Between control and independence: computational modelling within EC’s trade sustainability impact assessments

References

• Acs S, Ostlaender N, Listorti G, Hradec J, Hardy M, Smits P, Hordjik L. 2019. Modelling for EU policy support: impact assessments. Publications Office of the European Union, EUR 29832 EN.
   Google Scholar
• Bauer A, Pregernig M, Reinecke S. 2016. Enacting effective climate policy advice: institutional strategies to foster saliency, credibility and legitimacy. Evidence Policy. 12(3):341–362. doi:10.1332/174426416X14712636744181.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• BDI. 2020. Setting new rules – the free trade agreements of the European Union.
   Google Scholar
• Bice S. 2020. The future of impact assessment: problems, solutions and recommendations. Impact Assess Project Appraisal. 38(2):104–108. doi:10.1080/14615517.2019.1672443.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• BKP Economic Advisors. 2019. Trade sustainability impact assessment in support of FTA negotiations between the European Union and Australia - Final Draft Report. [accesed 2022 Jan 21]. http://trade-sia-australia.eu/images/reports/EU-AUS_Draft_Final_Report.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Bogner A, Littig B, Menz W, Eds. 2009. Interviewing experts. London: Palgrave Macmillan. doi:10.1057/9780230244276.
   Google Scholar
• Böhringer C, Löschel A. 2006. Computable general equilibrium models for sustainability impact assessment: status quo and prospects. Ecol Econ. 60(1):49–64. doi:10.1016/j.ecolecon.2006.03.006.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bond A, Retief F, Cave B, Fundingsland M, Duinker PN, Verheem R, Brown AL. 2018. A contribution to the conceptualisation of quality in impact assessment. Environ Impact Assess Rev. 68:49–58. doi:10.1016/j.eiar.2017.10.006.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Boswell C, Smith K. 2017. Rethinking policy ‘impact’: four models of research-policy relations. Palgrave Commun. 3(1):1–10. doi:10.1057/s41599-017-0042-z.
   Google Scholar
• Cambridge Econometrics. 2014. E3ME manual. [accessed 2022 Jan 21]. http://www.e3me.com.
   Google Scholar
• Capaldo J (2014). The trans-atlantic trade and investment partnership: European disintegration, unemployment and instability. Global Development and Environment Institute Working Paper No. 14-03.
   Google Scholar
• Cash D, Clark WC, Alcock F, Dickson NM, Eckley N, Jäger J (2002). Salience, credibility, legitimacy and boundaries: linking research, assessment and decision making.
   Google Scholar
• Castelvecchi D. 2016. Can we open the black box of AI? Nat News. 538(7623):20. doi:10.1038/538020a.
   Google Scholar
• De Ville F, Siles-Brügge G. 2015. The transatlantic trade and investment partnership and the role of computable general equilibrium modelling: an exercise in ‘managing fictional expectations’. New Political Econ. 20(5):653–678. doi:10.1080/13563467.2014.983059.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• The Economist. 2013. Come on, TTIP. The Economist. [accessed 2022 Jan 21]. https://www.economist.com/leaders/2013/02/16/come-on-ttip
   Google Scholar
• Ecorys. 2014. Trade sustainability impact assessment comprehensive trade and investment agreement between the European Union and the United States of America [Final report]. Final Inception Report , 495. [accessed 2022 Jan 21]. https://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/docs/2014/may/tradoc_152512.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Ecorys. 2017a. Annexes to the final report: SIA in support of the negotiations on a Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP). [accessed 2022 Jan 21]. https://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/docs/2017/april/tradoc_155466.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Ecorys. 2017b. Trade SIA on the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) between the EU and USA [Final report]. Final Report, 495. [accessed 2022 Jan 21]. https://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/docs/2017/april/tradoc_155464.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Esteves AM, Franks D, Vanclay F. 2012. Social impact assessment: the state of the art. Impact Assess Project Appraisal. 30(1):34–42. doi:10.1080/14615517.2012.660356.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• European Commission. 2013. Terms of Reference Related to a contract to provide a Trade Sustainability Impact Assessment (Trade SIA) in support of negotiations of a comprehensive trade and investment agreement between the European Union and the United States of America. [accessed 2022 Jan 21]. https://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/docs/2013/august/tradoc_151696.pdf
   Google Scholar
• European Commission. 2015. Communication ‘Better regulation for better results - An EU agenda’. [accessed 2022 Jan 21]. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A52015DC0215
   Google Scholar
• European Commission. 2016a. Handbook for trade sustainability impact assessment. Second ed. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union: European Commission. [accessed 2022 Jan 21]. https://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/docs/2016/april/tradoc_154464.PDF doi:10.2781/999660.
   Google Scholar
• European Commission. 2016b. Minutes of the Civil Society Dialogue - Meeting on TTIP Sustainability Impact Assessment – Draft Interim Report. [accessed 2022 Jan 21]. https://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/docs/2019/december/tradoc_158548.pdf
   Google Scholar
• European Commission. 2017a. Better Regulation Guidelines. [accessed 2022 Jan 21]. 2017a https://ec.europa.eu/info/sites/info/files/better-regulation-guidelines.pdf
   Google Scholar
• European Commission European Commission services’ position paper on the sustainability impact assessment in support of negotiations of the Transatlantic Trade & Investment Partnership between the European Union and the United States of America. 2017b. [accessed 2022 Jan 21]. https://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/docs/2017/march/tradoc_155462.pdf
   Google Scholar
• European Commission. 2017c. Terms Of Reference Related to a contract to provide Sustainability Impact Assessments (SIA) in support of free trade agreement (FTA) negotiations between the European Union and New Zealand, and between the European Union and Australia.‘ [accessed 2022 Jan 21]. https://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/docs/2019/june/tradoc_157936.pdf
   Google Scholar
• European Commission. 2021 European Commission Services' Position Paper on the Sustainability Impact Assessment In Support of Negotiations for a Free Trade Agreement Between the European Union and Australia . [accessed 2022 Jan 21]. https://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/docs/2021/july/tradoc_159743.pdf
   Google Scholar
• European Commission. 2022. Overview of FTA and Other Trade Negotiations. . [accessed 2022 Jan 21]. https://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/docs/2006/december/tradoc_118238.pdf
   Google Scholar
• European Parliament. 2015 Negotiations for the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) (debate): European Parliament Minutes. A8-0175/2015/PV 07/07/2015-4. Strasbourg . [accessed 2022 Jan 21]. https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/CRE-8-2015-07-07-ITM-004_EN.html.
   Google Scholar
• Fischer F, Gottweis H. 2012. Introduction: the argumentative turn revisited (The argumentative turn revisited). Durham and London: Duke University Press; p. 1–28. doi:10.1515/9780822395362-001.
   Google Scholar
• Fischer TB, Sykes O, Gore T, Marot N, Golobič M, Pinho P, Waterhout B, Perdicoulis A. 2015. Territorial impact assessment of European draft directives—the emergence of a new policy assessment instrument. Eur Plann Stud. 23(3):433–451. doi:10.1080/09654313.2013.868292.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Francois J, Manchin M, Norberg H, Pindyuk O, Tomberger P. 2013. Reducing transatlantic barriers to trade and investment: An economic assessment. [accessed 2022 Jan 21]. https://econpapers.repec.org/paper/lnzwpaper/20130401.htm
   Google Scholar
• Golobič M, Marot N, Kolarič Š, Fischer TB. 2015. Applying territorial impact assessment in a multi-level policy-making context–the case of Slovenia. Impact Assess Project Appraisal. 33(1):43–56. doi:10.1080/14615517.2014.938438.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hertin J, Turnpenny J, Jordan A, Nilsson M, Russel D, Nykvist B. 2009. Rationalising the policy mess? Ex ante policy assessment and the utilisation of knowledge in the policy process. Environ Plan A. 41(5):1185–1200. doi:10.1068/a40266.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hoekman B, Rojas-Romagosa H. 2022. EU trade sustainability impact assessments: revisiting the consultation process. J Int Econ Law. 25(1):45–60. doi:10.1093/jiel/jgac010.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hulme M. 2013. How climate models gain and exercise authority. In: Kirsten H, Martin S, editors. The social life of climate change models. New York: Routledge; p. 40–54. doi: 10.4324/9780203093870.
   Google Scholar
• ifo-Bertelsmann. 2013. Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership: who benefits from a free trade deal? [accessed 2022 Jan 21]. https://www.bertelsmann-stiftung.de/fileadmin/files/BSt/Publikationen/GrauePublikationen/TTIP_1-en_NW.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Jasanoff S. 2004. States of knowledge: the co-production of science and the social order. London and New York: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Kirkpatrick C, George C. 2006. Methodological issues in the impact assessment of trade policy: experience from the European Commission’s Sustainability Impact Assessment (SIA) programme. Impact Assess Project Appraisal. 24(4):325–334. doi:10.3152/147154606781765110.
   Google Scholar
• Kolkman DA, Campo P, Balke-Visser T, Gilbert N. 2016. How to build models for government: criteria driving model acceptance in policymaking. Policy Sci. 49(4):489–504. doi:10.1007/s11077-016-9250-4.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lawrence DP. 2013. Impact assessment: practical solutions to recurrent problems and contemporary challenges. Hoboken, New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons. .
   Google Scholar
• Leblond P, Viju-Miljusevic C. 2019. EU trade policy in the twenty-first century: change, continuity and challenges. J Eur Public Policy. 26(12):1836–1846. doi:10.1080/13501763.2019.1678059.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lee N, Kirkpatrick C. 2006. Evidence-based policy-making in Europe: an evaluation of European Commission integrated impact assessments. Impact Assess Project Appraisal. 24(1):23–33. doi:10.3152/147154606781765327.
   Google Scholar
• Leigh Star S. 2010. This is not a boundary object: reflections on the origin of a concept. Sci Technol Human Values. 35(5):601–617. doi:10.1177/0162243910377624.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nilsson L (2017). Economic modelling of EU free trade agreements: reflections by a partial bystander. (Ed.),^(Eds.).
   Google Scholar
• Nilsson L. 2019. Reflections on the economic modelling of free trade agreements. J Global Econ Anal. 3(1):156–186. doi:10.21642/JGEA.030104AF.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Owens S, Rayner T, Bina O. 2004. New agendas for appraisal: reflections on theory, practice, and research. Environ Plan A. 36(11):1943–1959. doi:10.1068/a36281.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Partidario MR. 2020. Transforming the capacity of impact assessment to address persistent global problems. Impact Assess Project Appraisal. 38(2):146–150. doi:10.1080/14615517.2020.1724005.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pelkmans J, Lejour A, Schrefler L, Mustilli F, Timini J. 2014. Detailed Appraisal by the EP of the Ex-ante Impact Assessment Unit of the European Commission’s Impact Assessment - EU-US Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership. [accessed 2022 Jan 21]. https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/etudes/join/2014/528798/IPOL-JOIN_ET%282014%29528798_EN.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Pollitt H, Chewpreecha U, Summerton P. 2007. E3me: an energy–environment–economy model for Europe. Cambridge Econometrics Ltd., UK.
   Google Scholar
• Radaelli CM. 2007. Whither better regulation for the Lisbon agenda? J Eur Public Policy. 14(2):190–207. doi:10.1080/13501760601122274.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rojas-Romagosa H. 2020. The evolution of methodology and coverage of EU Ex Ante Trade Sustainability Impact Assessments (TSIAs). In: Dixon P, Francois J, V. D. Mensbrugghe D, editors. Policy analysis and modeling of the global economy: a Festschrift celebrating Thomas Hertel. Singapore: World Scientific; p. 371–410.
   Google Scholar
• Star SL, Griesemer JR. 1989. Institutional ecology,translations’ and boundary objects: amateurs and professionals in Berkeley’s Museum of Vertebrate Zoology, 1907-39. Soc Stud Sci. 19(3):387–420. doi:10.1177/030631289019003001.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Strassheim H, Kettunen P. 2014. When does evidence-based policy turn into policy-based evidence? Configurations, contexts and mechanisms. Evidence Policy. 10(2):259–277. doi:10.1332/174426514X13990433991320.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Taylor PG, Upham P, McDowall W, Christopherson D. 2014. Energy model, boundary object and societal lens: 35 years of the MARKAL model in the UK. Energy Res Social Sci. 4:32–41. doi:10.1016/j.erss.2014.08.007.
   Google Scholar
• Turnpenny J, Radaelli CM, Jordan A, Jacob K. 2009. The policy and politics of policy appraisal: emerging trends and new directions. J Eur Public Policy. 16(4):640–653. doi:10.1080/13501760902872783.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• van Voorst S, Zwaan P. 2019. The (non-) use of ex post legislative evaluations by the European Commission. J Eur Public Policy. 26(3):366–385. doi:10.1080/13501763.2018.1449235.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Weingart P. 1999. Scientific expertise and political accountability: paradoxes of science in politics. Sci Public Policy. 26(3):151–161. doi:10.3152/147154399781782437.
   Google Scholar
• Young AR. 2019. Two wrongs make a right? The politicization of trade policy and European trade strategy. J Eur Public Policy. 26(12):1883–1899. doi:10.1080/13501763.2019.1678055.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zeiss R, van Egmond S. 2014. Dissolving decision making? Models and their roles in decision-making processes and policy at large. Sci Context. 27(4):631–657. doi:10.1017/S0269889714000234.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar