The Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership: Challenges and Opportunities for Consumer Protection. Paper No. 11 in the CEPS-CTR project ‘TTIP in the Balance’ and CEPS Special Report No. 115/July 2015

This paper examines options for regulatory cooperation in the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) and assesses the challenges and opportunities posed by regulatory cooperation for consumer protection. It looks at existing approaches to regulatory cooperation by referencing a range of case studies. Based on established practice and on the European Commission’s recently published proposal on regulatory cooperation, we discuss a possible approach that could be adopted in the TTIP. Against the significant potential gains from improved regulatory cooperation, one must set the significant challenges of reconciling the different regulatory philosophies of the US and the EU as well as some differences in their respective approaches to cooperation. In broad terms, this analysis finds that regulatory powers on both sides of the Atlantic will not be significantly affected by the TTIP, but suggests that European and American legislators will need to ensure that their priorities shape the TTIP regulatory cooperation agenda and not the other way around.

[1]  A. Renda,et al.  Telecommunications and Internet Services: The digital side of the TTIP. Paper No. 8 in the CEPS-CTR project ‘TTIP in the Balance’ and CEPS Special Report No. 112/July, 17 July 2015 , 2015 .

[2]  J. Pelkmans,et al.  Greater TTIP Ambition in Chemicals: Why and How , 2015 .

[3]  C. Freund,et al.  Gains from Harmonizing US and EU Auto Regulations under the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership , 2015 .

[4]  J. Pelkmans,et al.  This Time it's Different: Turbo-Charging Regulatory Cooperation in TTIP , 2015 .

[5]  Jacques Pelkmans,et al.  Transatlantic MRAs: Lessons for TTIP? , 2015 .

[6]  M. Karlsson TTIP and the environment: the case of chemicals policy , 2015 .

[7]  F. Benedetto The Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) , 2015 .

[8]  S. Tangermann,et al.  Agriculture, Food and the TTIP: Possibilities and Pitfalls , 2014 .

[9]  J. Pelkmans,et al.  The Impact of TTIP: The Underlying Economic Model and Comparisons , 2014 .

[10]  A. Alemanno,et al.  Towards Effective Regulatory Cooperation Under TTIP: A Comparative Overview of the EU and US Legislative and Regulatory Systems , 2014 .

[11]  Richard K. Lattanzio,et al.  U.S. and EU Motor Vehicle Standards: Issues for Transatlantic Trade Negotiations [February 18, 2014] , 2014 .

[12]  Anca Mot,et al.  THE TRANSATLANTIC TRADE AND INVESTMENT PARTNERSHIP , 2014 .

[13]  K. Weingartner,et al.  Regulatory Cooperation Under TTIP – A Risk for Democracy and National Regulation? , 2014 .

[14]  L. Kogan,et al.  Trade, the Precautionary Principle, and Post-Modern Regulatory Process , 2013, European Journal of Risk Regulation.

[15]  J. Francois,et al.  Reducing Transatlantic Barriers to Trade and Investment: An Economic Assessment , 2013 .

[16]  F. Cafaggi The Reality of Precaution – Comparing Risk Regulation in the US and Europe , 2012, European Journal of Risk Regulation.

[17]  A. Alemanno How to Get Out of the Transatlantic Regulatory Deadlock over GMOs? Time for Regulatory Cooperation , 2009 .

[18]  René von Schomberg,et al.  The Precautionary Principle and its Normative Challenges , 2006 .

[19]  Jonathan B. Wiener,et al.  Comparing precaution in the United States and Europe , 2002 .

[20]  D. Vogel Trading Up: Consumer and Environmental Regulation in a Global Economy , 1997 .