EN Official Journal of the European Union C 129/27

Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on ‘The core role of trade and investment in meeting and implementing the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)’

(own-initiative opinion)

(2018/C 129/05)

Rapporteur: Jonathan PEEL (UK-I) Co-rapporteur: Christophe QUAREZ (FR-II)

Plenary Assembly decision 26.1.2017 Legal basis Rule 29(2) of the Rules of Procedure Own-initiative opinion Section responsible REX Adopted in section 7.11.2017 Adopted at plenary 7.12.2017 Plenary session No 530 Outcome of vote (for/against/abstentions) 163/0/1

1. Conclusions and recommendations

1.1. The implementation and realisation of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) is seen as a top global priority. Maintaining momentum from now on is essential if the 2030 target date is to be met.

1.1.1. The European Economic and Social Committee (EESC) believes that the SDGs, together with the Paris Agreement (COP21) (1), will fundamentally change the global trade agenda, especially for trade in industrial goods and agriculture. The need to implement these profound agreements must lie at the heart of all future EU trade negotiations.

1.2. The EU is uniquely placed to further the realisation of the SDGs. It has the credibility to play an effective bridging role between developed and developing countries. Greater priority is needed for the development of the policies outlined in the Commission Communication ‘Next Steps’ (2), and sharper focus given to integrating the SDGs fully ‘in the European policy framework and current Commission priorities’, in conjunction with Member States where necessary.

1.2.1. It recognises it is bound to do so under the Lisbon Treaty (3). There should be a close synergy in promoting and implementing the SDGs and in promoting European values around the world.

1.3. Trade was only referred to once in the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) (4), but there are nine specific mentions of trade in the SDGs. As well as direct action to achieve the SDGs, we urge the EU to include ‘SDG friendly’ trade and investment. There are many ways in which trade and investment can make a positive, if sometimes indirect, contribution to them.

1.4. A specific target for Goal 17 (revitalise the Global Partnership for Sustainable Development) is for ‘a universal, rules-based, open, non-discriminatory and equitable multilateral trading system under the WTO’. The EU has long placed emphasis on multilateralism and on the key role of the WTO: it must continue to take active steps to support that.

1.5. The EESC notes that, as the SDGs are not legally binding, with no dispute mechanism, the EU must work through its own policies and activities to further their realisation.

1.5.1. We welcome the EU’s intention to provide annual updates, but we remain concerned that it often appears more interested in showing how existing policies coincide and overlap with SDG targets, rather than in gaining maximum synergy through focussing and adapting such policies and activities. A more concentrated EU focus on achieving the SDGs would gain better results.

1.5.2. There are a number of key policy areas where we believe the EU must work to ensure full synergy with the SDGs. These include the renewal of the ‘Cotonou’ ACP-EU Partnership Agreement as well as the EU’s wider interaction with those regions. That should specifically include both targeted capacity building to support and help implement the Trade Facilitation Agreement, as well as the wider joint EU/Member State Aid for Trade strategy. This is a core contribution to, and an essential part of, the WTO Aid for Trade Initiative which is designed to enhance the capacity of developing countries to use the opportunities offered by trade agreements. SDG focused input into the WTO’s sixth Global Review will be important.

1.5.3. More specific support should also be given to using trade as a means to boost both regional integration and the SDGs, especially in those regions where EPAs have yet to be reached, despite the EPAs not yet fully realising their early promise.

1.5.4. The EU should also look to develop greater synergies between the 27 core Conventions relevant to its GSP+ programme and the SDGs, as far as its competences will allow.

1.6. The Committee also urges the EU to promote the realisation of the SDGs wherever possible through its bilateral relations. A prime example here is interaction with China over its Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), the implementation of which the recent meeting of the EU-China Round Table (5) emphasised ‘should contribute to the realisation of the UN 2030 Agenda and its Sustainable Development Goals’.

1.7. The EESC underlines the key role of Responsible Business Conduct (RBC) in helping realise the SDGs. The impact of the private sector here will be both crucial and profound: the UN Committee for Trade and Development (Unctad) estimates (6) that an extra US$ 2,5trillion a year will be required: the private sector is expected to contribute a third of that. Many companies already have their SDG strategies, but all must be encouraged to own responsibility for their impact on society through risk-based due diligence. The EESC notes that resource mobilisation is also facilitated by international tax policies to support investments to implement the SDGs (7).

1.8. SDG 17 also specifically states that ‘a successful sustainable development agenda requires partnerships between governments, the private sector and civil society’. The EESC therefore urges that all future mandates for TSD Chapters in EU trade and partnership negotiations must include a specific clause requiring both parties of each civil society monitoring mechanism to work together to promote the SDGs and monitor the effects of that.

1.8.1. These TSD chapters (especially as these cover the SDGs, the Paris Agreement and observance of ILO Conventions) must be given equal weight to those covering commercial, technical or tariff issues.

1.9. Finally, the EESC reminds the EU of its earlier recommendation (8) that it undertake a full impact assessment on the likely effects that implementation of the SDGs and the Paris Agreement will have on EU trade policy, including agriculture. Good policy starts with good analysis.

2. Background: the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)

2.1. The implementation of the comprehensive United Nations ‘The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development’, and in particular its centrepiece, the SDGs, will remain a major global priority until its target date. The 17 SDGs are backed by a further 169 specific targets.

2.1.1. The SDGs are global in nature, universally applicable and interlinked — all countries must share responsibility in achieving them. They are already leading to a new way of global working — broader, more participative and more consultative: more than 90 countries have sought the assistance of others, notably the EU, to help meet them.

2.2. The importance of the SDGs was greatly enhanced by the Paris Agreement which has already entered into force. Considerable uncertainty has since been created by the US Administration’s stated intention to withdraw from the Agreement and what effects this could have in practice. It does open the way for the EU to assume global leadership in ensuring that both the SDGs and the Paris Agreement remain top priorities, building on the strong interest in these agreements shown by China and other growing economies. To date many fast-emerging economies have yet to make any other notable efforts to help other countries further behind in development.

2.3. The Commission Communication ‘Next Steps for a Sustainable European Future: European Union action for sustainability’ in November 2016 set out to integrate the SDGs fully ‘in the European policy framework and current Commission priorities’, as indeed it is bound to do under the Lisbon Treaty (9). This initiative, which is now being worked on, has been welcomed by the Committee in its opinion on Agriculture in Trade Negotiations (10), which also recommended the EU undertake a full impact assessment on their likely effects on EU trade policy.

2.3.1. This Communication stated that the SDGs ‘will be a cross-cutting dimension’ for the implementation of the EU’s global strategy. It pointed out that the EU was ‘instrumental in shaping’ this agenda. There should be a close synergy in promoting and implementing the SDGs and in promoting European values around the world, even though the SDGs do not directly promote good governance and the rule of law.

2.4. The SDGs and the Paris Agreement fundamentally change the global trade agenda, especially for trade in industrial goods and in agriculture. The need to implement these agreements must now lie at the heart of all future EU trade negotiations.

2.4.1. The EU has the credibility to play an effective bridging role between developed and developing countries. The EESC (11) has previously pointed out that the EU is uniquely positioned to drive this agenda forward: — it carries weight as one of the world’s leading exporters and importers, — it is no longer seen to be primarily defensive on agriculture, — it has a proven sustained interest in trade and development and — above all it showed at the 2015 WTO Ministerial Conference in Nairobi it has the ability to produce fresh and balanced thinking.

3. SDGs: a major role for trade and investment

3.1. On 1 May the UN Foundation (12) tweeted ‘Ensuring good education, health & governance for all makes conflict less likely. @UN has 17 #GlobalGoals to do this. http://bit.ly/UN2030’. These are fundamental requirements if the SDGs are to be realised, whilst war and corruption remain the most serious counter challenges.

3.2. Nevertheless, trade and investment have to play a very significant role if the SDGs are to be realised. Trade was only mentioned once in the MDGs, but nine times in the SDGs. The WTO website specifically draws attention to Goals 2 (End hunger, achieve food security and improved nutrition, and promote sustainable agriculture), 3 (Ensure healthy lives and promote well-being for all at all ages), 8 (Promote inclusive and sustainable economic growth, employment and decent work for all), 10 (Reduce inequality within and among countries), 14 (Conserve and sustainably use the oceans, seas and marine resources) and 17 (Revitalise the global partnership for sustainable development). To these, Goals 7 (Ensure access to affordable, reliable, sustainable and modern energy for all) and 9 (Build resilient infrastructure, promote sustainable industrialisation and foster innovation) should be added. These must also be in full synergy with other relevant action, notably development.

3.2.1. Trade in agriculture will also play a key role in realising most SDGs, notably 12 (Ensure sustainable consumption and production patterns) and 15 (Sustainably manage forests, combat desertification, halt and reverse land degradation, halt biodiversity loss), as well as 1 (End poverty in all its forms everywhere), 13 (Take urgent action to combat climate change and its impacts) and 5 (Achieve gender equality and empower all women and girls).

3.2.2. The SDGs, unlike the MDGs, specifically identify the ‘means of implementation’ through their 169 specifically identified targets. Such a large number of targets make it harder to determine priorities or to gather support. Despite that, a key consideration must be to ensure that they remain inclusive and that no section of society is being left behind.

3.3. The EESC is concerned that sufficient measures/policies have not yet been effectively defined, nor that the key gaps to be filled have already been fully identified.

3.3.1. It will be essential to look at in detail what trade, per se, can contribute. As well as direct action, ‘SDG friendly’ trade and investment should be included, such as through the use of clean technology. There are many ways in which trade and investment can make a positive, if indirect contribution, even though it cannot always be the main driving force for achieving the SDGs, nor can it offer a systematic approach.

3.4. By definition trade should be sustainable, although in reality this is by no means always so, especially when judged against current sustainability criteria including carbon footprints. In past times within Europe food and goods were traded that a region could not produce itself (13). Two other factors were important — key, fundamental processing skills developed over a long period, and ease of transport. Access to water was critically important, as transport over land was far more costly and much less reliable.

3.4.1. These factors remain important. Import substitution policies have regularly failed. International confidence in trading is fundamental to minimise or avoid unnecessary import barriers. For that a global trading system is essential, backed by an international rule-making and dispute settlement system. Here the role of the WTO remains critical, despite potential challenges from the US Administration.

3.4.2. Indeed a specific target of Goal 17 is to ‘promote a universal, rules-based, open, non-discriminatory and equitable multilateral trading system under the WTO’: the WTO therefore is tasked to play a key role. The EU must continue to encourage and support that.

3.4.3. The WTO Nairobi Ministerial Declaration spelt out that international trade can play a role towards achieving sustainable, robust and balanced growth for all (14), stressing that this would be far harder without an effective multilateral trade mechanism. It also underlined the importance of its Aid for Trade Initiative, which should play a key role in helping to achieve many SDGs.

3.4.4. The WTO commitment to abolish export subsidies for agricultural exports, reached in Nairobi, meets a key target set for SDG 2 (Zero hunger). Current WTO negotiations on fisheries subsidies are relevant to the SDG 14 (Oceans, seas and marine resources) target to prohibit by 2020 those which contribute to overcapacity and overfishing. We look to the forthcoming WTO Ministerial meeting in Buenos Aires to achieve such an agreement.

3.4.5. Since 1947 first the GATT, and now the WTO, has been about removing barriers. Apart from food, agricultural products, textiles, clothing, shoes and ceramics, the emphasis has now shifted from removing tariffs to dealing with to non-tariff barriers. As the EESC has previously stated (15)‘trade helps to even out imbalances in demand and supply, can significantly improve food security and nutrition through increasing food availability, promote resource use efficiency and increase investment, market opportunities and economic growth, thus generating jobs, income and prosperity’.

3.5. As global incomes rise, so does the demand for an unprecedented choice and variety of food and consumer goods. These include cotton products, grain and beef, which require a considerable amount of water to produce — and water in many places is a scarce commodity. Sustainable use of water and soil (and avoidance of air pollution) are key to realising many SDGs. Rationalisation of production will increasingly become a key issue: for example, Uzbekistan (not yet a WTO member) relies heavily on cotton production, yet is an arid country, and cotton is a notably thirsty crop which also requires a significant use of pesticides.

3.6. The Trade Facilitation Agreement (TFA), which came into effect in early 2017, should also notably increase sustainability in international trade through removing delays and unnecessary blockages at borders. Capacity building is a key role for the EU here.

3.7. The impact of trade and investment on climate change is significant. Negotiations for the plurilateral Environmental Goods Agreement (EGA) promise an important step in integrating climate change with multilateral trade policy but further multilateral action is still needed to promote greater consistency.

3.8. The role of investment in realising the SDGs is also fundamental, notably in Africa, through helping to provide sufficient infrastructure (Goal 9), sufficient secondary processing facilities and by increasing the ability to get the resulting products to transport hubs and to market.

3.8.1. As stated in the Committee opinion on stand-alone investment agreements (16), ‘a key area … for parties to an investment agreement will be to facilitate investment through the provision of necessary, sustainable infrastructure. Governments are responsible for providing a firm regulatory basis for infrastructure, …or for securing effective, efficient grids for energy, water and transport, through systematic groundwork. Energy and water networks and grids need complex design and may require a decade or more to be put fully into place’.

4. The role of the EU and what lies within its competence

4.1. As mentioned, the Commission Communication ‘Next Steps’ set out to integrate the SDGs fully in the European policy framework and current Commission priorities.

4.1.1. In its 2006 Communication ‘Global Europe: competing in the world’ the Commission stated that it was essential to ensure that the benefits of trade liberalisation ‘are passed on to citizens. As we pursue social justice and cohesion at home we should also seek to promote our values, including social and environmental standards and cultural diversity around the world’ (17).

4.1.2. The Lisbon Treaty (18) requires that all EU activity in trade, development, and wider external action is mutually informed. We have already expressed our disappointment (19) that the SDGs were hardly mentioned in the Commission Communication ‘Trade for all’ (20), published shortly after their adoption by the UN. In implementing its Trade for All strategy the EU must pay particular regard to ensuring that its future trade and partnership agreements comply with the ILO core standards, the COP21 commitments and ensure consumer protection.

4.1.3. However, as the recent ECJ judgement (21) on the EU-Singapore FTA showed, EU competence in investment is limited, whilst having full competence in trade matters.

4.2. The SDGs themselves are not legally binding, nor backed by a disputes mechanism. Success will rely on countries’ own sustainable development policies and programmes. The UN stress that partnerships are required between governments, the private sector and civil society. Its website (22) even lists actions for individuals to take.

4.3. The EU must continue to look to its own policies and activities to determine how it can best contribute to the realisation of the SDGs, not least over trade. We are concerned that the EU often appears more ready to show how its existing policies coincide and overlap with SDG targets, rather than adapt existing policies to gain maximum synergy. We have also yet to be convinced that the Commission has developed a fully cross DG approach to key issues. A more concentrated focus on achieving the SDGs, including in trade policy, would gain better results.

4.3.1. Such areas should include the upcoming renewal of the ‘Cotonou’ ACP — EU Partnership Agreement, and the EU’s wider interaction with those regions. As well as targeted capacity building to support the TFA, this should also underpin any ongoing review of the joint EU/Member State Aid for Trade (23) strategy, a key element of the WTO Aid for Trade Initiative. Designed to enhance the capacity of developing countries to use the opportunities offered by trade agreements, this in turn will be crucial to the process of achieving many of the Goals.

4.3.2. More focused support should also be given to using trade as a means to support both regional integration and the SDGs, especially those regions where EPAs have yet to be reached, although we also regret that the early promise of EPAs has yet to be fully realised.

4.3.3. As far as its competences allow the EU should also look to develop greater synergies between the SDGs and the 27 mandatory environmental and ILO Conventions relevant to its GSP+ programme (as well as the requirements for the LDC EBA programme).

4.3.4. The July 2015 Final Declaration of the 14th ACP-EU Economic and Social Interests Groups meeting in Yaounde (24) states that all available financial resources must be brought into play to achieve the SDGs, within a framework of sound, transparent fiscal governance, including the private sector.

4.4. The Committee also believes that the EU should promote the realisation of the SDGs wherever possible through its bilateral relations. A prime example here is interaction with China over its BRI, the implementation of which the recent meeting of the EU-China Round Table (25) emphasised ‘should contribute to the realisation of the … Sustainable Development Goals and the implementation of the Paris Agreement on Climate Change’. This mirrored similar recent comments by the UN Secretary-General.

4.4.1. The EESC, however, reiterates its firm belief in the importance of China’s and other countries’ compliance with the International Labour Organisation (ILO) Conventions.

4.5. The EESC believes too that the EU must incorporate the Europe 2020 strategy with the shared objectives of the SDGs in order to create the conditions for smart, sustainable and inclusive growth.

4.6. In its opinion on Sustainable development: a mapping of the EU’s internal and external policies (26), the EESC stated: ‘The UN 2030 Agenda should be turned into a proactive, transformational and positive narrative for Europe, and that process must be driven by a strong political will and determination to shape a sustainable European Union by shifting our economies towards resilient and competitive, resource-efficient, low-carbon and socially inclusive development. This forward-looking narrative would also help overcome the unprecedented lack of trust of EU citizens in the EU project and in particular win young people’s support for it. The EU should use the UN 2030 agenda in this way to present EU citizens with a new vision for Europe: the social contract of the 21st century’.

5. Role of the private sector

5.1. Unctad estimates (27) that, to meet the 17 SDGs (and their 169 targets), an extra US$ 2,5trillion a year will need to be found. Of that, at least a third is expected to be provided by the private sector, the role of which is highlighted in Goal 17, along with that of civil society.

5.2. Most of this will come through increased trade and investment, notably from the need to build cities, and the consequent provision of infrastructure, schools, hospitals and roads. This is already implicit in China’s BRI.

5.3. As mentioned, infrastructure building within Africa in particular will be especially important. Internal trade within Africa is low; it accounts for between 10 % and 15 % of all African trade. As the EESC has already stated, ‘enhancing African countries’ ability to expand trade in agriculture linked with the SDGs covering infrastructure, regional integration and deepening of internal markets, including through increased secondary processing, will be essential to enable Africa to participate positively in agricultural and other trade as well as enhance food security’ (28).

5.4. The EESC has also stated that a ‘regulatory environment needs to be planned for the long-term. Companies equally need to plan long-term, especially if their investments are to succeed. Failure on either side suits nobody. Robust government and private sector players need to develop new synergies and learn new forms of engagement. There should be a key role for civil society input here too, particularly at the level of the social partners’ (29).

5.5. Effective management of Global Value and Supply Chains (GVCs, GSCs) will be essential, as highlighted by the EESC in its opinion on Decent Work in Global Supply Chains (30). GVCs cover all activity from a product’s conception through to the final consumer. A GSC is part of a GVC dedicated to sourcing but not to conception or distribution.

5.5.1. The EESC stated its aim as ‘to put in place gradual, consistent and sustainable policy in the responsible management of GSCs’, and ‘to promote practical and suitable, risk-based approaches that will take into account the specific nature of the global value chain and the GSC (linear or modular, simple or complex, short or long organisation)’.

5.5.2. The impact of the private sector will be profound. It can be a major catalyst for social, economic and cultural renewal, not least through the promotion and development of key skills and providing greater diversification. Many companies already have their own SDG strategies. Nevertheless, Responsible Business Conduct (RBC) will be important in helping realise the SDGs, not least by encouraging all companies to own responsibility for their impact on society. This should be built on risk-based due diligence, notably in GVCs and GSCs, covering both negative impacts and risks and in actively promoting benefits, ensuring that no section of society is left behind. That in turn should boost companies’ ‘licence to operate’, whilst maximising both innovation and sustainable economic growth.

5.6. Ensuring greater synergy between the SDGs and the private sector will involve: — promoting corporate social responsibility (CSR), the ISO 26000 standard and the development of international framework agreements (IFAs) between large multinationals and the international trade union organisations (in all sectors, particularly industrial sectors); — developing the non-financial rating of companies (social and environmental) and to encourage socially responsible investment; — including social and environmental responsibility in the value chain between contractor and sub-contractor.

5.6.1. The EESC believes that any future EU trade or partnership agreement should seek to include the promotion of CSR principles and standards, and look to the promotion of national legislation in this area, notably in extra-financial reporting. They should insist that each signatory party should actively encourage compliance by companies with the OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises (31) and the United Nations Global Compact, that the right to collective bargaining be guaranteed and social dialogue sustained.

5.6.2. In its Information Report on Corporate Social Responsibility (32), the Committee also underlined the importance of the 2011 UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights (33), as a key step in the field of corporate responsibility through its emphasis on human rights under the societal pillar. This is now being developed further by the UN towards a Binding Treaty for Transnational Corporations and other enterprises regarding Human Rights.

5.6.3. Other relevant EESC opinions include those on the role of the Private Sector in Development (34), and on Establishing the EFSD Guarantee and the EFSD Guarantee Fund (35).

5.7. Realising Goal 17 should involve both Government procurement and governments working alongside the private sector. The EU should work closely both with Unctad and UNECE, which has been promoting the role of public-private partnerships (PPPs). Whilst generally supportive of PPPs, the EESC (36) has flagged up certain concerns, stating PPPs ‘could be an important instrument for implementing development strategies, assuming they are correctly calibrated and communicate with interested parties’.

5.8. The Committee has already underlined the enormous potential of e-commerce for SMEs and other more specialist companies, enabling them and local businesses to access markets hitherto inaccessible. Since SMEs are key drivers of innovation, key to maintaining and developing sustainability, and create 70-80 % of employment, the EESC calls on the Commission to pay particular attention to supporting such businesses in helping meet the SDGs.

6. Role of Civil Society

6.1. SDG 17 specifically refers to the role of civil society, saying that ‘a successful sustainable development agenda requires partnerships between governments, the private sector and civil society. These global partnerships […] are needed at the global, regional, national and local level’. It then refers to ‘review and monitoring frameworks’. For the first time in UN history, the SDGs specify that Governments are answerable to the people. Implementation of the SDGs will need direct involvement of civil society not least as that should encourage the rule of law and help counter corruption. When civil society is afraid to contribute, the reverse is true. In an open society its voice is a powerful force for major domestic change, openness and plurality.

6.1.1. Since the 2011 EU-Korea Free Trade Agreement (FTA), all EU trade and economic partnership agreements have aimed to include Trade and Sustainable Development (TSD) chapters (37) with civil society monitoring mechanisms. These chapters are now under review. They need to be strengthened and where possible adapted to support the realisation of the SDGs. Future EU negotiating mandates must include a specific reference in TSD Chapters to the SDGs.

6.2. These mechanisms have major potential in promoting EU values, including social and environmental standards. They can deliver tangible results. They are an important channel for cooperation with and empowerment of civil society from partner countries.

6.2.1. These joint civil society mechanisms must be able to intervene to promote the realisation of the SDGs, and take action against adverse developments. We believe that these TSD chapters need to be enforceable in the same way as other trade clauses. In this regard, we call on the European Commission to negotiate in each future agreements measures that allow full monitoring of the implementation of the TSD chapters, and where necessary to take such action.

6.3. The Committee also welcomes the emphasis given to the importance of ‘the social economy to job creation and sustainable development’ in ‘A New Global Partnership for Poverty Eradication and Sustainable Development after 2015’, adopted by the Council in May 2015 (38). Social economy organisations also have potential to be key players in helping realise the SDGs. In its recent opinion on the social economy (39), the EESC points out that the social economy is prominent in the everyday life and productive activity of large regions of Africa, America and Asia, making a major, global contribution to improving living and working conditions.

Brussels, 7 December 2017. The President of the European Economic and Social Committee Georges DASSIS

(1) The Paris Conference of the Parties to the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC COP21).

(2) COM(2016) 739 final.

(3) Article 21(3) TFEU.

(4) MDG 8, Develop a Global Partnership for Development.

(5) Beijing, 29-30 June 2017 (point 25).

(6) Unctad Press Release, Geneva, 2014 — since repeated regularly.

(7) REX/487 — EESC Own-initiative Opinion on EU development partnerships and the challenge posed by international tax agreements, rapporteur Alfred Gajdosik, co-rapporteur Thomas Wagnsonner (not yet published in the Official Journal).

(8) EESC Opinion on Trade for All — Towards a more responsible trade and investment policy, Rapporteur: Jonathan Peel (OJ C 264, 20.7.2016, p. 123).

(9) Article 21(3) TFEU.

(10) EESC Own-initiative Opinion on the Role of Agriculture in Multilateral, Bilateral and Regional Trade negotiations in the light of the Nairobi WTO Ministerial meeting, Rapporteur: Jonathan Peel (OJ C 173, 31.5.2017, p. 20).

(11) Idem.

(12) @UNFoundation.

(13) The North offered wool, furs, timber and grain, the South in turn offering cotton cloth, olive oil, cork, wines, foods and fruit.

(14) https://www.wto.org/english/thewto_e/minist_e/mc10_e/mindecision_e.htm

(15) See footnote 9, idem.

(16) EESC Opinion on the Role for sustainable development and civil society involvement in stand-alone EU investment agreements with third countries, Rapporteur: Jonathan Peel (OJ C 268, 14.8.2015, p. 19).

(17) COM(2006) 567 final, 4 October 2006, point 3.1.iii.

(18) Article 3 paragraph 5.

(19) EESC Opinion on Trade for All — Towards a more responsible trade and investment policy, Rapporteur: Jonathan Peel (OJ C 264, 20.7.2016, p. 123).

(20) COM(2015) 497 final.

(21) Court of Justice of the European Union, Press Release n. 52/17.

(22) http://www.un.org/sustainabledevelopment/takeaction

(23) Whilst recognising the record EU contribution here of EUR 12 bn. in 2014.

(24) As mandated by the Cotonou Agreement.

(25) See footnote 5.

(26) OJ C 487, 28.12.2016, p. 41.

(27) Unctad Press Release, Geneva, 2014 — and since repeated regularly.

(28) See EESC Opinion on the Role of Agriculture in Multilateral, Bilateral and Regional Trade negotiations in the light of the Nairobi WTO Ministerial meeting, ibidem, footnote 9 (OJ C 173, 31.5.2017, p. 20).

(29) See footnote 15.

(30) OJ C 303, 19.8.2016, p. 17.

(31) OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises, 2011.

(32) EESC Information Report on Corporate social and societal responsibility, Rapporteur: Evelyne Pichenot.

(33) http://www.ohchr.org/Documents/Publications/GuidingPrinciplesBusinessHR_En.pdf

(34) EESC Opinion on Financing for development — the position of civil society, Rapporteur: Ivan Voleš (OJ C 383, 17.11.2015, p. 49).

(35) EESC Opinion on Establishing the EFSD Guarantee and the EFSD Guarantee Fund, Rapporteur: Jan Simons (OJ C 173, 31.5.2017, p. 62).

(36) OJ C 67, 6.3.2014, p. 1.

(37) The only exception being the EPA with the SADC.

(38) http://data.consilium.europa.eu/doc/document/ST-9241-2015-INIT/en/pdf

(39) EESC Own-initiative Opinion on The External Dimension of the Social Economy, Rapporteur: Miguel Ángel Cabra De Luna (OJ C 345, 13.10.2017, p. 58).