Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions on the external dimension of the Lisbon strategy for growth and jobs - Reporting on market access and setting the framework for more effective international regulatory cooperation
Date: 2008-12-16
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: EU Member State, EU action, EU programme, development policy, economic and social cohesion, economic growth, employment policy, job access, management, regional policy

EN 

EN 

   EN 

 
 
COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES 

Brussels, 16.12.2008 
COM(2008) 874 final 

COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN 
PARLIAMENT, THE COUNCIL, THE EUROPEAN ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL 
COMMITTEE AND THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS 

ON THE EXTERNAL DIMENSION OF THE LISBON STRATEGY FOR GROWTH 
AND JOBS:   

Reporting on market access and setting the framework for more effective international 
regulatory cooperation 

EN 

   EN 

 
 
 
  
 
COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN 
PARLIAMENT, THE COUNCIL, THE EUROPEAN ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL 
COMMITTEE AND THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS 

ON THE EXTERNAL DIMENSION OF THE LISBON STRATEGY FOR GROWTH 
AND JOBS:   

Reporting on market access and setting the framework for more effective international 
regulatory cooperation 

1. 

INTRODUCTION 

Open  markets  matter.  They  create  opportunities  for  growth,  employment  and  investment. 
They  are  important  for  EU  businesses  as  well  as  for  those  in  developed  and  developing 
economies around the globe. Open markets are of particular importance for the EU since it is 
the largest trading block in the world. There is a risk that the ongoing financial and economic 
crisis will bring about more protectionism. It is important to learn from the past and counter 
such  tendencies.  In  their  recent  Washington  meeting  Heads  of  State  and  government  of  the 
G20 placed a clear emphasis on realising the full potential of the trade agenda1. 

In this context, removing remaining trade barriers – first and foremost through the successful 
and swift conclusion of the Doha Round of global trade talks, but also through bilateral and 
regional  approaches  -  acquires  further  importance  in  order  to  unlock  business  potential  and 
growth,  particularly  for  SMEs  which  account  for  over  99%  of  EU  enterprises  and  67%  of 
private  sector  jobs.  Regulatory  convergence  and  cooperation,  including  for  the  financial 
sector,  can  be  an  effective  path  to  pursue  international  stability  and  enhance  trade 
opportunities.  

The Global Europe strategy, launched at the end of 20062, is an essential part of the external 
pillar for the European Union’s Lisbon Strategy for growth and jobs and sets out an ambitious 
agenda for opening the markets that matter most, particularly in Asia. A key strand of this has 
been taken forward since April 2007 through the EU's renewed Market Access Strategy3. The 
importance  of  these  efforts  to  open  markets  was  recognised  last  year  in  the  Commission's 
Lisbon strategy Report to the Spring European Council4, and endorsed by European leaders, 
who proposed to report each year on market access, identifying countries and sectors where 
significant barriers remain. 

1 

2 
3 
4 

Heads of State and Government of the G20 agreed on 15 November 2008 not to raise new barriers to 
investment or to trade in goods and services within the next 12 month and to reach agreement in 2008 
on  modalities  that  lead  to  a  successful  conclusion  of  the  WTO's  Doha  Development  Agenda  with  an 
ambitious and balanced outcome. 
COM(2006) 517, 4.10.2006. 
COM(2007) 183, 18.4.2007. 
COM(2007) 803, 11.12.2007.  

EN 

2 

   EN 

 
 
                                                 
Two main thrusts were defined: 

•  The  EU  should  use  all  its  instruments  to  ensure  that  its  openness  is  maintained  and  to 

increase access to third country markets for its companies. 

•  The EU should upgrade its strategic dialogues with key third countries to develop mutually 

beneficial solutions, promote higher standards and greater regulatory convergence. 

The  European  Economic  recovery  plan  adopted  on  26  November  2008  by  the  European 
Commission5  confirmed  these  objectives  and  proposed  concrete  actions  to  maintain  and 
increase  market  openness  and  support  employment6,  during  the  current  difficult  economic 
times.  Improved  market  access  and  regulatory  convergence  and  cooperation  are  major 
elements of this plan. In the current economic context efforts towards regulatory convergence 
in financial sectors become critical. 

This  Communication  provides  a  first  reporting  on  Market  Access,  and  proposes  how  the 
Union can best achieve its objective of openness at home and abroad, and especially how it 
can  ensure  fair  and  open  access  to  those  third  country  markets  that  matter  most  to  EU 
businesses, including through regulatory co-operation.  

It  is  a  further  step  in  developing  a  stronger  external  dimension  of  the  Lisbon  Strategy  for 
growth and jobs after 2010. This will draw on the contribution of other Lisbon policy fields 
and  address  the  links  between  the  policies  we  pursue  at  home  and  abroad  which  was  also 
highlighted by the Single Market Review7 and the renewed Social Agenda8 

2. 

NON-TARIFF BARRIERS TO TRADE 

2.1. 

The changing nature of barriers to trade 

While high border tariffs still hamper trade in some sectors and must be tackled multilaterally 
and  bilaterally,  non-tariff  barriers  in  the  markets  of  our  trading  partners  are  increasingly 
important.  Successful  reduction  of  tariffs  can  be  rendered  meaningless  if  non-tariff  barriers 
(NTBs) hinder European companies’ access to the market or significantly increase the cost of 
their exports9. The 2008 Competitiveness report10 showed that EU firms perceive that NTBs 
and  lack  of  information  (e.g.  lack  of  knowledge  on  export  markets)  are  becoming  more 
important than the traditional policy-based trade constraints of import tariffs and duties11.  

5 
6 

7 
8 
9 

10 
11 

COM(2008) 800, 26.12.2008. 
In its renewed Social Agenda - COM(2008) 412 -, the Commission had already underlined that it will 
pay increasing attention to the projection of its social policies externally and the social impacts of its 
internal policies globally. 
COM(2007) 724, 20.11.2007. 
COM(2008) 412, 2.7.2008 
The overall costs of Non-Tariffs Barriers to European operators in China alone have been estimated at 
€ 21.4 billion. See http://trade.ec.europa.eu/do clib/docs/2007/february/tradoc _133299.pdf 
COM(2008) 774 and SEC(2008) 2853. 
Although  these  results  hold  generally  for  all  broad  sectors  of  activity  considered  in  the  analysis,  for 
particular sectors and countries import tariffs are still major trade barriers for European firms exporting 
abroad. 

EN 

3 

   EN 

 
                                                 
The  most  frequent  non-tariff  barriers  are  burdensome  customs  procedures  as  well  as 
discriminatory  tax  rules  and  practices,  technical  regulations,  standards  and  conformity 
assessment  procedures,  sanitary  and  phytosanitary  measures  (SPS),  restrictions  on  access  to 
raw  materials,  poor  protection/and  or  enforcement  of  intellectual  property  rights,  barriers  to 
trade  in  services  and  foreign  direct  investment,  restrictive  and/or  non-transparent  public 
procurement  rules  as  well  as  abusive  use  of  trade  defence  instruments  or  unfair  use  of 
subsidies.  

However,  addressing  these  barriers  is  complicated,  technically  challenging  and  time 
consuming. Responding to barriers is not a straightforward matter. Much depends on where 
the barriers originate and whether they are burdensome but in pursuit of legitimate aims or if 
they can be considered as unjustified measures. There are broadly speaking two categories of 
barriers. Some of these barriers simply result from differences, e.g. in the regulatory approach 
and different social, labour, environmental, public health and consumer objectives. Others are 
used in a more systematic way with the effect of favouring or protecting domestic production, 
e.g. special standards, testing requirements or excessive documentation needs. While the latter 
will  need  a  strong,  focused  response  from  the  EU,  using  more  assertive  instruments,  the 
former can be addressed through more systemic, long-term cooperation and dialogues. This is 
especially valuable in the area of regulatory differences.  

2.2. 

Illustration of barriers faced by European exporters  

An increasing number of successful barrier removals demonstrate that the strategic approach 
set  out  in  the  Commission's  Market  Access  Strategy  is  effective.  However,  significant 
remaining  barriers  in  the  EU's  main  target  markets  show  the  potential  for  further 
improvements of market access and call for focused actions. 

Non-tariff barriers in the goods area 

In  the  area  of  trade  in  goods,  differences  in  regulations  can  create  hurdles  for  market 
access since they may cause additional costs for manufacturers, for example where products 
must be tested by independent laboratories and certified in the target market before they can 
be sold, or special versions of products must be developed to comply with detailed technical 
regulations.  This  means  that  transparency  and  predictability  of  regulatory  regimes  are  of 
primary  importance  for  companies  active  in  third  countries.  EU  action  for  regulatory 
convergence  and  cooperation  in  this  area  focuses  on  addressing  the  second  category  of 
obstacle highlighted above.  

The  following  examples  drawn  from  sectors  which  are  economically  important  for  the  EU 
illustrate potential areas in which action may be needed to address significant trade barriers12. 

As  regards  the  automotive  sector  (including  car  parts  like  tyres)  major  barriers  related  to 
standards  are  encountered,  e.g.,  in  Brazil,  China,  India,  Taiwan,  Korea  and  Indonesia.  The 
chemical sector encounters major obstacles to exports in Asia, and in particular in China, (for 
example with regard to registration of some chemicals and burdensome import  procedures). 
Furthermore, irritants in chemicals trade include customs clearance and lack of transparency 
in the regulatory sphere.  

12 

See  Commission's 
http://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/html/141196.htm 

report  on  EU  performance 

in 

the  global  economy,  October  2008 

EN 

4 

   EN 

 
                                                 
For  pharmaceuticals,  market  access  in  potentially  important  markets  like  China,  Korea, 
Taiwan,  Japan,  Russia,  and  several  ASEAN  countries  is  severely  hampered  by  measures 
regarding  registration  procedures  (including  standards,  approval,  licensing  arrangements, 
financial guarantees and testing), reimbursement and pricing of imported products and lack of 
sufficient  data  protection.  For  medical  devices,  the  non-alignment  with  the  international 
guidelines  and  practice  established  by  the  Global  Harmonisation  Task  force  (GHTF)  or  the 
differences  in  regulatory  practice  of  countries  like  Brazil,  India,  Japan,  China,  Taiwan  and 
Korea  is  a  major  barrier  to  unhindered  trade.  In  the  case  of  medical  devices,  delays  in 
registration of products are another serious concern.  

Horizontally,  several  important  sectors  (in  particular  electrical,  electronics  and  ICT, 
automotives,  machinery  and  toy  industry)  are  concerned  by  the  Chinese  Compulsory 
Certification  System  (CCC),  which  creates  a  serious,  disproportionate  burden  on  EU 
exporters.  In  addition,  a  broad  range  of  IT  products  is  concerned  by  new  draft  Chinese 
legislation  concerning  security  standards.  In  other  third  markets,  European  exports  of 
electrical and electronic equipment, also encounter significant barriers in Korea and the US, 
where  product  standards  are  not  always  aligned  with  international  standards.  In  the  US, 
divergent technical  regulations and standards at federal,  regional and state level  split up the 
market even more.  

The greatest impediment for exports of major agrofood products is represented by sanitary 
and  phytosanitary  (SPS)  measures,  which  in  some  sectors  constitute  significant  barriers  in 
several  important  export  markets.  Numerous  third  countries  including  key  markets  in  Asia, 
Eastern Europe, the Mediterranean and the Middle East, as well as the Americas set standards 
that  go  beyond  international  standards  without  providing  the  necessary  scientific  evidence. 
These barriers become the more difficult to surmount when countries are non-members of the 
WTO  and  thus  are  not  bound  by  multilateral  rules  which  prohibit  discriminatory  and  non-
science  based  measures  and  practices.  Another  difficulty  arises  from  the  establishment  of 
private standards, which have become an increasingly important trade barrier in the SPS field. 

Regarding fair access to raw materials on which European industry is highly dependent, an 
increasing  number  of  export  restrictions,  like  duties  and  quotas,  hamper  the  competitive 
performance of EU industry (more than 400 product lines consisting of various raw materials 
concerning countries such as China, Russia, Ukraine, Argentina, South Africa and India)13. 

On  a  cross  cutting  basis,  burdensome  customs  procedures  as  well  as  excessive 
documentation and registration requirements pose significant problems for EU exporters in a 
broad range of important export markets. This would potentially be the case for the proposed 
U.S. legislation on 100% scanning of all containers, due to national security concerns. 

Barriers related to services and establishment 

Trade in services and foreign direct investment (FDI) plays a key role in the world economy. 
As the world’s largest exporter of commercial services and a major source of outward direct 
investment, the EU has an obvious interest to improve its access to foreign markets and to free 
the full potential of the EU’s internal strength in services and establishment. This is often also 
in the direct interest of our partners. Those seeking to attract FDI and to develop infrastructure 

13 

COM(2008) 699, 4.11.2008. 

EN 

5 

   EN 

 
                                                 
have much to gain from liberalising FDI and trade in services, in particular in sectors such as 
telecommunications, transport, energy (i.e. access to resources) and financial services. 

Various entry barriers still hamper trade in services and act as a brake on economic growth. 
Barriers  to  trade  in  services  involve  many  sectors  ranging  from  banking  to  express  courier. 
Detecting,  analysing  and  removing  these  is  often  more  complex  than  tackling  tariff  barriers 
because they concern a large range of regulations and controls. The EU is working to improve 
the  free  trade  of  services  as  well  as  FDI  within  the  multilateral  framework  of  the  General 
Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS) and through bilateral Free Trade Agreements.  

Major obstacles in the area of services and establishment are entry barriers such as nationality 
requirements, residency requirements, limits on foreign ownership or shareholding, limits on 
the  type  of  legal  entity  or  entry  being  subject  to  an  economic  needs  test.  Restrictions  on 
investment and foreign ownership exist in a majority of markets of interest to the EU, e.g., in 
Brazil,  Russia  China,  Japan,  India,  and  most  of  the  ASEAN  countries  as  well  as  in  the  US 
where acquisitions by foreign companies are subject to a “national security review process” 
(CFIUS).  Financial  services,  including  insurance,  encounter  numerous  restrictions  in  such 
markets as the U.S., Canada, Brazil, India, Russia, China, Japan, and South Africa. Further, 
significant  barriers  to  trade  in  services  exist  in  many  sectors  and  many  partner  countries  of 
interest  to  European  business  like  for  legal  services,  for  instance,  in  India,  China  and 
Singapore,  distribution  services  in  India,  China  and  ASEAN  countries,  postal  and  courier 
services in India, Brazil, China and Egypt, transport services in Brazil and India as well as in 
Canada,  South  Africa  and  Singapore,  while  barriers  to  telecommunication  services  exist  in 
China, Korea, Japan, India, Mexico and, to a lesser extent, Brazil. 

Restrictions regarding public procurement 

The value of public procurement is estimated to make up an average of 15% of the total GDP 
of OECD countries and even more for developing countries. Despite the high value of public 
procurement,  further  work  is  needed  to  promote  open  and  non-discriminatory  access.  EU 
suppliers can rely on the Agreement on Government Procurement (GPA), which provides for 
common  disciplines  and  public  advertising  of  major  contracts.  While  the  EU,  US,  Japan, 
Canada, Korea and a few other countries have signed up to the GPA, and China has applied to 
join,  many  other  WTO  members  have  not.  The  Commission  is  seeking  to  enlarge  GPA 
membership  and  actively  encourages  new  members  to  the  WTO  to  join  by  stressing  the 
benefits of open and competitive procurement markets and through more attractive accession 
procedures, in particular for developing countries.  

However, coverage is not complete and several procurement areas and contracting entities are 
not  bound  by  the  rules,  e.g.  non-national  small  businesses  are  often  excluded  from 
procurement  in  the  US,  Japan  and  Korea  among  others.  At  the  same  time,  the  EU’s  own 
procurement market is relatively open to foreign competition, which provides clear benefits in 
terms  of  value  for  money  and  a  wider  choice  of  competitive  bids,  but  reduces  the  EU’s 
leverage to prise open foreign procurement markets. 

Barriers related to insufficient IPR protection and enforcement 

European industry remains deeply concerned by the extent to which its intellectual property 
(IPR)  is  infringed  in  certain  regions  of  the  world,  by  lack  of  legal  protection  or  effective 
enforcement.  Significant  barriers  related  to  insufficient  IPR  protection  and  enforcement, 
including  insufficient  protection  of  geographical  indications  remain  in  a  number  of  third 
country markets. IPR problems have been signalled in particular in China, Russia, Brazil and 

EN 

6 

   EN 

 
several ASEAN countries. In some cases, such as in the case of industrial design, stronger co-
operation in the area of R&D could facilitate reinforcement of IPR protection. 

A study carried out by the OECD in 200714 suggests that international trade of counterfeit and 
pirated  products  would  represent  USD  200  billion  per  year.  This  amount  is  larger  than  the 
national GDPs of about 150 economies. The figure does not, however, include counterfeit and 
pirated  products  that  are  produced  and  consumed  domestically,  nor  does  it  include  non-
tangible  pirated  digital  products  being  distributed  via  the  internet.  The  study  also  indicates 
that,  if  these  items  were  added,  the  total  magnitude  of  counterfeiting  and  piracy  worldwide 
could well be several hundred billion dollars more. 

Moreover, the statistics for 2007 on customs seizures of counterfeit and pirated products at the 
EU  border15  show  that  customs  seizures  have  never  been  so  high,  with  over  43  000  cases 
registered,  compared  to  37,000  in  2006  -  an  increase  of  almost  17%.  In  total  79  million 
articles  were  seized  by  the  customs  at  the  EU  border16.  There  are  significant  increases 
compared  to  2006  in  particular  in  fake  products  which  are  dangerous  to  health  and  safety: 
cosmetics  and  personal  care  (+264%);  toys:  (+98%);  foodstuff  (+62%);  and  medicines 
(+51%). Apart from the health and safety dimension, this situation puts the competitiveness of 
the EU at risk. 

3. 

THE EU'S RESPONSE TO EXISTING BARRIERS 

The  Global  Europe  Strategy  stressed  the  need  for  open  markets  at  home  and  abroad  and  to 
create new opportunities for trade. European companies need to be able to compete fairly in 
foreign  markets.  The  Market  Access  Strategy  sets  out  a  more  strategic  and  result-orientated 
approach  to  address  barriers  to  trade,  using  the  full  range  of  instruments  available  in  a 
coordinated manner, including co-operation with our trading partners.  

A coordinated use of all resources and instruments, and increased focus on priority issues, is 
necessary  to  further  improve  unhindered  trade  and  engage  in  a  strong  response  where  our 
market access rights are unduly denied. It is clear that we can not rely on a single avenue or 
mechanism  to  tackle  trade  barriers.  We  can  draw  on  a  broad  range  of  instruments,  from 
formal to informal, from negotiation and dialogues to trade diplomacy measures, from ad hoc 
interventions to more long-term investments. Our experience has shown that the challenge is 
to mix and match these different instruments for success.  

3.1. 

Negotiations of trade agreements 

Negotiations  of  trade  agreements  are  a  primary  tool  to  provide  market  access  for  EU 
exporters. While multilateral negotiations in the framework of the WTO provide the unique 
opportunity of involving almost all of our trading partners, bilateral negotiations often allow 
for  more  comprehensive  and  deeper  engagements.  Moreover,  the  fact  that  negotiations  are 
underway can create leverage to address successfully long-standing trade irritants. Because of 

14 
15 

16 

See Executive Summary as document DSTI/IND(2007)9/PART4. 
See website of DG Taxud at the following address:  
http://ec.europa.eu/taxation_customs/customs/customs_controls/counterfeit_piracy/statistics/index_en.h
tm. 
See website of DG Taxud at the following address: 
http://ec.europa.eu/taxation_customs/customs/customs_controls/counterfeit_piracy/statistics/index_en.h
tm. 

EN 

7 

   EN 

 
                                                 
 
 
the  reciprocal  interest  involved,  WTO  accession  negotiations  have  equally  proven  to  be  a 
useful tool for tackling barriers to trade.  

The  swift  conclusion  of  the  Doha  round  of  global  trade  negotiations  would  reinforce  the 
global trading system and the rules designed to ensure markets are open and fair, as well as 
providing new market access. The multilateral approach is crucial to achieving a rule-based 
international  system.  The  Doha  trade  round  aims  to  reduce  not  only  tariffs  between  WTO 
members but also non-tariff barriers, for example through a trade facilitation agreement.  

At the bilateral and regional level, the EU’s goal of comprehensive Free Trade Agreements 
(FTA), especially with important trading partners in Asia, will deliver an excellent framework 
and  an  effective  tool  to  improve  EU  businesses  market  access  opportunities.  Besides 
eliminating  tariffs,  these  agreements  provide  novel  ways  for  effectively  tackling  unjustified 
non-tariff  obstacles  to  trade.  Innovative  elements  are  in  particular  substantive  disciplines 
addressing  non-tariff  barriers  in  certain  sectors  head-on;  an  enhanced  mechanism  of 
cooperation  and  consultation  on  Technical  Barriers  to  Trade  (TBT)  and  Sanitary  and 
Phytosanitary  measures  (SPS),  the  inclusion  of  a  chapter  on  market  access  in  services  and 
investments,  public  procurement  and  competition,  including  subsidies,  the  strengthening  of 
the  protection  and  enforcement  of  intellectual  property  rights  (including  Geographical 
Indications), and a customs and trade facilitation chapter. In addition, on a horizontal level, a 
mediation  mechanism  for  NTBs  will  complement  the  provisions  on  dispute  settlement  and 
commitments  on  labour  and  environmental  standards  in  order  to  promote  sustainable 
development. Strong monitoring of the effective implementation of FTAs in order to ensure 
that the commitments of the EU’s partners are effectively realised must be foreseen. 

3.2. 

Bilateral relations 

Market access barriers are also addressed in multiple ways through our regular or more ad hoc 
contacts with third countries.  

On a more regular basis, bilateral dialogues, which in most relationships address a very wide 
range of sectors, are an effective, institutionalised format to regularly address and follow-up 
on trade barriers and regulatory issues, with the possibility to escalate the issue to a higher, 
political  level  as  for  instance  the  High  Level  Economic  and  Trade  Dialogue  Mechanism 
(HLM)  with  China  and  the  Transatlantic  Economic  Council  with  the  US.  Political  summits 
between the EU and key partners can also be used. These dialogues are well suited to promote 
regulatory convergence through international cooperation and can be further strengthened. 

Assertive  trade  diplomacy  both  centrally  from  Brussels  as  well  as  locally  in  the  third 
country  concerned  is  well  suited  to  address  barriers  on  an  ad  hoc  basis  or  as  a  specific 
intervention  to  reinforce  a  long-term  strategy.  Coordination  between  the  Commission  and 
Member States and business within the Market Access Partnership should help to use the full 
potential of  the Commission and Member States’ bilateral contacts in acting as a block and 
efficiently articulate our interests abroad. 

In  addition,  the  EU’s  Trade  Related  Assistance  has  also  helped  overcome  or  smooth  out 
trade obstacles through, for instance, training of customs officials, thereby helping to create a 
framework for more efficient customs procedures.  

EN 

8 

   EN 

 
3.3. 

Formal instruments 

An  increasingly  important  tool  to  secure  open  trade  opportunities  are  the  notification 
procedures  in  the  framework  of  the  WTO-TBT17  Agreement  and  the  WTO-SPS18 
Agreement. The TBT and SPS Committees in Geneva serve as a multilateral consultation and 
negotiation  platform  for  all  WTO-members  with  the  objective  to  monitor  and  ensure 
compliance with the TBT and SPS Agreement. The obligation to notify new measures at the 
WTO  enables  partners  to  react  at  an  early  stage  and  address  concerns.  A  strong  and  active 
engagement  and  follow-up  is  essential  to  increase  the  possibility  to  prevent  new  barriers  to 
trade.  

To the extent that a mutually acceptable solution to a trade irritant can not be found, formal 
and enforceable instruments such as the EU’s Trade Barriers Regulation (TBR) procedure 
or  recourse  to  WTO  dispute  settlement  procedures  can  be  an  effective  remedy.  The 
Commission’s  Trade  Barrier  Regulation  provides  a  mechanism  for  EU  companies  to  act 
against  trade  barriers  affecting  their  access  to  third  country  markets,  by  requesting  the 
Commission  to  investigate  complaints  and  to  seek  redress.  The  WTO-Dispute  Settlement 
Procedure  is  a  useful  tool  to  address  WTO-incompatible  barriers  and  enforce  WTO-
compliance. In addition, the possibility of addressing trade barriers through bilateral dispute 
settlement and mediation mechanisms, as foreseen in our new generation FTAs, will become 
an important remedy and will help us to achieve increased market access. 

3.4. 

Regulatory cooperation 

The EU has a long standing experience with regulatory convergence and cooperation19 within 
the single market, which was constructed on the foundation of distinct, national regulations. 
In the EU, a high degree of social protection for its workers, high standards of product safety 
for  goods  sold  in  its  markets,  strong  protection  for  consumers  and  world-leading 
environmental protection legislation have encouraged the setting of equally high benchmarks 
in  third  countries.  A  key  objective  of  regulatory  cooperation  is  to  promote  high  standards 
abroad.  

Multilateral  or  bilateral  international  regulatory  co-operation  helps  address  unnecessary 
barriers  caused  by  differences  in  regulatory  practice.  Regulatory  co-operation  not  only 
establishes  a  mechanism  to  address  bilateral  regulatory  issues,  but  also  helps  build  a 
relationship between regulators which is conducive to exchanging information on regulatory 
changes being considered or planned (giving early warning), as well as best practices. In some 
cases  regulatory  convergence  may  be  the  appropriate  solution.  In  other  cases,  mutual 
recognition or equivalence agreements – sometimes following some degree of convergence - 
may be more appropriate. In all cases, visibility on likely regulatory developments is essential 
to help industry to plan ahead.  

The  bilateral  dialogues  mentioned  in  section  3.2  are  an  effective,  institutionalised  format  to 
regularly address and follow-up on regulatory issues and other trade barriers.  

17 
18 
19 

Technical Barriers to Trade. 
Sanitary and Phytosanitary. 
In  addressing  regulatory  cooperation  this  Communication  focuses  on  the  aspects  which  relate  most 
directly to market access and the removal of barriers to trade. Other aspects of regulatory cooperation 
include economic integration, improved consumer protection and the move towards global regulations. 

EN 

9 

   EN 

 
                                                 
Mutual  Recognition  Agreements  (MRA)  give  the  exporting  party  the  authority  to  certify 
products against the differing regulatory requirements of the importing party, prior to export. 
In the SPS field, a comparable instrument is the recognition of equivalence of measures of the 
exporting  country  with  the  measures  of  the  importing  country.  ACAAs  (Agreements  on 
Conformity  Assessment  and  Acceptance  of  Industrial  Products)  promote  regulatory 
convergence  in  that  they  commit  the  partner  country  -  either  in  support  of  the  enlargement 
process or the European Neighbourhood Policy - to adopt aspects of the European acquis for 
trade  in  goods,  in  return  for  which  the  partner  country  is  fully  integrated  into  the  European 
single market for such products.  

Regulatory convergence and co-operation with key countries  

Enlargement countries: The accession negotiations with Croatia and Turkey aim at the full 
implementation of the Community aquis in both countries. The Customs Union with Turkey 
is  an  additional  tool  for  accelerating  regulatory  convergence.  A  set  of  Stabilisation  and 
Association Agreements (SAA) establishes a free-trade area between the EU and the Western 
Balkan countries and prepares these countries for future membership. Regulatory co-operation 
is pursued through these agreements. All candidate and potential candidate countries receive 
substantial  community  assistance  provided  notably  through  the  'Technical  Assistance  and 
Institution Building' component of the Instrument for Pre-Accession Assistance (IPA) but also 
through the TAIEX programme, which assist in adoption, application and enforcement of the 
Community  acquis  (including  in  the  areas  of  conformity  assessment,  public  procurement, 
IPR, etc.). 

European  Neighbourhood  Policy  partners:  The  European  Neighbourhood  Policy  (ENP) 
aims  to  intensify  economic  integration  and  cooperation  with  the  neighbourhood  countries. 
Regulatory  co-operation  and  convergence  are  at  the  heart  of  the  ENP  and  are  based  on  the 
Partnership  and  Cooperation  Agreements.  As  outlined  in  the  European  Economic  Recovery 
plan,  the  economic  integration  and  cooperation  with  the  neighbourhood  countries  will  be 
progressively  intensified,  including  through  deep  and  comprehensive  FTAs  which  cover 
substantially  all  trade  and  aim  at  the  highest  possible  degree  of  liberalisation.  The  future 
Eastern Partnership will offer real perspectives for enhanced movement of goods, capital, the 
supply of services and for modernisation of the economies of the partner countries. The EU 
and its partners may reflect in future on a broader regional trade approach, offering full access 
to the internal market following full adoption of all relevant elements of the EU acquis. A first 
example of this approach is the new Association Agreement and FTA being negotiated with 
Ukraine.  For  the  Southern  neighbourhood,  co-operation  is  based  on  the  Association 
Agreements. Enhanced regulatory co-operation is a core component of the deepening of our 
trade ties with the Euromed countries with a view to establishing a free trade area. Ultimately, 
the goal is to achieve a common economic space including all countries within the European 
Neighbourhood policy. 

USA:  is  the  most  important  partner  for  the  EU.  Strong  co-operation  and,  where  possible, 
convergence  of  our  regulatory  approaches  are  of  key  strategic  and  economic  importance.  It 
would deepen the transatlantic market and could promote the development of global standards 
and regulation.. To that end the Transatlantic Economic Council (TEC) was set up in 2007 as 
a high-level political body giving political impetus to initiatives aimed at creating a barrier-
free  transatlantic  market  and  supporting  a  range  of  sectoral  regulatory  dialogues.  It  fosters 
upstream  co-operation  for  regulatory  convergence  and  the  resolution  of  downstream 
barriers/burdens  arising  for  business  on  both  sides  of  the  Atlantic.  Among  its  successes  are 
significant administrative simplification for the pharmaceuticals industry and equivalence of 

EN 

10 

   EN 

 
accounting standards.  

China:  The  “Consultation  Mechanism  on  Industrial  Products  and  WTO/TBT”  promotes 
reciprocal understanding and transparency in our regulatory processes. Among its successes is 
the simplification of certification procedures for medical devices. Regulatory issues can also 
be  brought  up  in  the  context  of  the  EU-China  HLM  which  addresses  issues  of  a  strategic 
nature with the aim of achieving concrete outcomes. The EU intends to maintain and further 
develop  the  existing  high-level  dialogue  mechanism  and  the  industrial  policy  and  sectoral 
regulatory  dialogues  with  a  view  to  securing  genuine  access  to  the  Chinese  market  and  the 
safety of consumers on both sides.  

Russia:  The  elimination  of  inefficient  cumbersome  regulatory  barriers  would  enormously 
facilitate the economic relationship and notably also foster the access to the Russian market 
for European businesses. Therefore, there is a mutual interest in ensuring the convergence of 
EU and Russian regulations. Regulatory co-operation with Russia is currently carried out in 
the context of the Common Economic Space and a number of specific regulatory dialogues in 
many policy fields have been established. While in some areas significant progress has been 
achieved,  in  a  number  of  others  cooperation  needs  to  become  better  focused  and  more 
operational. There is a huge untapped potential in the economic relationship between the EU 
and  Russia.  Russian  accession  to  WTO  and  Russia  future  commitments  as  a  WTO  member 
will further help to address a number of issues. Regulatory cooperation is a key objective for 
the  EU  which  will  be  addressed  in  the  ongoing  negotiations  for  a  new  EU-Russia  legal 
framework. 

Japan:  NTBs  are  one  of  the  biggest  problems  in  our  economic  relations.  A  number  of 
dialogues exist between the EU and Japan, including the Regulatory Reform Dialogue. There 
is  much  to  be  gained  from  pursuing  discussions  with  Japan  across  a  wide  range  of  sectoral 
interests.  In  view  of  its  economic  importance  regulatory  co-operation  with  Japan  should  be 
stepped up. 

Canada:  As  a  part  of  a  new  wide-ranging  agreement  covering  trade  and  investment, 
regulatory  co-operation  needs  to  be  developed  and  intensified.  Co-operation  with  Canada 
must take into account regulatory co-operation with the US too, so that the final outcome is a 
trilateral convergence of regulations. 

3.5. 

The Market Access Partnership 

To enhance the full use of these instruments  and complement our various efforts to remove 
barriers to trade, the Market Access Strategy established a new, stronger Partnership between 
the  Commission,  Member  States  and  business  in  order  to  pool  all  available  resources  and 
expertise  to  detect,  analyse  and  get  rid  of  barriers.  This  was  strongly  supported  by  the 
European Parliament20 and the Council21. Monthly meetings of the Market Access Advisory 
Committee (MAAC)  have  become the focal point for  coordination with Member States and 
business, supported by specific expert groups to address specific cases, sectors and regions22. 

20 

21 
22 

Report  on  the  EU's  strategy  to  deliver  market  access  for  European  companies  (2007/2185  (INI)), 
7.1.2008, ref. A6-0002/2008, RR\396713EN.doc, PE396.713v02-00 
Council Conclusions (GAERC) of 18 June 2007, Doc. 10542/07 
Working Group on Vaccines/Japan; Tyres/India, China and Indonesia; Medical Devices/ India, China, 
Korea, Taiwan, Brazil, Turkey; ICT/Turkey and China. 

EN 

11 

   EN 

 
                                                 
In  addition,  local  Market  Access  Teams  have  been  established  in  most  of  the  EU's  major 
export  markets,  pooling  the  expertise  and  commitment  of  the  Commission's  Delegations, 
Member States' Embassies and EU business representations. The work of these local Market 
Access  Teams  is  especially  valuable  to  prevent  barriers  through  a  strong  “early-warning-
mechanism”,  monitoring  the  legislation  of  the  host  country  and  providing  the  necessary 
knowledge  and  contacts.  In  addition,  they  have  allowed  greater  expertise  to  be  applied  to 
individual  cases,  given  knowledge  of  local  conditions.  Furthermore,  they  play  an  important 
role  in  coordinating  among  the  Commission,  Member  States  and  business  on  the  ground, 
facilitating the effective articulation of our trade concerns with one voice.  

Finally,  to  increase  its  leverage  the  Commission  has  stepped  up  cooperation  with  third 
countries on market access issues of common concern – particularly with the US and Japan, 
both by sharing information and through coordinated joint or parallel actions. 

4. 

WAY FORWARD 

All  the  instruments  identified  above  should  be  used  to  ensure  that  the  EU’s  openness  is 
maintained  and  matched  by  increased  access  to  third  country  markets  for  European 
companies. In the context of the Market Access Strategy the Commission, Member States and 
business  need  to  continue  their  active  engagement  to  ensure  that  the  European  Union  acts 
coherently in third countries and articulates its interests efficiently abroad. 

This  becomes  even  more  important  against  the  backdrop  of  the  current  economic 
environment, where the external dimension of the Lisbon Strategy needs to play its part in a 
higher engagement with a focus on jobs and growth.  

Beyond our efforts towards a swift conclusion of the Doha round and towards completion of 
ambitious Free Trade Agreements, strong emphasis will be put on: 

•  Market access activities related to sectors of high potential for future growth, such as 
automotives, pharmaceuticals, chemicals, electronics, machinery and environmental goods, 
as well as services, establishment and public procurement. For services, working groups 
(starting with postal courier and distribution services) have recently been set up to address 
key barriers in markets, which offer significant opportunities for EU service providers. 

•  IPR protection and enforcement in third countries through the successful conclusion of 
bilateral  agreements  with  detailed  provisions  on  IPR,  in  particular  on  enforcement, 
intensification  of  bilateral  co-operation  and  dialogues,  and  technical  co-operation 
programmes in particular in China and ASEAN countries. An Action Plan on IPR Customs 
enforcement will be signed with China shortly. Bilateral cooperation with the US on IPR 
enforcement  will  also  be  pursued.  In  order  to  ensure  better  market  access  for  European 
GIs,  we  will  explore  the  possibility  of  GI  protection  for  non-agricultural  products  as  a 
response to third country request such as India. 

•  Market  access  for  small  and  medium  size  companies  (SMEs)  as  outlined  in  the  Small 
Business Act (SBA)23, including special assistance to help obtain and alleviate the costs of 

23 

COM(2008) 394, 25..6.2008. 

EN 

12 

   EN 

 
                                                 
obtaining information on the regulatory, legal and cultural environment of potential export 
markets.  

The EU needs to use its economic weight and give impetus to its economic and trade relations 
with the major world economies. We must go further in drawing together the strands of our 
trade,  regulatory  and  broader  economic  relations.  While  there  is  no  single  model  for  our 
relations with all our partners, the  EU  must  find  better  ways  to  co-ordinate  the  internal  and 
external dimensions of our policies and to engage in comprehensive dialogues with our key 
partners.  In  this  context  we  should  also  consider  how  best  to  promote  the  internationally 
agreed decent work agenda and core labour standards.  

The following principles should guide the EU's future activities: 

(1) 

A coordinated approach 

All efforts to improve market access and export opportunities for European business, 
and  other  issues  related  to  regulatory  cooperation  and  convergence  should  be 
coordinated and clearly linked to the external competitiveness agenda. Efforts must 
be well-focused and properly directed, making best use of the available instruments, 
rather  than  isolated  ad-hoc  discussions  on  certain  areas  with  our  partners.  It  is 
necessary to ensure political supervision of the process with the EU's most important 
partners.  The  Market  Access  Strategy  is  an  important  framework  for  this 
coordination. 

(2) 

Setting priorities 

Prioritisation is a critical factor: Addressing barriers to trade, whatever their nature, 
is  resource  intensive.  We  need  to  ensure  that  EU  efforts  to  open  markets  and 
cooperate  on  regulation  have  a  real,  sustainable,  economic  impact  and  can  be 
accomplished  within  a  reasonable  time  span.  Priority  must  be  given  to  partners, 
sectors  and  policies  where  there  is  a  strong  economic  interest,  either  actual  or 
potential.  The  EU's  wider  political  objective  of  economic  integration  with  its 
neighbours means that engagement with these countries will also be a priority.   

(3) 

Listening to stakeholders   

The strengthened partnership between the Commission, Member States and business 
in the framework of the Market Access Strategy has proven to be very effective. This 
strength  should  be  carried  over  into  all  aspects  of  market  access  and  regulatory 
cooperation  activities.  Upstream  coordination  within  the  Partnership  and  with  third 
countries will be essential in having a pro-active approach to avoiding and removing 
barriers to trade. 

(4) 

Making full use of the range of instruments 

Relations between the EU and its main trading partners cover a wide range of diverse 
interactions. These have until now been conducted often independently of each other, 
which makes it more difficult to assess the balance of benefits. The EC should look, 
in  future,  at  areas  where  our  partners  benefit  from  cooperation  with  the  EU,  for 
example  in  research  and  development  programmes,  while  maintaining  significant 
barriers to EU businesses. We need to use all instruments at our disposal in a focused 

EN 

13 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
and  coherent  way,  in  order  to  improve  export  opportunities  for  European  exporters 
and improve the global regulatory framework. 

5. 

CONCLUSION 

This  Communication  aims  at  ensuring  greater  opportunities  for  EU  businesses  in  third 
countries and brings together external and internal policies.  

It  is  also  the  first  yearly  market  access  report,  giving  an  account  of  significant  existing 
barriers.  Successful  barrier  removal  will  require  an  assertive  articulation  of  European  trade 
interest with one voice. The success of the EU's actions will continue to depend very much on 
the serious commitment of all stakeholders.  

Response to trade barriers must be coherent and targeted. The EU has different instruments at 
its disposal to overcome trade barriers and promote regulatory convergence. It needs to use all 
its  instruments  strategically  and  to  ensure  that  there  is  a  more  integrated  external  policy 
agenda, which allows for trade-offs and win-win solutions. The Commission will ensure full 
exploitation  of  the  potential  of  regulatory  co-operation  to  anticipate  trade  challenges  and 
ensure  mutually  beneficial  cooperation  at  early  stages  of  the  legislative  process.  Beyond 
market  access,  regulatory  cooperation  offers  further  benefits  in  areas  such  as  consumer 
protection, improving environmental standards, improving the evidence base for drawing up 
legislation and reducing the cost of doing business.  

This  Communication  sets  out  ways  to  remove  regulatory  obstacles  and  increase  market 
access,  to  create  growth  and  jobs.  The  Commission  will  pursue  these  objectives  actively  in 
2009, including reflecting on how to further strengthen regulatory cooperation. These efforts 
will go hand in hand with the further development of the Lisbon Strategy for Growth and Jobs 
post 2010. 

EN 

14 

   EN