Purposefully Triggering Unintended Consequences: the European Commission and the Uncertain Future of the EU-ACP Partnership

ABSTRACT

The EU’s proposal to renew the EU-ACP Agreement in spite of a number of signals pointing in the opposite direction is, inter alia, the unintended consequence of independent decisions taken in three different policy areas (trade, environment, and foreign and security affairs). The common unintended consequence that the three decisions shared would not have materialised if the European Commission had not purposefully triggered it to justify its vision of future EU-ACP relations. These findings challenge the prevailing and superficial usage of the notion of the unintended as a synonym for unanticipated and undesirable, and demonstrate that unintended consequences do not necessarily presuppose lack of anticipation, but may well be the result of calculation by policymakers.

KEYWORDS:

• Unintended consequences
• EU-ACP relations
• Cotonou Agreement
• Paris Agreement
• Economic Partnership Agreements
• EU Global Strategy

Notes

¹ For a systematic review of the literature, see Carbone (2013b).

² In parallel, an internal evaluation of the first 15 years of the Cotonou Agreement was also conducted.

³ In one of the few studies of unintended consequences in the area of EU external relations, Stevens (2006) claims that the European Union’s aggressive stance in the EPA negotiations antagonised ACP countries and regions and undermined the promotion of regional integration as well as other crucial political, environmental and social norms.

⁴ Along similar lines, Kejzer and Bartels (2017, 3) argue that the “provisions in EPAs that feature cross-references to the Cotonou Agreement have had the unintended effect of contributing to a felt need to continue the existing EU and all-ACP partnership”.

⁵ The first to use this expression was the chief negotiator of the United States, Todd Stern, at a press briefing on 7 December 2015: “There is a large coalition for high ambition. I referred to it as a high-ambition coalition.”

⁶ It should be noted that the European External Action Service (EEAS) was co-leader with DG DevCo, which however remained chef de file.

⁷ It is worth remembering that the EEAS is organised around geographical divisions with ACP countries split into three different directorates.

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Maurizio Carbone

Maurizio Carbone is Professor of International Relations and Development and Jean Monnet Professor of EU External Policies at the University of Glasgow, UK.