Email this article 
Hide
Show all
GEORGIA’S TRADE PERFORMANCE IN THE LIGHT OF EU-GEORGIA DEEP AND COMPREHENCIVE FREE TRADE AREA
Abstract
The EU-Georgia Association Agreement (AA) with its integral part on Deep and Comprehensive Free Trade Area (DCFTA) is an important step towards Georgia’s close political association and gradual economic integration with the EU. The EU-Georgia DCFTA is considered as the best mechanism available to Georgia to promote exports, attract foreign direct investments and achieve high economic growth rate. In recent years Georgia’s trade analysis demonstrates some optimistic developments in trade performance. However, in short period since provisional application of the DCFTA, its positive outcomes are not significant. Georgia’s gains from the AA/DCFTA directly depend on scope and speed of legal approximation and regulatory convergence with the EU, which is challenging process, especially in short term. Nevertheless, it is clear that Georgia should continue economic reforms, namely reforms in all trade related areas in order to fully benefit from close economic and political relations with the EU foreseen by the agreement.
Keywords
References
Adarov, A. and Havlik, P. (2016). Benefits and Costs of DCFTA: Evaluation of the Impact on Georgia, Moldova and Ukraine, Joint Working Paper.
Case/Global Insight. (2008). Economic Feasibility, General Economic Impact and Implications of a Free Trade Agreement between the European Union and Georgia.
Commission of the European Communities. (2006). Communication on “Global Europe: Competing in the World.” COM (2006) 567, Brussels.
Commission of the European Communities. (2007). Communication on “A Strong European Neighborhood Policy.” COM (2007) 774. Brussels.
Dreyer I. (2012). Trade Policy in the EU’s Neighbourhood. Ways Forward for the Deep and Comprehensive Free Trade Agreements, ʻStudies and Researchʼ, Notre Europe, Paris, No. 90.
Eteria, E. (2013). Economic Globalization and the Prospects of Georgia-European Union Trade Relations, Economics and Business, vol. 2, pp. 161-180.
European Commission. (2010). Communication on “Trade, Growth and World Affairs: Trade Policy as a core component of the EU’s 2020 Strategy.” COM (2010) 612. Brussels.
European Commission. (2017a). Report from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions on Implementation of Free Trade Agreements. 1 January 2016 - 31 December 2017, COM(2017) 654 final.
European Commission. (2017b). Commission Staff Working Document, Country reports and info sheets on implementation of EU Free Trade Agreements Accompanying the document Report from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions on Implementation of Free Trade Agreements. 1 January 2016 - 31 December 2016. SWD(2017) 364 final.
European Commission. (2018a). Report from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions on Implementation of Free Trade Agreements. 1 January 2017 - 31 December 2017, COM(2018) 728 final.
European Commission. (2018b). Commission Staff Working Document, Country reports and info sheets on implementation of EU Free Trade Agreements Accompanying the document Report from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions on Implementation of Free Trade Agreements. 1 January 2017 - 31 December 2017. SWD(2018) 454 final.
European Commission. (2019). Association Implementation Report on Georgia, Joint staff working paper, SWD (2019) 16 final, Brussels, 30.1.2019 .
Ecorys/CASE. (2012). Trade Sustainability Impact Assessment in support of negotiations of a DCFTA between the EU and Georgia and the Republic of Moldova. Final report. Rotterdam.
Fojtíková, L. (2012). Ex-post Assessment of the Global European Strategy, Review of Economic Perspectives, 12(2), pp. 71–91
Guerrieri, P. and Dimon, D. (2006). The Trade Regionalism of the United States and the European Union: Cooperative or Competitive Strategies? The International Trade Journal, 20:2, pp. 85-93.
Kawecka-Wyrzykowska, E. (2015). The EU-Georgia Association Agreement: An Instrument To Support The Development Of Georgia Or Lip Service? / Układ Stowarzyszeniowy Ue – Gruzja: Instrument Wsparcia Rozwoju Gruzji Czy Deklaracja Bez Pokrycia?, Comparative Economic Research, 18(2), pp. 77-97.
Koopmann, G. and Wilhelm, M. (2010). EU Trade Policy in the Age of Bilateralism. Intereconomics 45 (5), pp.305-312.
Manoli, P. (2013). Political Economy aspects of Deep and comprehensive Free Trade Agreements. Eastern Journal of European Studies, volume 4, Issue 2, pp. 51-73
Messerlin, P. Emerson, M. Jandieri, G. and Le Vernoy, A. (2011). An appraisal of the EU’s trade policy towards its Eastern Neighbors: the case of Georgia. The Center for European Policy Studies, Brussels.
National Statistics Office of Georgia. www.geostat.ge
UNDP. (2007). Assessment of the Impact of Potential Free Trade Agreement between the EU and Georgia.
Woolcock, S. Barfield, C. MacLaren, D. and Koopmann, G. (2007). Competing regionalism - patterns, economic impact and implications for the multilateral trading system. Intereconomics 42, (5), pp. 236-259.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License.