WWF, the Friends of the Earth, the Rainforest Action Network and 350.org have raised concerns about the TPP and the environment. Allison Chin, President of the Sierra Club, complained about the lack of transparency, due process, and public participation in the TPP talks: ‘This is a stealth affront to the principles of our democracy.’ Maude Barlow’s The Council of Canadians has also been concerned about the TPP and environmental justice. New Zealand Sustainability Council executive director Simon Terry said the agreement showed ‘minimal real gains for nature’. A number of organisations have joined a grand coalition of civil society organisations, which are opposed to the grant of a fast-track. On the 15th January 2013, WikiLeaks released the draft Environment Chapter of the TPP - along with a report by the Chairs of the Environmental Working Group. Julian Assange, WikiLeaks' publisher, stated: ‘Today's WikiLeaks release shows that the public sweetener in the TPP is just media sugar water.’ He observed: ‘The fabled TPP environmental chapter turns out to be a toothless public relations exercise with no enforcement mechanism.’ This article provides a critical examination of the draft Environment Chapter of the TPP. The overall argument of the article is that the Environment Chapter of the TPP is an exercise in greenwashing – it is a public relations exercise by the United States Trade Representative, rather than a substantive regime for the protection of the environment in the Pacific Rim. Greenwashing has long been a problem in commerce, in which companies making misleading and deceptive claims about the environment. In his 2012 book, Greenwash: Big Brands and Carbon Scams, Guy Pearse considers the rise of green marketing and greenwashing. Government greenwashing is also a significant issue. In his book Storms of My Grandchildren, the climate scientist James Hansen raises his concerns about government greenwashing. Such a problem is apparent with the TPP – in which there was a gap between the assertions of the United States Government, and the reality of the agreement. This article contends that the TPP fails to meet the expectations created by President Barack Obama, the White House, and the United States Trade Representative about the environmental value of the agreement. First, this piece considers the relationship of the TPP to multilateral environmental treaties. Second, it explores whether the provisions in respect of the environment are enforceable. Third, this article examines the treatment of trade and biodiversity in the TPP. Fourth, this study considers the question of marine capture fisheries. Fifth, there is an evaluation of the cursory text in the TPP on conservation. Sixth, the article considers trade in environmental services under the TPP. Seventh, this article highlights the tensions between the TPP and substantive international climate action. It is submitted that the TPP undermines effective and meaningful government action and regulation in respect of climate change. The conclusion also highlights that a number of other chapters of the TPP will impact upon the protection of the environment – including the Investment Chapter, the Intellectual Property Chapter, the Technical Barriers to Trade Chapter, and the text on public procurement.

NAFTA Itunaren ondorioak Mexikoko ekonomian

The objective of this Final Project focuses on explaining how the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) has affected the economy of Mexico. To achieve this, we have conducted a documentary research based on analysis of existing general and specific scientific literature on the subject from the objectives and hypotheses a priori. The framework is divided into several sections where the following issues are addressed: the processes of negotiation and adjustment plans that occurred before to signing the agreement; the aim and purpose of the agreement; the consequences of the covenant in the economy of Mexico, considering the decomposition of the status and importance of immigration; and finally, an analysis of the current situation of Mexico. This paper concludes with a set of final thoughts with hypothesis testing, and a theory about how different countries should cooperate in order to have a beneficial development in all parties.

Introduction: The apparel industry and North American economic integration

The economic and social consequences of international trade agreements have become a major area of inquiry in development studies in recent years. As evidenced by the energetic protests surrounding the Seattle meeting of the World Trade Organization (WTO) in December 1999 and the controversy about China's admission to the WTO, such agreements have also become a focus of political conflict in both the developed and developing countries. At issue are questions of job gains and job losses in different regions, prices paid by consumers, acceptable standards for wages and working conditions in transnational manufacturing industries, and the quality of the environment. All these concerns have arisen with regard to the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) and can be addressed through an examination of changes in the dynamics of the apparel industry in the post-NAFTA period.1 In this book, we examine the evolution of the apparel industry in North America in order to address some of these questions as they pertain to North America, with an eye toward the broader implications of our findings. We also consider the countries of the Caribbean Basin and Central America, whose textile and apparel goods are now allowed to enter the U.S. market on the same basis as those from Canada and Mexico (Odessey 2000). © 2009 by Temple University Press. All rights reserved.

NAFTA and the apparel commodity chain: Corporate strategies, interfirm networks, and industrial upgrading

The apparel industry is one of the oldest and largest export industries in the world, with global trade and production networks that connect firms and workers in countries at all levels of economic development. This chapter examines the impact of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) as one of the most recent and significant developments to affect patterns of international trade and production in the apparel and textile industries. Tr ade policies are changing the institutional environment in which firms in this industry operate, and companies are responding to these changes with new strategies designed to increase their profitability and strengthen their control over the apparel commodity chain. Our hypothesis is that lead firms are establishing qualitatively different kinds of regional production networks in North America from those that existed prior to NAFTA, and that these networks have important consequences for industrial upgrading in the Mexican textile and apparel industries. Post-NAFTA crossborder production arrangements include full-package networks that link lead firms in the United States with apparel and textile manufacturers, contractors, and suppliers in Mexico. Full-package production is increasing the local value added provided by the apparel commodity chain in Mexico and creating new opportunities for Mexican firms and workers. The chapter is divided into four main sections. The first section uses trade and production data to analyze shifts in global apparel flows, highlighting the emergence and consolidation of a regional trade bloc in North America. The second section discusses the process of industrial upgrading in the apparel industry and introduces a distinction between assembly and full-package production networks. The third section includes case studies based on published industry sources and strategic interviews with several lead companies whose strategies are largely responsible for the shifting trade patterns and NAFTA-inspired cross-border production networks discussed in the previous section. The fourth section considers the implications of these changes for employment in the North American apparel industry. © 2009 by Temple University Press. All rights reserved.

The Terror that Underpins the “Peace”: The Political Economy of Colombia's Paramilitary Demobilization Process

Studies on terrorism have traditionally focused on non-state actors who direct violence against liberal states. These studies also tend to focus on political motivations and, therefore, have neglected the economic functions of terrorism. This article challenges the divorce of the political and economic spheres by highlighting how states can use terrorism to realise interconnected political and economic goals. To demonstrate this, we take the case of the paramilitary demobilisation process in Colombia and show how it relates to the US-Colombian free trade agreement. We argue that the demobilisation process fulfils a dual role. First, the process aims to improve the image of the Colombian government required to pass the controversial free trade agreement through US Congress to protect large amounts of US investment in the country. Second, the demobilisation process serves to mask clear continuities in paramilitary terror that serve mutually supportive political and economic functions for US investment in Colombia.

A review of the global pesticide legislation and the scale of challenge in reaching the global harmonization of food safety standards

Pesticide use is important in agriculture to protect crops and improve productivity. However, they have the potential to cause adverse human health or environmental effects, dependent on exposure levels. This review examines existing pesticide legislation worldwide, focusing on the level of harmonisation, and impacts of differing legislation on food safety and trade. Pesticide legislation varies greatly worldwide as countries have different requirements guidelines and legal limits for plant protection. Developed nations have more stringent regulations than developing countries, which lack the resources and expertise to adequately implement and enforce legislation. Global differences in pesticide legislation act as a technical barrier to trade. International parties such as the European Union (EU), Codex Alimentarius Commission (Codex), and North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) have attempted to harmonise pesticide legislation by providing maximum residue limits (MRLs), but globally these limits remain variable. Globally harmonised pesticide standards would serve to increase productivity, profits and trade, and enhance the ability to protect public health and the environment. 

Intellectual property rights and the campaign for access to essential medicines : the advocacy role assumed by Médecins Sans Frontières

Non-governmental organizations and transnational networks have been increasingly successful a t gaining influence within issue areas traditionally controlled by the state. In many instances, non-state actors have been instrumental in forcing issues onto the global agenda, have aided in the development or transformation of global regimes, and have participated in securing state compliance for the adoption of new international norms. This paper argues that, consistent with social constructivist theory, ideas are important in influencing state preferences and change may be possible when certain factors are present. I f non-state actors can influence states, it is meaningful to understand how this happens. This paper focuses on a campaign led by Medecins Sans Frontieres that began in the late 1990s to acquire affordable medicines for patients in developing states that could not afford patented drugs. The campaign reached a measure of success in that member states of the World Trade Organization re-negotiated contested terms and meanings within the trade agreement for intellectual property rights and allowed concessions that would benefit lower income states. What factors contributed to the success of the campaign? And what were the most important factors - the issue, the actors or the mechanisms used?

L'évolution de la réglementation internationale des investissements directs étrangers dans les Amériques : vers de nouvelles perspectives ?

"Mémoire présenté à la Faculté des études supérieures en vue de l'obtention du grade de LL.M. Droit Dans le cadre du programme de Maîtrise en droit(LL.M.) 2-325-1-0 en option recherche et droit des affaires"

L'élimination des barrières non tarifaires au commerce interprovincial et l'Accord sur le commerce intérieur du Canada

L'Accord sur le commerce intérieur est un accord de libre-échange pancanadien visant l'abaissement des barrières non tarifiaires au commerce interprovincial. La notion de barrières au commerce interprovincial, en soi, suscite maintes controverses. Aucun consensus n'existe à savoir quelles sont les barrières au commerce, quelles en sont leurs coûts, mais surtout, s'il faut les abaisser. La grande majorité des experts concoivent que beaucoup de ces barrières non tarifaires au commerce se retrouvent dans le secteur des produits agroalimentaires. À ce titre, ce domaine est, depuis plusieurs décennies, traditionnellement protectionniste et constitue donc un marché des plus difficiles à intégrer. Cette réalité prévaut tant au niveau international qu'interprovincial. Au Canada, l'outil privilégié après des années de négociations constitutionnelles infructueuses fut l'Accord sur le commerce intérieur. Cet accord, aux allures de traité international, vise l'intégration graduelle du marché interne canadien. La volonté de devenir un marché intégré et compétitif au niveau mondial se heurte à la détermination des provinces de protéger leur souveraineté législative. Ainsi, l'outil d'ouverture du marché que constitue l'Accord sur le commerce intérieur, qui navigue entre ces positions antagonistes, fut rédigé de manière assez complexe et peu accessible. Le contexte politique et constitutionnel particulier dans lequel se sont inscrites les négociations de cet accord a ainsi teinté le texte de l'accord et sa rédaction. En plus de sa simplification, plusieurs solutions intervenant sous plusieurs facettes de l'Accord sur le commerce intérieur permettraient à ce dernier de se voir plus efficace dans sa mission d'intégration du marché interprovincial canadien, en plus d'augmenter sa notoriété, sa crédibilité et de permettre une meilleure mise en œuvre.

Essays in open economy macroeconomics with borrowing frictions

Cette thèse comporte trois essais en macroéconomie en économie ouverte et commerce international. Je considère tour à tour les questions suivantes: sous quelles conditions est-il optimal pour un pays de former une union économique? (essai 1); l'augmentation de la dispersion transversale des avoirs extérieurs nets des pays est-elle compatible avec une dispersion relativement stable des taux d'investissement? (essai 2); le risque de perte de marché à l'exportation du fait de l'existence des zones de commerce préférentiel joue t-il un rôle dans la décision des pays exclus de négocier des accords commerciaux à leur tour? (essai 3). Le premier essai examine les conditions d'optimalité d'une union économique. Il s'intéresse à une motivation particulière: le partage du risque lié aux fluctuations du revenu. Dans la situation initiale, les pays ont très peu d'opportunités pour partager le risque à cause des frictions: les marchés financiers internationaux sont incomplets et il n'y pas de mécanisme pour faire respecter les contrats de crédit entre pays. Dans ce contexte, une union économique apparait comme un arrangement qui pallie à ces frictions entre les pays membres seulement. Cependant, l'union dans son ensemble continue de faire face à ces frictions lorsqu'elle échange avec le reste du monde. L'arbitrage clé dans le modèle est le suivant. D'un coté, l'intégration économique permet un meilleur partage du risque entre pays membres et la possibilité pour le partenaire pauvre d'utiliser la ligne de crédit du partenaire riche en cas de besoin. De l'autre coté, l'union peut faire face à une limite de crédit plus restrictive parce que résilier la dette extérieure est moins coûteux pour les membres l'union. De plus, le fait que le partenaire pauvre peut utiliser la limite de crédit du partenaire riche génère une externalité négative pour ce dernier qui se retrouve plus fréquemment contraint au niveau des marchés internationaux des capitaux. En conformité avec les faits observés sur l'intégration économique, le modèle prédit que les unions économiques sont relativement peu fréquentes, sont plus susceptibles d'être créées parmi des pays homogènes, et généralement riches. Le deuxième essai porte sur la dispersion des avoirs extérieurs nets et la relation avec la dispersion des taux d'investissement. Au cours des récentes décennies, la dispersion croissante des déséquilibres extérieurs et les niveaux record atteints par certaines grandes économies ont reçu une attention considérable. On pourrait attribuer ce phénomène à une réduction des barrières aux mouvements internationaux des capitaux. Mais dans ce cas, il est légitime de s'attendre à une augmentation de la dispersion au niveau des taux d'investissement; ceci, parce que le financement des besoins en investissements constitue une raison fondamentale pour laquelle les pays échangent les capitaux. Les données indiquent cependant que la dispersion des taux d'investissement est restée relativement stable au cours des récentes décennies. Pour réconcilier ces faits, je construis un modèle d'équilibre général dynamique et stochastique où les pays sont hétérogènes en raison des chocs idiosyncratiques à leurs niveaux de productivité totale des facteurs. Au niveau des marchés internationaux des capitaux, le menu des actifs disponibles est restreint à une obligation sans risque et il n'y a pas de mécanisme pour faire respecter les contrats de crédit entre pays. A tout moment, un pays peut choisir de résilier sa dette extérieure sous peine d'exclusion financière et d'un coût direct. Ce coût direct reflète les canaux autres que l'exclusion financière à travers lesquels les pays en défaut sont pénalisés. Lorsque le modèle est calibré pour reproduire l'évolution de la dispersion transversale des avoirs extérieurs nets, il produit une dispersion relativement stable des taux d'investissement. La raison principale est que les incitations que les pays ont à investir sont liées à la productivité. Avec l'intégration financière, même si les opportunités d'emprunt se sont multipliées, les incitations à investir n'ont pas beaucoup changé. Ce qui permet de générer une dispersion accrue de la position des avoirs extérieurs nets des pays avec une dispersion relativement stable des taux d'investissement. Le troisième essai analyse un aspect de l'interdépendance dans la formation des accords commerciaux préférentiels: j'examine empiriquement si le risque de diversion des exportations en faveur des pays membres des zones de commerce préférentiel est un facteur déterminant dans la décision des pays exclus de ces accords de négocier un accord à leur tour. Je construis un indicateur qui mesure le potentiel de diversion des exportations auquel font face les pays et estime un modèle probit de formation des zones de commerce préférentiel créées entre 1961 et 2005. Les résultats confirment que les pays confrontés à un plus grand potentiel de détournement des échanges sont plus susceptibles de former une zone de commerce préférentiel à leur tour.

Les répercussions du DR-CAFTA sur l'accès aux médicaments et la santé des populations au Guatemala : la perspective d'acteurs clefs

Mémoire numérisé par la Division de la gestion de documents et des archives de l'Université de Montréal.