Political Contestation about International Economic Agreements: Lessons for the Canada-UK Trade Relationship after Brexit

点击翻译按钮获取中文摘要

In recent years, some international economic agreements - such as the Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement (CETA) concluded between Canada and the European Union (EU) - have generated considerable public controversy, while others have largely escaped public scrutiny. As Canada and the United Kingdom (UK) prepare to negotiate their post-Brexit economic relationship, it is important to understand under which conditions bilateral economic and trade agreements become politically contentious. Policy makers will also have to consider how public controversies about such agreements can be anticipated in designing the trade policy process, so that political contestation is channelled into impactful public debates. This knowledge synthesis project assesses the state of research knowledge on these issues. It addresses the following questions: Why do some international agreements become politically contentious, while others hardly register in public debates? Which arguments dominate debates in those instances in which agreements become politically contentious? What could be flashpoints of public contestation in a potential Canada-UK agreement? What best practices have been developed to channel trade-related political controversies into the process of making international economic policy, inter alia by increasing the transparency of negotiations, incorporating diverse stakeholders and viewpoints from an early stage, and informing the broader public about negotiation results? The proposed synthesis of research knowledge on these questions will identify researchstrengths and gaps in this emergent field of scholarly inquiry; it will also aid policy makers in making crucial decisions on the governance of the upcoming Canada-UK trade negotiations, with the objective of facilitating an inclusive and evidence-based public debate.