Procedure over substance? CETA and the political economy of subsidiarity

References

• Aichele, R., & Felbermayr, G. (2014). CETA: Welche Effekte hat das EU-Kanada-Freihandelsabkommen auf Deutschland? Ifo Schnelldienst, 67(24), 20–30.
   Google Scholar
• Bouchard, S. (2018, April 19). Supreme Court upholds interprovincial trade law in cross-border alcohol case, The Globe and Mail. Retrieved from https://www.theglobeandmail.com/canada/article-supreme-court-upholds-law-in-cross-border-alcohol-case/
   Google Scholar
• Boyd, D. R., & Calvert, J. R. (2016). An open letter to the parliament of Wallonia and Belgian voters on the proposed CETA and its foreign investor protection system. Retrieved from https://gusvanharten.files.wordpress.com/2016/10/canadian-academics-open-letter-on-the-ceta-and-wallonia.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Broude, T. (2016). Selective subsidiarity and dialectic deference in the World Trade Organization. Law & Contemporary Problems, 79(2), 53–74.
   Google Scholar
• Burke, J. (2010). Distributive justice and subsidiarity: The firm and the state in the social order. Journal of Markets & Morality, 13(2), 297–317.
   Google Scholar
• De Beer, J. (2012). Implementing international trade agreements in federal systems: A look at the Canada-EU CETA’s intellectual property issues. Legal Issues of Economic Integration, 39(1), 51.
   Google Scholar
• De Mestral, A. (2015). When does the exception become the rule? Conserving regulatory space under CETA. Journal of International Economic Law, 18(3), 641–654. doi: 10.1093/jiel/jgv033
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• D’Erman, V. J. (2016). Comparative intergovernmental politics: CETA negotiations between Canada and the EU. Politics and Governance, 4(3), 90–99. doi: 10.17645/pag.v4i3.565
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dierckx, S. (2015). European unions and the repoliticization of transnational capital: Labor’s stance regarding the financial transaction tax (FTT), the transatlantic trade and investment partnership (TTIP), and the comprehensive economic and trade agreement (CETA). Labor History, 56(3), 327–344. doi: 10.1080/0023656X.2015.1042776
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dolle, T., & Simões, B. G. (2016). Mixed feelings about “mixed agreements” and CETA’s provisional application. European Journal of Risk Regulation, 7(3), 617–622. doi: 10.1017/S1867299X00006139
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• European Commission. (2017). The economic impact of the comprehensive economic and trade agreement (CETA). Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union.
   Google Scholar
• European Commission. (2018). Report on implementation of EU free trade agreements. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union.
   Google Scholar
• Fafard, P., & Leblond, P. (2013). Closing the deal: What role for the provinces in the final stages of the CETA negotiations? International Journal: Canada’s Journal of Global Policy Analysis, 68(4), 553–559. doi: 10.1177/0020702013509319
   Google Scholar
• Fahey, E. (2017, February 9). CETA and global governance law: What kind of model agreement is it really in law? European Papers, 1–10.
   Google Scholar
• Federal Constitutional Court. (2016a). Judgment of the Second Senate of 13 October, 2BvR 1368/16 - paras. 1–73. Retrieved from http://www.bverfg.de/e/rs20161013_2bvr136816en.html
   Google Scholar
• Federal Constitutional Court. (2016b). Order of the Second Senate of 07 December, 2BvR 1444/16 - paras. 1–31. Retrieved from http://www.bverfg.de/e/rs20161207_2bvr144416en.html
   Google Scholar
• Federal Parliament. (2015, September 30). Dem CETA-Abkommen so nicht zustimmen (Antrag). Drucksache 18/6201, 1–11.
   Google Scholar
• Healy, T. (2014). Canadian and European Unions and the Canada—EU CETA negotiations. Globalizations, 11(1), 59–70. doi: 10.1080/14747731.2014.860798
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hindelang, S., & Wernicke, S. (Eds.). (2015). Essentials of modern investment protection. Berlin: Harnack-Haus Reflections. Retrieved from http://tinyurl.com/qylvb78
   Google Scholar
• Howse, R., & Nicolaїdis, K. (2016). Toward a global ethics of trade governance: Subsidiarity writ large. Law and Contemporary Problems, 79(2), 259–283.
   Google Scholar
• Hübner, K., Deman, A.-S., & Balik, T. (2017). EU and trade policy-making: The contentious case of CETA. Journal of European Integration, 39(7), 843–857. doi: 10.1080/07036337.2017.1371708
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ibbitson, J. (2018, April 19). A sigh of regret, and of relief, for the Supreme Court’s cross-border alcohol ruling. The Globe and Mail. Retrieved from https://www.theglobeandmail.com/politics/article-a-sigh-of-regret-and-of-relief-for-the-supreme-courts-cross-border/
   Google Scholar
• Johnson, P. M., Muzzi, P., & Bastien, V. (2013). The voice of Quebec in the CETA negotiations. International Journal: Canada’s Journal of Global Policy Analysis, 68(4), 560–567. doi: 10.1177/0020702013509320
   Google Scholar
• Kelly, J. E. (2004). Solidarity and subsidiarity: “Organizing principles” for corporate moral leadership in the new global economy. Journal of Business Ethics, 52, 283–295. doi: 10.1023/B:BUSI.0000037479.11370.cd
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kohler, P., & Storm, S. (2016). CETA without blinders: How cutting “trade costs and more” will cause unemployment, inequality, and welfare losses. International Journal of Political Economy, 45(4), 257–293. doi: 10.1080/08911916.2016.1270081
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Krajewski, M. (2014). Anmerkungen zum Gutachten von Dr. Stephan Schill zu den Auswirkungen der Bestimmungen zum Investitionsschutz und zu den Investor-Staat-Schiedsverfahren im Entwurf des CETA auf den Handlungsspielraum des Gesetzgebers vom 22.9.2014. Retrieved from https://www.global2000.at/sites/global/files/Krajewski_Zusatzerklaerungen_Investorenschutz.PDF
   Google Scholar
• Kukucha, C. J. (2013). Canadian sub-federal governments and CETA: Overarching themes and future trends. International Journal: Canada’s Journal of Global Policy Analysis, 68(4), 528–535. doi: 10.1177/0020702013509321
   Google Scholar
• Larik, J. (2017). Prêt-à-ratifier: The CETA decision of the French Conseil constitutionnel of 31 July 2017. European Constitutional Law Review, 13, 759–777. doi: 10.1017/S1574019617000335
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Leblond, P. (2010). The Canada-EU comprehensive economic and trade agreement: More to it than meets the eye. Policy Options, 31(7), 74–78.
   Google Scholar
• Mayer, F. C. (2014). Stellt das geplante Freihandelsabkommen der EU mit Kanada (Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement, CETA) ein gemischtes Abkommen dar? Rechtsgutachten, Bundesministerium für Wirtschaft und Energie. Retrieved from https://www.bmwi.de/Redaktion/DE/Downloads/C-D/ceta-gutachten-einstufung-als-gemischtes-abkommen.pdf?__blob=publicationFile&v=4
   Google Scholar
• Mendes, J. (2017). The external administrative layer of EU law-making: International decisions in EU law and the case of CETA. European Papers, 2(2), 489–517.
   Google Scholar
• Neuwahl, N. (2017). CETA as a potential model for (post-brexit) UK-EU relations. European Foreign Affairs Review, 22(3), 279–301.
   Google Scholar
• Paramonov, I. M. (2017). Canada’s pact with Europe and North America’s economic integration: Is CETA bigger than NAFTA? Journal of International Business and Cultural Studies, 10, 1–29.
   Google Scholar
• Petersmann, E. (2015). Transformative transatlantic free trade agreements without rights and remedies of citizens? Journal of International Economic Law, 18(3), 579–607. doi: 10.1093/jiel/jgv030
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Philippidis, G., & Kitou, E. (2012). Quantifying opportunities and threats: Examining the Canada–EU trade negotiations. Journal of Economic Policy Reform, 15(4), 301–320. doi: 10.1080/17487870.2012.717001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Reinisch, A. (2016). Will the EU’s proposal concerning an investment court system for CETA and TTIP lead to enforceable awards?—The limits of modifying the ICSID convention and the nature of investment arbitration. Journal of International Economic Law, 19(4), 761–786. doi: 10.1093/jiel/jgw072
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rodrik, D. (2011). The globalization paradox. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Sardinha, E. (2017). Towards a new horizon in investor–state dispute settlement? Reflections on the investment tribunal system in the comprehensive economic trade agreement (CETA). Canadian Yearbook of international Law/Annuaire canadien de droit international, 54, 311–365. doi: 10.1017/cyl.2017.10
   Google Scholar
• Schill, S. (2014). Auswirkungen der Bestimmungen zum Investitionsschutz und zu den Investor-Staat-Schiedsverfahren im Entwurf des Freihandelsabkommens zwischen der EU und Kanada (CETA) auf den Handlungsspielraum des Gesetzgebers (Kurzgutachten). Retrieved from https://konzepte-online.de/wp-content/uploads/2014/12/ceta-gutachten-investitionsschutz.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Sirico, R. A. (2014). Subsidiarity and the reform of the welfare of the nation state. In M. Evans, & A. Zimmermann (Eds.), Global perspectives on subsidiarity (pp. 107–127). Dordrecht: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Trew, S. (2013). Correcting the democratic deficit in the CETA negotiations: Civil society engagement in the provinces, municipalities, and Europe. International Journal: Canada’s Journal of Global Policy Analysis, 68(4), 568–575. doi: 10.1177/0020702013509313
   Google Scholar
• VanDuzer, J. A. (2013). Could an intergovernmental agreement increase the credibility of Canadian treaty commitments in areas within provincial jurisdiction? International Journal: Canada’s Journal of Global Policy Analysis, 68(4), 536–544. doi: 10.1177/0020702013509315
   Google Scholar
• Weinberger, L. D. (2014). The relationship between sphere sovereignty and subsidiarity. In M. Evans, & A. Zimmermann (Eds.), Global perspectives on subsidiarity (pp. 49–63). Dordrecht: Springer.
   Google Scholar