photocredits: Theodore C (CC BY-ND 2.0)  license

As Colombia starts its pro tempore presidency of the Pacific Alliance for a year, it seems timely to examine the road ahead and how its presidency could contribute to progress on the already populated agenda of the PA. This post is the first of a series of contributions that will tackle relevant issues that could be targeted as future works for the mechanism.

It is worth mentioning the multiple areas and topics in which the PA is currently working that make it difficult to map out the actual activities and progress in each of them. As it is reported in its website  (alianzapacifico.net) there are currently 20 technical groups and one subcommittee working on topics such as: digital agenda, innovation, public procurement, gender, cooperation, culture, tourism, SMEs, intellectual property, education, mining development, services and capital, public procurement, trade and integration, communications strategy, expert group on the CEAP, promotion agencies, regulatory improvement, international fiscal transparency, movement of persons, and external relations. The establishment of two more groups one on labour and the other on green growth and the environment was also envisioned in presidential declarations. However, up to today, it is not clear if the latter two groups have been established although the Cali Presidential Declaration provides for actions regarding green growth and the environment. Notwithstanding these works the PA is also undertaking joint activities on fisheries and aquaculture, health and access to medicines, and consumer protection.

Continue reading

Photocredits: antpkr/FreeDigitalPhotos.net
It has already been documented that one of the main reasons for the early success of the Pacific Alliance lies in its ability to show and prove real results by tackling areas and projects where member states share common views and interests. These refer to non-contentious areas such as cooperation in education, innovation, science and technology, as well as the promotion of SMEs.

However sooner than later the PA will have to deal with more sensitive areas of the deep integration process if it is to live up to the expectations created. The PA needs to work on the high hanging fruits and test the political will to tackle these areas which include:

Labour Mobility: this field comprises not only flexibility of migratory requirements for high and medium skill professionals and technical personnel, but also the recognition of their qualifications and requirements to practice in the territory of the parties.

Financial Integration: although parties are working into integrating their stock markets through MILA the operations undertaken within it continue to be low due to hurdles from different sources including differences in regulatory frameworks, barriers to institutional investors such as pension funds and inefficiencies coming from dual fees and non-unified clearance systems.

Unleash the potential of energy integration: Marczak and George call on the need to work on a comprehensive integrated energy matrix within the PA using the Central American (Central American Interconnection System) experience as a precedent.

Progress in these areas requires high levels of regulatory harmonization and convergence that could trigger disagreements among domestic stakeholders benefited by the status quo regulation. Moreover, engaging the private sector participation in funding long-term projects continues to be a challenge. Again harmonisation of regulatory frameworks regarding public-private partnerships constitutes a step in this direction.

I look forward to hearing your insights on areas of work that continue to be high hanging fruits of the Pacific Alliance Integration.

Sources: Jason Marczak and Samuel George, ‘Pacific Alliance 2.0: Next Steps in Integration’ (Atlantic Council and Bertelsmann Foundation, May 2016)

Carlos Arturo Villagrán PhD Candidate from the Melbourne Law School has shared with the Pacific Alliance Blog his insights on the role that Costa Rica has played and continues to play in Central America and particularly in the Central American integration.

Photocredits: Stuart Miles/FreeDigitalPhotos.net
Costa Rica’s relationship with and within integration processes has been, and continues to be unique and different to its regional partners in Central America.
Since the 1950’s, the Central American region has been attempting to consolidate a regional integration scheme; however, these efforts continue to display and repeat the same old differences and pathologies since the fall of the Central American federation in 1838.
In this enterprise for integration, Costa Rica displays itself as an interesting outlier. Costa Rica, different to its regional neighbors, has been historically interested in consolidating its export industry and agricultural diversification. In addition, Costa Rica has been successful in maintaining a stable and democratic rule since the 1950s. This had aided Costa Rica to provide its citizens a higher quality of life than its regional counterparts. This has made Costa Rica, understandably, weary of its neighbors and to remain outside of the regional struggle.

Nevertheless, Costa Rica during the regional turmoil period, between 1975 and 1985, understood itself as not part of the regional problem, but as affected by it. In those years the Central American common market, born in the early 1960s, halted and, also due to the external conditions, Costa Rica fell into economic depression.

In this pursuit of economic recovery, Costa Rica became a leader for the return of the region to democracy and peace. Nevertheless, Costa Rica promoted a policy of ‘intervention without integration’. Following this line of thought, Costa Rica was not particularly against integration, rather it focused on using regional machinery, or the integration process, in order to successfully insert itself into the international markets. This position has led Costa Rica to become a reluctant player within the new Central-American integration enterprise, founded in 1991.

This reluctance has been displayed by the fact that it has not ratified many of the Central-American integration treaties, including those agreements  to become a member of the regional parliament and the court. In addition, Costa Rica aided for the creation of a new WTO-like dispute settlement scheme in the region, taking away the competencies of the newly established regional court. Continue reading