EUROPEAN COMMISSION Brussels, 28.1.2016 SWD(2016) 8 final JOINT STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT

'The EU Special Incentive Arrangement for Sustainable Development and Good Governance ('GSP+') covering the period 2014 – 2015 Accompanying the document Report from the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council Report on the Generalised Scheme of Preferences during the period 2014 – 2015 {COM(2016) 29 final}



JOINT STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT



The EU Special Incentive Arrangement for Sustainable Development and Good Governance ('GSP+') covering the period 2014 – 2015



Contents 1.Introduction 1.1.What is GSP+? 1.2.Conditions for GSP+ beneficiary status 1.3.What are the GSP+ covered conventions? 1.4.The GSP+ monitoring process 1.5.GSP+ beneficiary countries 2.Armenia — GSP+ Assessment 2.1.Country Overview 2.2.Compliance with GSP+ Obligations 2.3.Trade and Economy 3.Bolivia– GSP+ Assessment 3.1.Country Overview 3.2.Compliance with GSP+ Obligations 3.1.Trade and Economy 4.Cabo Verde– GSP+ Assessment 4.1.Country Overview 4.2.Compliance with GSP+ Obligations 4.3.Trade and Economy

5.Costa Rica — GSP+ Assessment 5.1.Country Overview 5.2.Compliance with GSP+ Obligations 5.3.Trade and Economy 6.Ecuador — GSP+ Assessment 6.1.Country Overview 6.2.Compliance with GSP+ Obligations 6.3.Trade and Economy 7.El Salvador– GSP+ Assessment 7.1.Country Overview 7.2.Compliance with GSP+ Obligations 7.3.Trade and Economy 8.Georgia– GSP+ Assessment 8.1.Country Overview 8.2.Compliance with GSP+ Obligations 8.3.Trade and Economy 9.Guatemala– GSP+ Assessment 9.1.Country Overview 9.2.Compliance with GSP+ Obligations 9.3.Trade and Economy

10.Mongolia– GSP+ Assessment 10.1.Country Overview 10.2.Compliance with GSP+ Obligations 10.3.Trade and Economy 11.Pakistan– GSP+ Assessment 11.1.Country Overview 11.2.Compliance with the GSP+ obligations 11.3.Trade and Economy 12.Panama– GSP+ Assessment 12.1.Country Overview 12.2.Compliance with GSP+ Obligations 12.3.Trade and Economy 13.Paraguay– GSP+ Assessment 13.1.Country Overview 13.2.Compliance with GSP+ Obligations 13.3.Trade and Economy 14.Peru– GSP+ Assessment 14.1.Country Overview 14.2.Compliance with GSP+ Obligations 14.3.Trade and Economy

15.Philippines– GSP+ Assessment 15.1.Country Overview 15.2.Compliance with GSP+ Obligations 15.3.Trade and Economy 16.Annex 16.1.Armenia – Treaty Ratification and Reporting 16.2.Bolivia – Treaty Ratification and Reporting 16.3.Cabo Verde – Treaty Ratification and Reporting 16.4.Costa Rica – Treaty Ratification and Reporting 16.5.Ecuador – Treaty Ratification and Reporting 16.6.El Salvador – Treaty Ratification and Reporting 16.7.Georgia – Treaty Ratification and Reporting 16.8.Guatemala – Treaty Ratification and Reporting 16.9.Mongolia – Treaty Ratification and Reporting 16.10.Pakistan – Treaty Ratification and Reporting 16.11.Panama – Treaty Ratification and Reporting 16.12.Paraguay – Treaty Ratification and Reporting 16.13.Peru – Treaty Ratification and Reporting 16.14.Philippines – Treaty Ratification and Reporting

1.Introduction This Staff Working Document (SWD) accompanies the Report on the Generalised Scheme of Preferences and sets out in greater detail the functioning of the GSP+ since Regulation EU (No) 978/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 October 2012 applying a scheme of generalised tariff preferences ("GSP Regulation") started to apply on 1 January 2014. It provides an overview of the GSP+, and the international conventions that beneficiaries must ratify and effectively implement. It also analyses the effects and utilisation of the GSP+ among the beneficiary countries, based on the information available at the time of writing. Unless stated otherwise, this report reflects the effects of the GSP+ as of 1 November 2015. 1.1.What is GSP+? Under the GSP Regulation, the Special Incentive Arrangement for Sustainable Development and Good Governance, or "GSP+", is an instrument of the EU trade policy which aims to encourage third countries to comply with core international standards in the areas of human rights, labour rights, environmental protection and good governance. It is a special arrangement of the Generalised Scheme of Preferences. While the general GSP arrangement ("Standard GSP") generally grants tariff reductions or suspensions to developing countries on about 66% of EU tariff lines, the GSP+ offers additional advantages through complete duty suspensions for essentially the same goods. In return, beneficiary countries must commit to ratify and effectively implement core international conventions on human and labour rights, environmental protection, and good governance. Beneficiaries must also commit to cooperate with both the monitoring procedures imposed by those conventions, and the EU's monitoring procedure on the GSP+. Standard GSP beneficiaries wishing to benefit from the GSP+ must demonstrate that they meet the entry requirements for the GSP+, as set out by the GSP Regulation. Applications are accepted by the Commission at any time. Once a country has requested admission to the GSP+, the EU will evaluate the application within 10 months. The Commission has up to 6 months to examine the application and, provided the entry requirements are met, to propose the granting of GSP+ preferences. The Council of the EU and the European Parliament then have up to 4 months to consider the Commission's proposal. 1.2. Conditions for GSP+ beneficiary status 1.2.1.Precondition: Standard GSP conditions To be eligible for GSP+, countries must first fulfil the precondition of being beneficiaries of the Standard GSP. To benefit from the Standard GSP, countries must not previously have been classified for 3 consecutive years as upper-middle or high-income income economies by the World Bank, and must not benefit from other EU preferential market access arrangements offering the same, or better, tariff preferences. Should this be the case, countries cease to be GSP and also GSP+ beneficiaries, following a transitional period. 1.2.2.Vulnerability To be eligible for GSP+, GSP beneficiaries must be considered 'vulnerable' due to a low level of economic diversification, and a low level of integration within the international economy. Annex VII to the GSP Regulation provides two numerical criteria to determine 'vulnerability'. Firstly, the seven largest sections of a country's GSP imports into the EU must represent more than 75% of the value of all sections of a country's GSP imports. Secondly, that country's GSP imports into the EU must represent less than 6,5% of the value of the EU's total GSP imports from all GSP beneficiaries. 1.2.3.Ratification, reservations and implementation of core conventions at entry When applying for GSP+, a country is required to have already ratified the 27 core international conventions listed in Annex VIII of the GSP Regulation. These conventions cover human and labour rights, environmental protection, and good governance. Moreover, a country must not have formulated any reservations which are prohibited by those conventions, or which are incompatible with the object and purpose of the conventions. Lastly, for a country to be admitted to the GSP+, the most recent available conclusions and recommendations of the conventions' monitoring bodies must have not identified a serious failure to effectively implement any convention. 1.2.4.Undertaking to maintain ratification and effectively implement core conventions To be accepted into the GSP+, countries must sign a binding undertaking to maintain their ratification of the 27 conventions, and to ensure their effective implementation. 1.2.5.Undertaking to cooperate in GSP+ monitoring GSP+ applicants must also accept without reservation the reporting requirements and monitoring imposed by those conventions. They must also agree to participate in and co-operate with the EU GSP+ monitoring led by the European Commission. This cooperation enables the Commission to monitor beneficiaries' compliance with their undertakings under the GSP+. 1.3.What are the GSP+ covered conventions? 1.3.1.The 27 core conventions The 27 international conventions relevant to the GSP+ are listed in Annex VIII to the GSP Regulation. Part A of Annex VIII contains seven United Nations (UN) conventions on human rights, and eight International Labour Organisation (ILO) conventions on labour rights. Part B of Annex VIII contains eight conventions on the protection of the environment, and four conventions on good governance principles. 1.3.2.UN Human Rights Conventions

Seven UN conventions on human rights are relevant to the GSP+, as follows: Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women Convention against Torture and other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment Convention on the Rights of the Child. Each of the human rights conventions establishes a specialised committee of independent experts responsible for monitoring the implementation of the convention. States parties are obliged to report periodically to these committees. Detailed information on reporting requirements and parties' compliance can be found on the website of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (UNHCHR). States parties are only obliged to report periodically to the committees established under each convention. In some cases, states parties have not reported to the committees during the period of 2012-2014, or no committee reports are available. It should also be noted that as the reports of the committees aim to ensure full implementation of the conventions, they generally focus on shortcomings. The Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide bans acts committed (during war or peace) with the intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnic, racial or religious group. This convention does not provide for a monitoring committee. The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) provides for a wide range of rights, including the right to life; the right to freedom from torture and cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment and punishment; the right to liberty and security of the person; the right of detained persons to human treatment; the right to freedom of movement; the right to a fair trial; the right to freedom of thought, conscience, and religion; the right to freedom of opinion and expression; and the right to freedom of assembly and association. The ICCPR also provides that all peoples have the right to self-determination and that minorities have the right to enjoy their own culture, practise their own religion and use their own language. Two optional protocols provide for: (1)the possibility of individual complaints with regard to alleged violations of the Covenant by state parties; (2)the abolition of the death penalty in the territory under the jurisdiction of the state party. However, it is not necessary to ratify or implement these optional protocols to benefit from the GSP+. The Human Rights Council (HRC) monitors the implementation of the ICCPR. Each state party is obliged to submit a report on adopted measures and on progress made to the HRC within one year after the ICCPR entering force, and every 4 years thereafter. The International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR) focuses on economic, social, and cultural rights. These include the right to just and favourable conditions of work, the right to form trade unions and the right to strike, the right to social security, the right to an adequate standard of living, the right to education, and the right to take part in cultural life. The ICESCR also lists the right to self-determination for all peoples. Its implementation is monitored by the Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (CESCR). Parties must submit a report within two years after the ICESCR entering force, and every 5 years thereafter. The CESCR examines the reports, adopts concluding observations, and makes recommendations to the states parties. The International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (ICERD) prohibits racial discrimination in all its forms. The ICERD requires states parties not to engage in acts of racial discrimination, to amend any laws which create racial discrimination, and to end racial discrimination by all persons or groups. Moreover, states parties must declare the dissemination of ideas based on racial superiority or incitement to racial hatred as criminal offences, and must prohibit organisations which promote racial discrimination. Implementation is monitored by the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination (CERD). All states parties are obliged to submit reports to the committee one year after acceding to the ICERD, and every two years thereafter. The CERD adopts concluding observations, and makes suggestions and recommendations to states parties. The Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women requires states parties to eliminate discrimination against women in political and public life, to accord women equality before the law, and to eliminate discrimination against women concerning acquisition of nationality, and in matters concerning marriage and family relations, with an emphasis on measures in rural areas. The Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW) monitors states parties' compliance with the convention. States parties must submit a report to the CEDAW on the legislative, judicial, administrative or other measures adopted within a year after the convention's entry into force, and at least every 4 years thereafter. The CEDAW examines the reports, adopts concluding observations, and makes recommendations to the states parties.

The convention is supplemented by an optional protocol recognizing the competence of the CEDAW to receive and consider complaints from individuals or groups, and to initiate inquiries into situations of grave or systematic violations of women’s rights. The Convention against Torture and other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment bans torture under all circumstances. It requires states parties to prevent torture and to ensure that acts of torture are criminal offences; furthermore it forbids states from expelling persons to states where they would be in danger of being tortured. The convention also requires a state party to prevent acts of cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment not amounting to torture. The optional protocol to the convention creates the UN Subcommittee on Prevention and allows in-country inspections of places of detention to be undertaken in collaboration with national institutions. However, it is not necessary for countries to have ratified and implemented this optional protocol to benefit from the GSP+. All states parties are obliged to submit regular reports to the monitoring Committee against Torture (CAT), initially one year after acceding to the convention, and every 4 years thereafter. The CAT examines the reports, adopts concluding observations, and makes recommendations to the states parties. The Convention on the Rights of the Child requires states parties to ensure that in all actions concerning children undertaken by state authorities, the best interests of the child are a primary consideration. The convention provides a range of rights for children relating to registration of birth, respect for identity, protection against separation from parents, family reunification, freedom of thought and expression, freedom of association, access to information, protection from physical or mental violence, adoption, health care, mental or physical disability, social security, adequate living standards, education, and protection from exploitation. The convention is supplemented by two optional protocols concerning the sale of children, child prostitution and child pornography, and on the involvement of children in armed conflict. However, it is not necessary for countries to have ratified these optional protocols to benefit from the GSP+. The Committee on the Rights of the Child (CRC) monitors states parties' implementation of the convention. All states parties must report to the committee on the implementation of the convention, initially two years after acceding to the convention, and every 5 years thereafter. The CRC examines the reports, and addresses its concerns and recommendations to the states parties through its concluding observations. 1.3.3.ILO Labour Rights Conventions Eight fundamental ILO conventions on labour rights are relevant to the GSP+, as follows: Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise Convention (No 87) Right to Organise and Collective Bargaining Convention (No 98) Forced Labour Convention (No 29) Abolition of Forced Labour Convention (No 105) Minimum Age Convention (No 138) Worst Forms of Child Labour Convention (No 182) Equal Remuneration Convention (No 100) Discrimination (Employment and Occupation) Convention (No 111). In general, states must report every three years on the steps taken to implement the eight fundamental ILO conventions. The Committee of Experts on the Application of Conventions and Recommendations (CEACR; hereinafter referred to as the Committee of Experts), is an impartial body of 20 legal experts. It reviews states' reports and publishes an annual report on members' compliance with the fundamental ILO conventions. The Committee of Experts' annual report is published on the ILO website, and all observations on the implementation of the conventions can be found on the ILO's NORMLEX database. The first part of the Committee of Experts' report describes the committee's work, and the extent to which Member States have fulfilled their reporting obligations. It also identifies cases for which the Committee of Experts has decided to insert special notes, according to the seriousness and persistence of the problem, the urgency of the situation, or the quality and scope of a government’s response in its reports. Depending on the seriousness of the problem, governments may be requested to submit early reports on these cases ("single footnoted cases"), or may be requested to provide full information to the next International Labour Conference ("double footnoted cases"). The second part of the Committee of Experts' report publishes observations concerning individual countries. Besides reflecting information on legislation and governmental practice, other sources of information are taken into account, including comments of employers' and workers' organisations. Also considered are the proceedings and findings of other ILO supervisory bodies, such as the Committee on the Application of Standards of the International Labour Conference (CAS), the Governing Body's Committee on the Freedom of Association (CFA), and the findings of the special procedures. The Committee of Experts' report feeds into the work of the CAS, where measures taken by the ILO Member States are considered, and 24-25 exemplary individual cases of serious failure of the fulfilment of the conventions' requirements are discussed, and conclusions are adopted. The individual cases are selected through negotiations between social partners (employers' and workers' representatives) in the countries that have been the object of an observation in the Committee of Experts' report. Customarily, the social partners include in this list also the "double footnoted cases" identified by the Committee of Experts. The CAS's General Report is then adopted by the International Labour Conference. ILO monitoring is not limited to legal implementation, but focuses also on concrete application and technical issues, including cases of progress and good practice. The reports of the Committee of Experts and the CAS also evaluate states' willingness to address problems in complying with ratified labour standards, and to cooperate with the ILO.

1.3.4.UN Conventions on Environmental Protection and Climate Change Eight international conventions on environmental protection and climate change are relevant to the GSP+, as follows: Basel Convention on the Control of Trans-boundary Movements of Hazardous Wastes and Their Disposal Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora Convention on Biological Diversity Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety Montreal Protocol on Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer UN Framework Convention on Climate Change Kyoto Protocol to the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change. The Basel Convention on the Control of Trans-boundary Movements of Hazardous Wastes and Their Disposal aims to reduce hazardous waste generation. It covers a wide range of wastes defined as "hazardous", as well as household and incinerator ash. The Convention calls for environmentally sound management of hazardous waste by ensuring the availability of adequate disposal facilities, located close to the source of generation. The Convention also seeks to limit and regulate trans-boundary movement of hazardous waste. This includes written consent between concerned states, exchange of information, and technical assistance. Before the end of each calendar year, each party must submit a report containing comprehensive information on its implementation of the convention. These national reports are reviewed by the Implementation and Compliance Committee, which also reviews individual cases of non-compliance. The Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants aims to protect human health and the environment from persistent organic pollutants (POPs). POPs are hazardous chemicals that are toxic to humans and wildlife. They remain intact in the environment for long periods, become widely distributed geographically, and accumulate in the fatty tissue of living organisms. POPs circulate globally and cause damage wherever they are distributed. A non-compliance mechanism under the Stockholm Convention has not yet been established. Although no compliance committee exists, compliance and implementation is assessed through the requirement for parties to submit a National Implementation Plan. Every four years, parties must also submit a National Report on the effectiveness of measures taken to implement the convention. The Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES) is among the most prominent conservation agreement. Its aim is to ensure that international trade in more than 35000 animal and plant species does not threaten their survival. The list of species covered by CITES is regularly updated by the Conference of the Parties which meets every three years. Under the CITES framework, Parties have to enact an adequate legislation, report on trade levels in CITES products and implement specific measures against illegal trade in particularly endangered species (such as elephants, rhinoceroses, Asian big cats and some rosewood species). The implementation of CITES is monitored by the CITES Secretariat and the Standing Committee.. The Standing Committee is a powerful compliance body, as it can decide upon sanctions, including trade suspensions, in case of failures by Parties to properly implement their obligations under CITES . The Secretariat of CITES is a repository of information on the implementation of the Convention and receives information and reports that it has to communicate to the Parties. This is done through the Notifications to the Parties. The Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) aims to ensure the conservation and sustainable use of all ecosystems, species and genetic resources. It has three main goals: conserving biological diversity, ensuring the sustainable use of its components, and fairly sharing the benefits arising from the use of genetic resources. The CBD is legally binding for the parties, which must establish a National Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan (NBSAP) outlining actions to implement the CBD. Parties must report on implementation every four years. The governing body of the CBD, the Conference of Parties, adopted the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety in 2000. The protocol aims to ensure a balance between the sustainable use of modern biotechnology and economic interests. The protocol governs the trans-boundary movement of Genetically Modified Organisms (GMOs), and authorises states to prevent the import of GMOs according to the precautionary principle. The Montreal Protocol on Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer reflects the need to phase out the production and consumption of ozone-depleting substances. Adjustments through decisions of the parties allow the protocol to react to new scientific developments and technical progress. The protocol provides for two key control measures: data reporting and a non-compliance procedure. Parties report every year to the Ozone Secretariat in Nairobi, Kenya, on production, import and export of ozone-depleting substances referred to in the protocol. In addition, the Implementation Committee monitors compliance on the basis of the data provided, and makes extensive reports on non-compliant countries. The committee recommends an ‘indicative list’ of measures to be taken in case of non-compliance, through adoption of the Meeting of the Parties to the Montreal Protocol. These measures include issuing formal cautions and suspending specific rights and privileges, as well as finance and trade measures. The Multilateral Fund of the Montreal Protocol provides assistance to countries to comply with the protocol. The UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) was included among the conventions relevant to the GSP+ by the 2012 reform to the GSP, in order to place further emphasis on the importance of effectively addressing climate change issues. Each party is obliged to report on its implementation of the convention. However, developing countries have only to submit a national inventory of emissions and removals of greenhouse gases, and a general description of steps taken to implement the convention. There are no fixed dates for developing countries to submit national communications, although in principle reports should be submitted within 4 years of the initial financial support to assist them with preparing the reports. Moreover, rather than being subject to an in-depth review by an international team of experts, developing countries' reports are instead considered by a dedicated group set up by the Subsidiary Body on Implementation.

Ahead of the 2015 Conference of the Parties in Paris (COP21), parties committed to undertake certain post-2020 climate actions. These commitments were communicated in the form of an Intended Nationally Determined Contribution (INDC). While these communications outlined parties' intended actions on climate change, submission of an INDC was optional under the UNFCCC, and so is not taken into account by GSP+ monitoring. The Kyoto Protocol to the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change is an international framework to combat global warming by reducing greenhouse gas emissions through internationally binding commitments. Adopted in 1997 and entering into force in 2005, the protocol has been amended several times, most recently through the Doha Amendment in December 2012. The first commitment period ended in 2012, during which parties committed themselves to reduce their greenhouse gas emissions by an average of 5% against 1990 levels. A reduction of 18% has been agreed for the second commitment period (2013 to 2020), although not all parties of the first period have joined the commitments of the second period. The protocol provides for an International Emissions Trading mechanism, where emission transactions must be reported to the UN Climate Change Secretariat. The Secretariat verifies that transactions are consistent with the commitments. The protocol also establishes an Adaptation Fund to finance projects in developing countries to mitigate the adverse impacts of climate change. 1.3.5.UN Conventions on Good Governance Four international conventions on good governance principles are relevant to the GSP+, as follows: UN Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs UN Convention on Psychotropic Substances UN Convention against Illicit Traffic in Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances UN Convention against Corruption. The three major international drug control conventions are mutually supportive and complementary. They seek to codify internationally applicable control measures to ensure the availability of narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances for medical and scientific purposes, while preventing their diversion into illicit channels. They also include provisions on illicit trafficking and drug abuse. The UN Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs, adopted in 1961, aims to combat misuse of narcotic drugs. First, it seeks to limit the possession, use, trade, distribution, import, export, manufacture, and production of drugs exclusively to medical and scientific purposes. Second, it combats drug trafficking through international co-operation to deter and discourage drug traffickers. The UN Convention on Psychotropic Substances entered into force in 1976. It establishes an international control system for psychotropic substances not covered by the Convention on Narcotic Drugs. It responded to the diversification and expansion of the spectrum of drugs of abuse and introduced controls over a number of synthetic drugs according to their abuse potential and their therapeutic value. The UN Convention against Illicit Traffic in Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances entered into force in 1990. It provides additional regulative mechanisms to enforce the abovementioned conventions through comprehensive measures against drug trafficking, including provisions against money laundering and the diversion of precursor chemicals. It also covers international co-operation through, for example, extradition of drug traffickers, controlled deliveries and transfer of proceedings. The International Narcotics Control Board (INCB) monitors compliance with the three international drug control conventions. It has the authority to investigate the failure of any country to carry out the conventions' provisions, including countries that are not parties to the conventions. The INCB recommends actions and suggests adjustments to both international and national control regimes. As well as reporting on compliance with the conventions, the INCB can recommend sanctions to the parties, which can extend to stopping the export or import of particular psychotropic substances. The UN Convention against Corruption (UNCAC) entered into force in 2005. It covers several areas: prevention and criminalisation of a wide range of acts of corruption, law enforcement, international co-operation, asset recovery, and technical assistance. The convention covers a broad range of actions defined as corruption, including trading in influence, abuse of function, and corruption in the private sector. It is the only global anti-corruption instrument which is legally binding. The Conference of the State Parties has established a mechanism to monitor implementation of the convention. After undergoing a comprehensive self-assessment, states parties review each other in groups of three, selected by lot. The monitoring process is carried out by governmental experts. Country review reports remain confidential, although countries are encouraged to publish their reports, and executive summaries are made available. 1.4.The GSP+ monitoring process The reformed GSP Regulation requires enhanced monitoring of the GSP+ beneficiaries' compliance with their commitments made when entering the arrangement. Once a country is granted GSP+ benefits, the Commission monitors that it abides by its undertaking, namely to: maintain ratification of the international conventions covered by the GSP+ arrangement; ensure their effective implementation;

comply with reporting requirements of the monitoring bodies; accept regular monitoring and review of its implementation record in accordance with the conventions; cooperate with the Commission in its monitoring role and provide all necessary information. Each GSP+ beneficiary is subject to a continuous and structured monitoring process by the Commission. In particular, this involves an ongoing dialogue with beneficiary authorities based on a list of salient shortcomings identified in its implementation of the relevant conventions (the GSP+ "scorecard"). 1.4.1.GSP+ dialogue and scorecards As a beneficiary joins the GSP+, the Commission compiles an assessment of the beneficiary's compliance with its GSP+ commitments (the first "scorecard"). This formal "scorecard" notes the salient shortcomings identified in particular by the international conventions' monitoring bodies. This begins the ongoing GSP+ dialogue, during which the Commission draws the beneficiary's attention to the areas listed in the scorecard. Whenever possible, the dialogue makes use of existing political and institutional links between the EU and beneficiaries. The lists of issues in the scorecard are updated annually, and seek to reflect beneficiaries' progress in the effective implementation of the conventions. The assessment reflects developments on the ground, where beneficiaries are expected to demonstrate serious efforts towards tackling the identified problems. The Commission seeks to take every possible opportunity to discuss these issues with beneficiary countries, to result in a constructive and continuing GSP+ dialogue. In line with the GSP Regulation, GSP+ monitoring takes into account the views from a wide range of sources beyond the international conventions' monitoring bodies, including civil society, social partners, the European Parliament and the Council. A wide range of stakeholders are also involved in the beneficiary countries – not just the central government, but local or regional authorities, civil society (e.g. social partners, non-governmental organisations), business associations, and local offices of international organisations. As part of its monitoring, the Commission may participate in local workshops, or field visits to industries. Reaching out to local stakeholders, particularly during GSP+ monitoring visits, is important not only to gather first-hand information, but also to improve understanding of how the GSP+ works, and the EU's expectations of beneficiaries. This helps local stakeholders to play a constructive role in assisting local, regional and central authorities to meet their commitments under the conventions. In particular, as direct beneficiaries of tariff preferences, economic operators are expected to play a key role in supporting implementation of the conventions. 1.4.2.Challenges to GSP+ monitoring The conventions relevant to the GSP+ do not all provide for a regular, continuous monitoring mechanism. Some of the environmental conventions, for example, establish committees which only examine individual cases of non-compliance, rather than issuing general and consecutive reports which cover all states parties. In other cases, reports may not exist for certain countries, even in cases of shortcomings. Other reports, such as those concerning compliance with the UN Convention against Corruption, may be entirely published on a voluntary basis. Therefore, the GSP+ monitoring process does not rely on information from the conventions' monitoring bodies alone. Instead, the Commission gathers information from as wide a range of sources as possible, including civil society organisations, NGOs, EU Delegations in the beneficiary countries, and through the ongoing dialogue with the government authorities. GSP+ monitoring field visits to beneficiary countries are particularly useful in this regard. However, the Commission carefully evaluates all monitoring information gathered – information from sources other than the conventions' monitoring bodies cannot always be verified. 1.4.3.Temporary withdrawal Beneficiaries must demonstrate a positive record of compliance with and effective implementation of the commitments made upon entry into the GSP+. If the Commission has a reasonable doubt that a beneficiary does not respect its binding undertaking to comply with the reporting obligations under the international conventions, or to cooperate with the relevant monitoring bodies or with the Commission, or to maintain ratification and ensure the effective implementation of the relevant international conventions, then the Commission will consider opening an investigation into whether a beneficiary is complying with its GSP+ undertaking. Following this, GSP+ benefits may be temporarily withdrawn, until the beneficiary demonstrates compliance with the GSP+. 1.5.GSP+ beneficiary countries For the reporting period of 2014-2015, 14 countries benefitted from the GSP+. Armenia, Bolivia, Cape Verde, Costa Rica, Ecuador, Georgia, Mongolia, Pakistan, Paraguay and Peru were granted GSP+ benefits from 1 January 2014, followed by El Salvador, Guatemala and Panama from 28 February 2014, and the Philippines from 25 December 2014. Ecuador was classified by the World Bank as an upper-middle income country in 2011, 2012, and 2013. Following a 2-year transition period, it therefore ceased to be a GSP+ beneficiary from January 2015. Costa Rica, El Salvador, Guatemala, Panama and Peru will cease to be GSP+ beneficiaries from January 2016. These countries have benefitted from a free trade agreement with the EU since 2013, and have remained in the GSP+ for a transition period. Similarly Georgia will cease to be a GSP+ beneficiary from January 2017, as it has benefitted from EU preferential market access under a bilateral deep and comprehensive free trade agreement (DCFTA) since 2014. The following sections of the Staff Working Document provide analysis of the effects of the GSP+ on each beneficiary. This includes information on beneficiaries' ratification, compliance with, and implementation of the international conventions relevant to GSP+. 2.Armenia — GSP+ Assessment 2.1.Country Overview

The first years following Armenia’s independence from the USSR in 1991 were very turbulent. The Nagorno-Karabakh conflict and a transportation blockade by Azerbaijan and Turkey which left landlocked Armenia with the two longest out of its four borders closed, as well as an energy crisis and difficult transition from a centrally planned to a market economy contributed to the country’s economic collapse and emigration of a quarter of its population in the early 1990s. In the mid-1990s Armenia began to recover economically, but the unresolved conflict and two closed borders, as well as high outward migration, remain to this day. Moreover, Armenia was hit hard by the Georgia-Russia war and international financial and economic crisis at the end of the first decade of this century. Despite subsequent resumption of economic growth serious economic difficulties and related social problems persist. At present, Armenia in particular strongly feels the impact of western sanctions on Russia (a sharp decrease of exports and remittances). Armenia has to continue implementing sound macroeconomic policies against external vulnerabilities, while supporting with further reforms the transition to a more competitive and globally integrated economy. The domestic political situation remains fragile. An excessive overlap between political and economic interests has depleted public trust in political elites, as has their record of rigged elections and corrupt administrative practices. Polarisation between political parties deepened in 2008 when the police and army forcefully dispersed mass protest after presidential elections, leaving several dead and wounded. In the following years, the Armenian authorities made more serious efforts to address problems in the area of human rights, democracy and rule of law, but further important work remains ahead, in particular as regards implementation and enforcement of adopted legislation and the rebuilding of public trust. Towards the end of 2015, the political scene was focused on constitutional reform, including the referendum. The reform aims at transforming Armenia from a semi-presidential democracy to a parliamentary one. The process was criticised by the majority of the opposition and civil society, questioning the motives and the process guiding the reform. The EU took note of the concerns expressed on the constitutional referendum held on December 6th and has urged the authorities to fully investigate in a transparent manner fraud allegations. The draft constitutional amendments were consulted closely with the Council of Europe’s Venice Commission, whose opinion of the final draft was mostly positive. In 2004, Armenia was included in the EU’s European Neighbourhood Policy (ENP) and in 2009 also in its enhanced eastern dimension, the Eastern Partnership (EaP). The EU and Armenia negotiated an Association Agreement (AA) including a Deep and Comprehensive Free Trade Area (DCFTA) by 2013. However, Armenia later decided to join the Eurasian Economic Union (EEU), delegating its trade policy competence to the EEU. Therefore, preferential trade agreements like the DCFTA with the EU could no longer be concluded. The bilateral contractual relations therefore remain based on the 1999 Partnership and Cooperation Agreement (PCA) which will be replaced by a new overarching and legally binding agreement, on which Armenia and the EU started negotiations on 7 December, 2015. 2.2.Compliance with GSP+ Obligations 2.2.1.UN Human Rights Conventions (Conventions 1-7) Status of ratification and reporting Armenia ratified all the GSP+-relevant UN human rights conventions, without reservations, and maintains their ratification. For further details please see the annex. In 2014-2015, Armenia made a considerable effort to catch up with its reporting obligations to the monitoring bodies of these conventions. However, the latest report due under the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination remained outstanding from 2014. For further details please see the annex. Status of implementation of the conventions Regarding the implementation of the seven conventions, in 2014-2015 Armenia made an overall serious effort to address the shortcomings identified in its GSP+ scorecards. In particular, in 2014, the government approved an action plan for the implementation of the National Strategy on Human Rights Protection in 2014-2016, which serves as a roadmap for coordinated actions by public institutions toward fulfilling Armenia’s international human rights commitments and obligations. The Armenian authorities also made an effort to better involve civil society in the action plan’s implementation and monitoring. However, many of the initiatives undertaken in this period represent only initial steps towards tackling the identified problems, and Armenia now needs to proceed with further preparatory and in particular monitoring and implementation activities to demonstrate results. International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (ICERD) While some efforts were deployed to raise awareness of the rights of people belonging to minorities, challenges remain to increase tolerance and tackle discrimination of ethnic minorities. Therefore, the 2014-2016 Human Rights Action Plan suggests assessing the compatibility of the existing Armenian legislation with the international legal framework and weighting the merits of adopting a comprehensive anti-discrimination law. At the end of 2015, Armenian authorities signalled they are preparing such a stand-alone law to be adopted by the end of 2016. International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) Despite the Armenian authorities’ efforts to comply with the requirements of the ICCPR, more efforts are needed to ensure the independence and integrity of the judiciary system. Public trust in the judiciary system remains low, and awareness of civil and political rights remains limited among the general public and also among legal professionals. Police officers were only rarely held accountable for excessive use of force and findings of human rights institutions were not properly followed up. As mentioned above in the section on the implementation of the ICERD, Armenia lacks a comprehensive legislative and enforcement framework against discrimination. Discrimination against minority religious and ethnic groups, in particular at the workplace and in the media, persisted in 2014-2015. Persons with disabilities remained discriminated against and socially segregated. However, towards the end of 2015, the Armenian authorities signalled a comprehensive anti-discrimination law was under preparation, for adoption by the end of 2016. Some activities to address gender equality issues and ensure equal opportunities were launched, such as the establishment of bodies in charge of gender policy at regional and community levels or organisation of training courses and awareness-raising campaigns on gender sensitivity. With regard to religious minorities, the introduction of a possibility of alternatives to military service for Jehovah’s Witnesses represented a clear improvement. Progress was also noted in access to media and textbooks in minority languages, as well as efforts to train teachers. Progress in the implementation of the convention in the reporting period includes also the strengthening of the independence of judges through amendments to the judicial code, which defined the duties of the self-governing structures. The criteria for evaluating and promoting judges were also improved, and the procedure for appointing them was made more transparent. Furthermore, the number of public defenders increased and the categories of groups of population eligible for free legal aid were expanded. However, the lack of information to the public about these improvements continued to impair access to justice. To enhance public awareness of the role of the public defender, a public information campaign was organised. Further quality control measures and capacity development of public defenders should be undertaken. International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR)

In 2014-2015 Armenia took further steps to implement the ICESCR, including reception of over 17 000 Syrian refugees and asylum seekers, adoption of the 2013-2015 National Action Plan to Combat Trafficking in Persons and establishment of employment quotas for persons with disabilities as from the beginning of 2015. However, high levels of violence against women, including domestic violence, prevailed, and participation of women in public life remained low. Further efforts are needed to address deeply rooted patriarchal attitudes and stereotypes regarding the role of women and men, and to increase the representation of women in public administration, academia and research institutions. Furthermore, discrimination and in some cases violence based on gender identity and sexual orientation remained widespread in Armenia, and the position of lesbian, gay, bi-sexual, trans-sexual and inter-sexual (LGBT) people continued to be of serious concern. In 2014, 30 % of the population lived below the poverty line. Unemployment remained high (around 18 %, with youth unemployment at around 24 %) and needs more attention. Armenia should also take measures to regularise the informal sector of the economy. Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW) Concerning the implementation of the CEDAW in 2014-2015, the law on equal rights and equal opportunities for men and women was not sufficiently implemented. Moreover, the law lacks a complaint mechanism. Deeply rooted patriarchal attitudes and stereotypes regarding the roles of women and men remained, coupled with persistently high levels of violence against women. A law on domestic and gender-based violence was not adopted in the reporting period. On the positive side, a Men and Women Equality Affairs Council was established as a national mechanism to deal with issues related to discrimination against women, and an annual action plan for women and men equality policy was adopted by the government in 2015, as was an action plan for preventing gender violence. The World Bank Report on Women, Business and the Law placed Armenia as one of 18 countries where there were no legal differences between men and women. Convention against Torture and other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (CAT) During the period under review, Armenia developed an action plan for prison reform in line with the recommendations of the Council of Europe’s Committee for the Prevention of Torture (CPT). In July 2015, processing of cases of alleged torture and ill-treatment also improved. Persons detained were better informed about their rights. A number of awareness-raising and training activities were undertaken with the aim to improve prevention, detection and reporting of torture and ill-treatment. Nevertheless, reports of torture and ill-treatment persisted during the period under evaluation. Criminal justice bodies relied on confessions and information obtained during questioning to secure convictions, and there were not sufficient procedural safeguards against ill-treatment. Allegations of instances of torture and mistreatment during pre-trial investigations were not always properly investigated. Amendments to the penal code bringing Armenian legislation in line with the definitions of the CAT were adopted in June 2015. These amendments also allow for the opening of investigations into torture on grounds other than the victim’s complaints. A package of further legal amendments to prevent torture and avoid impunity is under preparation. Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC) As regards the implementation of the CRC, in 2014-2015 Armenia did not sufficiently address the previous recommendations of the CRC Committee. In spite of the declared political will to give priority to the matter, there was a significant decrease in the budget allocation for issues related to children’s rights protection, particularly in the areas of health and education. Moreover, national bodies such as the National Commission for the Protection of Children’s Rights and the Office of Human Rights Defenders lacked necessary resources and capacities to effectively carry out their mandate. First-line custody issues were handled by councils comprised of volunteers. The development of a cadre of professional social workers remained an important issue to be addressed. Child poverty remained very high, and there was still not a clear and legally binding distribution of functions between social protection and child services, although measures were taken to improve inter-service cooperation. Monitoring of childcare institutions revealed cases of abuse and ill-treatment of children. In June 2015, the UN Universal Periodic Review (UPR) particularly highlighted the need to address sexual abuse of children. Sex-selective abortions remained a considerable concern, with a birth ratio of 114 boys per 100 girls. Progress in implementing the convention during the reporting period included the adoption of a number of other relevant international conventions, as well as of amendments and supplements thereto. Furthermore, there was good progress related to institutional and policy measures, with implementation of the National Programme for the Protection of Children’s Rights for 2013-2016, Programme of State Support to Graduates of Child Care Institutions for 2004-2015 and Programme on Deinstitutionalisation of Children Care for 2004-2015. Introduction of a multi-ministerial approach to children’s rights protection involving all ministries concerned was a very good step to improve efficiency in this area. Efforts were made to detect and assist homeless children. Draft legislation was presented to the parliament banning sex-selective abortions. Future actions and priorities The Armenian government’s future priorities and objectives regarding human rights protection include in particular continuation of the judiciary reform; improvements in the area of electoral rights; fight against use of torture and ill treatment; advancement of women’s rights; improvement of the treatment and situation of, respectively, ethnic minorities and people with disabilities; fight against corruption; and improvements on several social and economic rights, such as healthcare and living standards. The government also intends to put emphasis not only on drafting and adoption of legislation and strategic and programming documents, as has mostly been the case so far, but also on their proper implementation and enforcement, including through institutional capacity building and effective monitoring and evaluation. Conclusions In 2014-2015, the Armenian authorities made an overall serious effort to address the shortcomings identified in the area of human rights protection in Armenia’s GSP+ scorecards. In particular, they prepared a number of legislative proposals as well as strategies, action plans and similar initiatives. If adopted and properly implemented, these would address many of the problems listed in the scorecards. The Armenian authorities also deployed tangible efforts to be more inclusive in their processes related to human rights protection, involve civil society and consult international and regional expertise with a view to meet international standards in this field. Moreover, the authorities focused on increasing public awareness of international human rights conventions, as well as of the need for social and economic integration of the whole of Armenia’s population. At the same time, Armenia needs to further step up efforts to effectively address several persisting human rights problems, in particular the lack of independence and integrity of the judiciary and of the political system as a whole, no sufficient legislative and enforcement framework against use of torture and ill treatment, corruption, discrimination against minorities, discrimination and violence against women and child poverty.

2.2.2.ILO Labour Rights Conventions (Conventions 8-15) Status of ratification and reporting Armenia ratified all eight ILO fundamental labour conventions relevant for the GSP+, without reservations, and maintains their ratification. For details please the see annex. In 2014-2015, Armenia complied with all its reporting obligations to the monitoring bodies of these conventions. For details please the see annex. Status of implementation of the conventions Regarding the implementation of these eight conventions the ILO Committee of Experts on the Application of Conventions and Recommendations (hereafter referred to as Committee of Experts) in its recent reports raised a number of issues. In 2014-2015, the Armenian authorities deployed efforts to address several of these problems, but in many cases more will still have to be done in the future. Freedom of association and collective bargaining (Conventions 87 and 98) In its 2014 report, the Committee of Experts requested legislative amendments to enable some excluded categories of civil servants as well as self-employed, liberal professions and informal workers to form and join trade unions. It requested amendments also to the legislation on the formation of an organisation or federation of employers. Moreover, the Committee of Experts asked for further legislative amendments of the labour code on the right to strike. In 2014-2015, the Armenian authorities discussed the requested amendments with social partners and other associations representing the interests of employers. Some legislative proposals were drafted and submitted to the National Assembly. However, these proposals have not been adopted yet, and there is no indication when this is supposed to happen. It also remains unclear whether the government is considering amending the legislation to ensure that public servants could join trade unions. In its 2014 report, the Committee of Experts requested legislative amendments to ensure that in cases where there was no trade union representing 50 % of the company’s workers, existing minority unions were entitled to bargain collectively on behalf of their own members. It also asked for amending provisions envisaging automatic termination of a collective agreement in case of privatisation or restructuring of an enterprise. In 2014-2015, the later amendments were discussed with social partners but further debate is needed and the government decided to request ILO expertise to this end. In the reporting period, the major Armenian trade unions repeatedly expressed dissatisfaction with the functioning of the national trilateral commission responsible for the implementation of the National Collective Agreement. In July 2013, the Government passed Decree Nr 857 restructuring several line Ministries and transferring the responsibility for labour inspection from the Ministry of Labour to the Ministry of Health (State Health Inspectorate). Subsequently, the 2015 Decree Nr 572 limited the mandate of the inspection services whilst also limiting its competence to issues related to occupational safety and health. Labour inspectors are no longer allowed to control other matters linked to general working conditions or employment relations covered by collective bargaining or by law (wages, employment contracts, welfare provisions etc.) and are not entrusted with legal enforcement powers. As a result of the 2013 restructuring, the number of labour inspectors was reduced from 149 to 60. While the inspection reform process is still ongoing, it is clear that developments so far have seriously weakened the capacity of official authorities to monitor compliance with national labour laws and provisions and collective agreements. In November 2015, Armenia took part in the Sub-Regional Tripartite conference on the topic of labour inspection organised by the ILO in Sochi. Representatives from both the Armenian Ministries of Health and of Labour were present, as well as from employers and workers. The purpose was to analyse the implementation of labour inspection systems, and to make proposals to countries in the sub-region to develop strategies and programmes for improving workplace compliance (with labour standards and legislation). Enforcement is important for ensuring application of the core labour standards on freedom of association and collective bargaining as well as other core labour standards. Abolition of forced labour (Conventions 29 and 105) In its 2013 comments, the Committee of Experts requested the government to submit copies of several legislative acts to allow for assessing whether the Armenian legislation was aligned with the convention. The Committee of Experts also asked for further information concerning the rules of work of convicted persons serving a sentence of imprisonment, in particular whether they could be hired by private companies. Moreover, the Committee of Experts noted a continued implementation of the National Action Plan for Combating Trafficking in Human Beings and pursuance of several cooperation programmes in this area with the UN organisations and other countries in the region. Regarding rehabilitation of victims of trafficking, the Committee of Experts also noted that the Armenian legislation included victims of trafficking among beneficiaries from services and activities of employment centres. Additional progress in the fight against trafficking of human beings and in their re-integration nevertheless remained necessary. In its 2013 report, the Committee of Experts also requested further information illustrating the use of the criminal provision concerning penalties for public officials for their failure to exercise their duties. Moreover, the committee repeated some of its earlier demands, notably for copies of relevant court decisions and further information concerning penalties for persons inciting national, racial or religious hatred, as well as for those involved in events breaching national legislation on meetings and demonstrations. According to available information, no developments took place in 2014-2015 regarding these matters. Worst forms of child labour (Convention 182) Further to the ratification of the convention by Armenia in 2006, the Committee of Experts examined the country’s first report on the convention’s implementation in 2011. The committee requested further information on the application of the criminal code’s provision prohibiting the use of children under 16 in criminal activities, including trafficking in drugs. Armenia’s national committee on child protection aims to fight against children’s involvement in the worst forms of child labour (such as trafficking or sexual exploitation) and to support their withdrawal from such labour and re-integration in the society. Moreover, the 2004-2015 National Plan of Action (NPA) for the Protection of the Rights of the Child foresaw concrete support measures for vulnerable groups of children (e.g. street children or children from rural areas) and actions to combat the worst forms of child labour. In its 2011 report, the Committee of Experts requested more detailed information on the role of the national committee on child protection and on the impact of the measures taken within the 2004-2015 NPA. It also asked to be informed on actions taken to strengthen the capacity of law enforcement bodies to combat the trafficking of persons under 18.

Furthermore, the Committee of Experts noted that due to poverty and rising costs of education, an increasing number of families were not in a position to ensure even a basic education for their children. Also, an increasing number of children dropped out of the education system to start working, primarily in the informal economy. The government was requested to address this situation as compulsory education is considered to be one of the most effective means to limit the occurrence of child labour. Moreover, the committee noted that the number of children begging in the streets was increasing and asked the government to take measures to protect children living and working in the streets from the worst forms of child labour. To ensure effective protection of children from the worst forms of child labour, detect beggars and homeless children, solve the problems related to them and organise joint activities, a dedicated interagency working group was established under the coordination of the police in November 2013. It started its activities in 2014 and three sessions took place in 2014-2015. Moreover, inspection check-tours were organised in Yerevan, with the participation of the working group. Involvement of families of juvenile beggars in relevant social programmes was also supported. As a result, some beggars/street children were able to return to school or receive medical support. The Armenian authorities also informed that in 2013, the 2004-2015 NPA on children’s rights protection was repealed, and the Strategic Programme for the Protection of the Rights of the Child and related action plan for 2013-2016 were adopted. Minimum age for work (Convention 138) In 2011, the Committee of Experts examined Armenia’s first report on the implementation of the convention. The committee noted that the labour code applied only to persons working on the basis of an employment contract, hence children working in the informal economy, self-employed and those working in unpaid work seemed not to be protected by the code. The committee asked the government to address this shortcoming and to provide further information on light work and conditions in which it could be undertaken by children, and on children’s participation in artistic performances. Moreover, the Committee of Experts took note of the 2004-2015 National Plan of Action for the Protection of the Rights of the Child envisaging elimination of child labour as one of seven areas for action and asked for information on the concrete measures undertaken in the framework of the plan’s implementation to that effect. The committee also asked the government to ensure that sufficient data on the situation of working children were available, including information on the number of children and young people working below the minimum age and the nature, scope and trends of their work. Furthermore, the Committee of Experts requested the upper age limit of compulsory education be changed from 15 to 16 years so that it coincided with the minimum age of admission to work. The authorities should also address the high rate of school drop-outs. Moreover, training to labour inspectors on issues related to child labour should be provided. In 2014-2015, amendments to the labour code regulating participation in sport and artistic activities by children under 14 were submitted to the government and adopted in June 2015. Moreover, a research project on child labour, including collection of statistics, is carried out by the ILO, starting in mid-October 2015. In the preparatory phase, a questionnaire was developed and staff of the national statistical office and social partners (trade unions and employers’ union) were trained by the ILO. Results of field work under the project are expected by April 2016. Based on two new laws on the education system adopted in April 2015 and to be enacted in June 2017, free of charge compulsory secondary education will amount to 12 years. The 2008-2015 programme of pre-school education reforms aimed in particular at increasing the enrolment of upper pre-school-aged group (5 years old) up to 90 % by the end of 2015, giving priority to families in need and communities where no pre-school institutions operated. Changes to the Law on General Education were adopted in 2014 and provided for a gradual move to completely inclusive education by 2025. The number of schools providing inclusive education to children with special needs was planned to reach 150 by the end of 2015 (from 117 in 2014 and 63 in 2011; in mid-2015 there were 139 such schools). Targeted training for specialists involved in protection of children’s rights, including labour inspectors, are foreseen by the 2014-2016 action plan for the implementation of the National Strategy on Human Rights, as well as the 2013-2016 Strategic Programme for the Protection of the Rights of the Child and the timetable of measures for this programme. NGOs also provided training in this area. Overall, however, training on child labour issues remained under-developed in Armenia and the country would require further support and assistance in this field. Elimination of discrimination (Conventions 100 and 111) In its 2013 report, the Committee of Experts requested amendments to the labour code in order to broaden the scope of its provisions concerning equal remuneration for men and women for work of equal value. The committee also asked the government to take measures tackling the root causes of a persisting substantial wage gap, and to ensure that the principle of equal remuneration was taken into account in the minimum wage tripartite fixing process and that criteria used to determine the remuneration scales in the public administration were free from gender bias. Moreover, the committee recommended organising targeted awareness-raising activities on the principle of equal remuneration for workers, employers, labour inspectors and judges. According to the Armenian authorities, ensuring equal pay for work of equal value was one of the government’s main priorities in respect of gender equality in recent years and included in the Gender Policy Programme 2011-2015. Broadening of the legislative definition of equal remuneration was foreseen to be taken up with other amendments and supplements to the labour code planned to be prepared by the end of 2015. The labour code includes a general provision stating that the government should ensure equal pay and no discrimination. No specific mechanism is, however, defined. The law ‘On Remuneration of Persons Holding Public Positions’ adopted in December 2013 introduced a unified system for the remuneration in the public service which entered into force in July 2014. The ILO is implementing the project ‘Support the Public Sector Pay Reform’ aiming at providing a comprehensive and detailed analysis of the existing public pay practice. A relevant methodology on job evaluation methods and job classification, based on international experience, was developed in this framework and local experts were trained on it. Moreover, relevant recommendations and suggested solutions were reflected in the draft amendments to the legislation on remuneration of civil servants which was intended to be submitted to the government by the end of 2015. In its 2013 conclusions, the Committee of Experts also asked for adoption of legislation setting out a comprehensive and clear definition and prohibition of all kinds of direct and indirect discrimination covering all aspects of employment and occupation, including recruitment. Moreover, the committee noted adoption of the Gender Policy Strategic Action Plan for 2012-2015, which included measures to eliminate discrimination based on gender in the socioeconomic field. The committee requested information on steps taken to develop and implement a comprehensive national strategy or policy to promote equality and non-discrimination in all aspects of employment and occupation. It also requested information on how the protection of ethnic minorities against discrimination in the labour area was ensured in law and in practice. With a view to ensure effective enforcement, the committee recommended organising awareness-raising activities on equality and non-discrimination in employment and occupation, and strengthening capacity of labour inspection, judges and human rights defenders in this field. Furthermore, the committee asked that the labour code establish a definition of sexual harassment at the workplace and prohibit this phenomenon, as well as provide an accessible enforcement mechanism and remedies. To improve the situation regarding discrimination in the labour area, in the period covered by this report the Armenian authorities organised several awareness-raising campaigns, notably on gender equality issues for different target groups. Also, methodological guidelines to ensure gender equality in communities were adopted. According to several sources, notably civil society organisations, effective application of the law on equal opportunities for men and women is compromised by its lacking mechanism and institutions for dealing with complaints on gender equality breaches, including in the labour area. Moreover, the Women’s Council under the prime minister’s office does not constitute an effective national gender equality mechanism, i.e. one concerning labour issues, as it lacks policy-making functions as well as sufficient financial and technical capacity. Furthermore, it is deemed necessary to strengthen the overall (not only gender-specific) institutional framework regarding equality and non-discrimination in employment and occupation. In particular, a functional authority able to deal effectively with complaints and provide adequate support and services to discrimination victims is missing. Cases of discrimination against minority religious groups at the workplace, including state institutions, continued to be reported in 2014-2015.

Future actions and priorities In its May 2015 response to the GSP+ scorecard, without providing any precise timeline, the Government of Armenia indicated that adopting amendments to the labour code to bring it in compliance with international standards is a priority. Fighting against trafficking and exploitation of human beings remains on the government’s agenda and a number of preventive, information-sharing and capacity-building activities are planned in relevant action plans and strategies adopted by the government. As a contribution to the elimination of child labour, laws that make free secondary education compulsory will enter into force in June 2017, while the gradual move towards completely inclusive education will continue to be achieved by 2025. Under its 2014-2017 programme the government foresees a gradual increase of the minimum wage, which is expected to contribute to reducing the gender pay gap. Besides, the government acknowledges the need for awareness-raising and training programmes (schools, education institutions, public bodies) and capacity building on state policy programmes for ensuring gender equality, protection of child’s rights, women’s rights, the rights of minorities and of disabled people. Conclusions Armenia's legislation and practice are broadly in line with the ILO fundamental conventions. However, both should be improved on a number of points, in particular the freedom of association for employers and workers. Armenia also needs to ensure that labour inspection is equipped with all relevant powers and adequate resources, and that a system is put in place that allows monitoring of compliance with the application of core labour standards and related national legislation and collective agreements. Moreover, the current legislation is not sufficient to prevent discrimination at the workplace. A comprehensive anti-discrimination legislative framework still has to be developed and adopted, including as regards the right for redress (judicial and non-judicial) and compensations. The institutional and enforcement framework concerning anti-discrimination and equality also needs to be strengthened. The government continues to take actions to reduce and, in further consequence, eliminate child labour. These efforts should be stepped up, including undertaking actions addressing the main shortcomings identified in the GSP+ scorecards, such as insufficient coverage by the labour legislation of children working in the informal economy or self-employed. It is of utmost importance that the government involve the social partners as well as the ILO in its initiatives in the area of labour rights protection. The government informed that a draft law on the matter was under preparation to be adopted by the end of 2016. 2.2.3.UN Conventions on Environmental Protection and Climate Change (conventions 16-23) Status of ratification and reporting Armenia ratified all the GSP+-relevant conventions on environmental protection and climate change, without reservations, and maintains their ratification. For details please see the annex. In 2014-2015, Armenia complied with reporting obligations to monitoring bodies of all these conventions, with the exception of the CITES (the Biennial report for 2011-2012 remained due), Basel Convention (National Report for 2012 and 2013 remain due), and the Cartagena Protocol (the 3rd National Report was due on 1 November 2015). For further details please see the annex. Status of implementation of the conventions In 2014-2015, Armenia continued its work on the implementation of these eight conventions, i.e. taking advantage of the EU substantial technical assistance in the relevant areas. Nevertheless, several challenges remained to be addressed further. Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Flora and Fauna (CITES) Armenia’s national legislation related to the implementation of CITES remained ranked as category 3, which means that it did not yet meet the requirements for the convention’s implementation. Armenia claimed its existing legislation was compliant with the CITES’ requirements, but was so far not able to provide its English translation to the CITES Secretariat for an assessment as requested. Such English translation was foreseen to be accomplished and submitted to the secretariat together with Armenia’s annual national report by the end of 2015. In mid-2015, Armenia informed that a draft amendment to the Code of Administrative Offences concerning penalisation of illegal trade in wild animals and plants protected by the CITES had been submitted to the government for discussion. No further updates concerning preparations of this amendment were available since. The biennial report for 2011-2012 remained due and the Armenian authorities did not specify for when they foresaw its finalisation and submission to the CITES Secretariat. In 2014-2015, Armenia also faced a number of allegations, e.g. from the CITES Secretariat and various NGOs and media, of illegal wildlife trade to, from and via the country. In particular, cases of illegal imports of great apes (bonobos) were repeatedly reported. The Armenian authorities informed on capacity-building activities undertaken to tackle the problem of illegal wildlife trade, notably the organisation of two dedicated workshops. On the specific case of alleged illegal imports of bonobos Armenia reported that these allegations had been put under a juridical procedure which should reveal possible ways of such illegal trafficking.

Armenia also informed that some encouraging improvements had recently been registered in terms of the population status of the most vulnerable species of its fauna, such as bear, wolf or golden jackal, as well as of Caucasian leopard, Armenian mouflon, bezoar goat and a number of birds. Basel Convention No salient shortcomings regarding the implementation of the Basel Convention were identified in Armenia’s 2014 and 2015 GSP+ scorecards. However, a lack of information on measures taken or foreseen to effectively implement this convention was noted. It was also put to the Armenian authorities that national reports under the convention for 2011, 2012 and 2013 remained due. In response, Armenia reported on a number of legislative documents elaborated and approved by the government for the implementation of the convention, in particular the Law on Waste with about 30 related by-laws, List of Hazardous Waste, List of Restricted Waste, Classification of Waste and Classification of Waste According to Hazard. Armenia also informed that the annual National Report for 2012 was submitted to the convention’s secretariat in December 2013 and the annual National Report for 2013 in February 2015. However, this information was not yet confirmed by the secretariat. Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) There were no salient shortcomings identified in Armenia in 2014-2015 as regards the implementation of the CBD. Moreover, the Armenian authorities followed up on several legal acts and other documents concerning flora and fauna protection developed and/or adopted during 2009-2013, with the aim to ensure biodiversity conservation and sustainable use. In particular, the government approved the Strategy and National Action Plan on Development of Specially Protected Nature Areas as well as Measures in the Field of Conservation and Use. Armenia also informed about other achievements related to CBD’s implementation in the reporting period, such as activities on-going under the projects ‘Forming Passports and Mapping of the Monuments of Nature and their Conservation Zones’ and ‘Development of the System of Specifically Protected Areas’ or implementation of the 2012-2015 project ‘Forest Landscape Restoration in Northern Armenia’. Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants No salient shortcomings concerning the implementation of the Stockholm Convention were identified in Armenia’s 2014 and 2015 GSP+ scorecards. However, a lack of information on measures taken or foreseen to effectively implement this convention was communicated to the authorities. Armenia clarified that a domestic legislative framework had been elaborated in order to ensure proper implementation of the convention. Moreover, the Guidance on Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCB) Containing Waste Management and Rules for the Handling of Obsolete Pesticides were adopted. Additionally, an inventory on obsolete POPs pesticides, the burial site and contaminated soils was performed and an inventory of dioxins/furans main release sources was accomplished. An inventory of PCB-containing equipment and oils in energy and industry sectors was also carried out. Furthermore, Armenia reported that the 3rd National Report was submitted to the convention’s secretariat in August 2014. It also informed on the development of updates to the first National Implementation Plan, which was approved in 2005. Convention on Biosafety (Cartagena) Concerning the implementation of the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety, in its 2nd National Report submitted in December 2011 (latest information available) Armenia informed that its domestic regulatory framework was only partially in place. Armenia did not regulate the transit and contained use of living modified organisms (LMOs). Armenia disposed of a few sampling laboratories and scientific potential to detect and identify LMOs, but legislation and administrative measures for the operation of the advance informed agreement (AIA) procedure was lacking. Moreover, training for experts and experience exchange would be necessary in this field. Also, no legal acts determining special import procedures for LMOs envisaged for use as food or feed were adopted. The 3rd National Report was due (by all parties of the protocol) by the end of October 2015. Conventions on Climate Change There were no salient shortcomings in Armenia as regards the implementation of the Montreal Protocol on Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer in 2014-2015. Moreover, an assessment of Armenia’s preparedness for harmonising its legislation controlling the field of ozone-depleting substances (ODS) legislation with that of the EU was carried out. ODS consumption data were collected, cross-checked and submitted to the protocol’s secretariat in a timely manner. Furthermore, various awareness-raising and training activities on climate change and ODS took place. In particular, two training sessions on ‘Prevention of Illegal Trade in Ozone-Depleting Substances’ were carried out for customs officials in March 2014. Concerning the implementation of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), no salient shortcomings were identified in Armenia’s 2014 and 2015 GSP+ scorecards. Armenia submitted to the UNFCCC Secretariat its 2010 National Inventory Report in November 2014 and its third National Communication in April 2015. However, it still needs to finalise and submit its first Biannual Progress Report, due by the end of 2014. A National Appropriate Mitigation Action (NAMA) project on ‘Energy Efficient Public Buildings and Housing in Armenia’ was developed and submitted to the UNFCCC NAMA Registry seeking support for the implementation. Armenia submitted its Intended Nationally Determined Contribution (INDC) to the 2015 Climate Agreement on 29 September 2015. Climate change mitigation and adaptation remain dealt with through various sectorial laws and policy documents, and it is still necessary to establish a framework legal act and policy in this area. Insufficient institutional capacity remains a significant limiting factor and continuous international support is necessary. No salient problems were identified in Armenia’s implementation of the Kyoto Protocol to the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change in 2014-2015. Moreover, the Doha amendment to the protocol was translated into Armenian, adopted by the government and submitted to the National Assembly for ratification. Conclusions In 2014-2015, Armenia continued to make efforts to protect the environment. This was reflected in the implementation of the existing legal framework as well as in preparation of several new laws and by-laws. In particular, specific legislation on environmental protection was introduced in several sectors (e.g. air, water, nature protection). However, the system of horizontal legislation needs to be developed further. A general/framework environmental law which would improve legislation on principles and basic procedures such as issuing of permits was discussed but still needs to be drafted, adopted and enacted. Specifically as regards the implementation of the CITES, Armenia’s legislation remained classified as not meeting the convention’s requirements and the authorities did not provide sufficiently clear indications as to when this shortcoming would be properly addressed. Progress also remains necessary on the fight against illegal trade in wildlife and on complying with reporting obligations under the CITES. Concerning the Basel Convention, CBD and Stockholm Convention, the reporting situation was satisfactory, but more detailed clarifications from the Armenian authorities would be welcomed on national legislation linked to the Basel and Stockholm Conventions’ implementation.

Regarding the implementation of the Montreal Protocol, UNFCCC and Kyoto Protocol, Armenia is progressing, however it is still necessary that a framework legal act and policy in this area is established, also to support the implementation of the 2015 Climate Agreement. To this end, significant donor support remains at Armenia’s disposal. Overall, Armenia takes good advantage of the EU substantial assistance on environmental protection and tackling of climate change and intends to continue doing so also to support its future priorities and objectives in these areas. There are currently several projects on-going to achieve objectives of the CBD, such as the Forest Law Enforcement and Governance programme, sustainable biodiversity management in South Caucasus, reintroduction of the Caucasian red deer in Armenia or protection of the Caucasus leopard. Moreover, a number of activities supported by EU funding are planned for the implementation of the Montreal Protocol, e.g. aligning the national ODS legislation with that of the EU, continuation of development of the Hydrochlorofluorocarbons Phase-Out Management Plan, carrying out of further awareness-raising activities and training of customs officers and refrigeration technicians. EU technical assistance for the implementation of the UNFCCC continues to be provided through the regional Clima East Policy project, focussing in particular on strengthening the capacity of policy-makers to contribute to the preparation and implementation of the 2015 Climate Agreement and on the development of medium and long term mitigation policies. 2.2.4.UN Conventions on Good Governance (conventions 24-27) Status of ratification and reporting Armenia ratified the three core UN conventions on fighting illegal drugs (UN Single Conventions on Narcotic Drugs, UN Convention on Psychotropic Substances and UN Convention against Illicit Traffic in Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances) on 13 September 1993, and the UN Convention against Corruption (UNCAC) on 8 March 2007, all without reservations, and maintains their ratification. For further details please see the annex. In 2014-2015, Armenia made effort to comply with its reporting obligations to monitoring bodies of these conventions. As of January 2015, Armenia was compliant with all requests for monitoring information from the monitoring body of the three core UN conventions on fighting illegal drugs (International Narcotic Control Board — INCB). Regarding the UNCAC, Armenia has fully complied with reporting obligations. Reviewing of Armenia's compliance with the UNCAC is carried out by the UNCAC Implementation Review Group. The executive summary of the most recent review was made available to the public in March 2015. Status of implementation of the conventions Regarding the implementation of the core international conventions fighting illegal drugs and corruption, in 2014-2015 Armenia continued to face important challenges, particularly in the latter area. It is also there where, despite the authorities’ increased efforts, substantial additional improvements will have to be achieved. UN Conventions fighting illegal drugs The main shortcomings identified in Armenia’s implementation of these conventions were the need to further reinforce the system for the control of diversion of precursors, the need to improve the availability of narcotic drugs for medical use, the need to reduce further the use of drugs by inmates in the prison system and the need to sign the Memorandum of Understanding with the European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction (EMCDDA) concerning the monitoring and evaluation system. There was also a need to ensure access to essential medicines, including antiretroviral medicines, oral opioids and methadone for vulnerable people. In order to effectively implement its obligations under these conventions and to strengthen the control on the circulation and to prevent the illegal traffic of narcotic drugs, psychotropic substances and their precursors in Armenia, a draft decree ‘On making amendments and supplement to 2010 Decree No 270-N on establishing the rules of traffic in narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances and their precursors’ was elaborated. This draft, however, was not yet adopted and put in application. To further reinforce the system of the control of diversion of precursors, several changes were made in the Appendices of Criminal and Administrative Offences codes of Armenia and 115 names of ‘spice’ type drug were added in December 2014. Armenia adopted a new national strategy on the fight against drug addiction and illicit traffic of drugs in December 2014. This strategy aims to reinforce fight against drug addiction and illicit traffic of narcotic drugs. It foresees implementation of a series of activities in the fields of prevention and public awareness-raising, elimination of illicit drug trafficking, rehabilitation and integration of drug abusers and overall control of all layers of the society involved in the illegal ‘business’. This strategy also defines how to proceed to reduce drug usage in the prison system. In September 2014, the government adopted the 2015 National Action Plan against Drug Addiction and Illicit Drug Traffic. This action plan contains a number of activities directed to the improvement of legislation in order to implement international conventions and effectively fight against drug addiction and illegal drug traffic, training, capacity building and information sharing. The action plan foresees also implementation of preventive and special activities in the territory of Armenia and on borders to identify illegal trade of drugs and prevent the use of drugs and psychotropic substances in the country. In July 2015, Armenia signed a memorandum of understanding with the EMCDDA concerning the monitoring and evaluation system. This memorandum was concluded for an initial period of 5 years and cooperation would be implemented through a joint work programme that would be updated every 3 years. The agreement provides for an exchange of technical expertise and knowledge, co-sponsoring of technical meetings and pooling of human and financial resources to launch joint programmes. It was agreed that the Armenian side would endeavour to present to the EMCDDA an annual report on the drug situation in Armenia. The EMCDDA, for its part, would facilitate training as well as the exchange of experts and scientific research findings on issues of mutual interest UN Convention against Corruption (UNCAC) Regarding Armenia’s compliance with the requirements of the UNCAC, the executive summary of the most recent monitoring body review (made available in March 2015) identified a need for a closer alignment of the Armenian legislation with the definitions in Articles 15 and 16 of the convention as well as for the full implementation of Article 31(1)(b), and a need to further enhance law enforcement cooperation, including at the international level. Moreover, the institutional framework of the monitoring division of the government staff at the prime minister’s office, acting as the secretariat of the Anti-corruption Council established in 2015, continued to lack the financial and human resource capacity necessary to effectively monitor and coordinate the future implementation of the 2015-2018 Anti-corruption Strategy and Action Plan. Also, this body was not considered genuinely independent. Moreover, it remained necessary to strengthen the mandate and functions of the Ethics Committee for High-Ranking Officials to ensure it became truly operational.

The 2014 GRECO (Council of Europe’s Group of States against Corruption) analysis assessed that their 2011 recommendations had been implemented satisfactorily by the Armenian authorities. Moreover, UNCAC reviewing experts highlighted some legal provisions which could be regarded as a good practice, including the aim to expedite international cooperation and mutual legal assistance. A Concept Paper on the Fight Against Corruption in the Public Administration System was approved in April 2014. It focused on the areas of education, state revenues, police and healthcare. The concept paper emphasised many important principles, such as participation and transparency. In particular, it stated that representatives of state power and public institutions had to ensure accessibility of information related to the public interest, transparency of the decision-making process and the participation of civil society in this process. There was also a commitment to ensure the engagement of civil society and the business community in the implementation of specific preventive measures against corruption. On the basis of this concept paper a new 2015-2018 Anti-corruption Strategy and related action plan for its implementation were drafted and discussed within the Armenian administration as well as with international experts, civil society and other stakeholders. In September 2015, the Armenian government approved the two documents. Discussions were, however, pending regarding the allocation of funds for their implementation in 2016. Conclusions Regarding the implementation of the three core UN conventions fighting illegal drugs in 2014-2015, Armenia demonstrated a considerable improvement in its efforts to address salient shortcomings in this area. The government made combating trafficking in narcotic drugs a priority. Important progress was achieved in the normative framework aimed at strengthening the government’s capacity to address drug trafficking and related corruption and violence. Thanks to the efforts of law enforcement bodies, the fight against the illegal drug circulation became stable and the drug-related situation was put under control. Armenia reported a decrease of 9.4 % of drug-related crimes in the first half of 2014 compared to the same period in 2013. Drug addiction treatment resources increased and precursors became strictly regulated. In July 2015, Armenia signed a memorandum of understanding with the EU anti-drugs agency (EMCDDA). The fight against corruption remained one of the major challenges for Armenia in 2014-2015, and it will continue to be so in the coming period. Armenia adopted a comprehensive concept paper for an anti-corruption strategy in 2014 and, following discussions of a draft strategy and a related action plan with stakeholders, the strategy and action plan were adopted by the government in September 2015. Specific priorities will be healthcare, education, state revenue collection and the police. Major progress in the practical implementation of the strategy is, however, yet to be achieved. In particular, Armenia will have to substantially improve the implementation and enforcement of the existing anti-corruption legislation, including through reinforcing institutional capacities in this area. The recent focus of the Armenian authorities on strengthening the public procurement and internal and financial control systems are also key to prevent and control corruption in the country in the future. The government’s priorities for the future include also introduction of a legal ‘public servant’ class, increasing transparency of governance and ensuring liability by law for corruption offences. The EU foresees targeting its future assistance in this area on the implementation of anti-corruption and civil service reforms. As regards anti-corruption reforms, the emphasis will be on supporting the implementation of the new anti-corruption strategy, including a focus on ethics schemes and reducing opportunities for corruption at the borders through a single window system. Legislative reforms will include the protection of whistle-blowers. There will also be focus on strengthening of interactions between the Armenian institutions and civil society organisations with a view to enhancing the overall accountability of the authorities’ activity. On civil service reforms, the emphasis will be on the adoption and implementation of a civil service reform strategy and action plan in line with EU standards. SIGMA project will continue to provide support to the Ethics Commission for High-Ranking Officials. 2.3.Trade and Economy 2.3.1.Trade Picture The Armenian economy grew in 2014, although moderately (3.5 % GDP growth), pushed by the service and agriculture sectors. This positive trend continued in the first half of 2015 (4.1 % GDP growth), as a result of the good performance of the agriculture and mining sectors. The EU-Armenia bilateral trade relations are currently regulated by a Partnership and Cooperation Agreement from the 1990s. Negotiations launched in 2010 to replace this outdated agreement by an Association Agreement, including a Deep and Comprehensive Free Trade Area, were concluded in July 2013, but the agreement was not signed following Armenia’s decision to join the Eurasian Economic Union. At the Riga Eastern Partnership Summit in May 2015 the EU and Armenia decided to negotiate a new framework agreement which would develop and strengthen bilateral cooperation in all areas of mutual interest within the Eastern Partnership framework. The EU is Armenia’s main trading partner accounting for around 26.6 % of Armenia’s total trade. Bilateral trade flows in 2014 amounted to EUR 0.9 billion. The EU continues to be Armenia’s biggest export and import market with, respectively, a 28.8 % and 25.8 % share in total Armenian exports and imports. EU imports from Armenia in 2014 amounted to 0.2 billion and mainly consist of manufactured goods, crude material, miscellaneous manufactured articles, and beverages and tobacco. EU exports to Armenia amounted to 0.7 billion in 2014 and are dominated by machinery and transport equipment, manufactured goods, miscellaneous manufactured articles and chemicals. 2.3.2.GSP+ Statistics GSP/GSP+ preferences have a significant trade and economic importance for Armenia, in particular in the absence of a bilateral FTA. Around 26 % or EUR 59.6 million of Armenia’s exports to the EU came under the GSP/GSP+ regime in 2014. This, however, represents a significant drop compared to 2012, when Armenia’s GSP/GSP+ exports amounted to EUR 90.7 million and represented 33 % of the Armenian total exports to the EU (2013 figures were almost identical to 2014 ones — EUR 58.2 million and 27 %). Moreover, Armenia still registered quite a good GSP utilisation rate — 72.8 % — in 2014, but it was less than the 78.3 % in 2013 and in particular than the 89.8 % in 2012. Furthermore, Armenia’s GSP/GSP+ exports remain heavily concentrated in very few goods with a rather low value added — in 2014, iron, steel and products made thereof re