English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

International trade negotiations are no longer largely limited to federal government's constitutional jurisdictions. In this context, substate governments, like Quebec and Wallonia, are aware that their ability to formulate and implement policy, are subject to negotiations in trade talks. This article compares the role of Quebec and Wallonia in the CETA negotiations. While Wallonia was able to force the inclusion of an interpretative legal instrument to clarify certain parts of CETA, Quebec, like the other Canadian provinces, was able to influence the negotiation from within. Quebec's influence was felt on many issues such as regulatory cooperation, certification, labour mobility, cultural diversity, but also on issues that were ultimately left outside the agreement. The comparison provides important lessons: the inclusion in the negotiating process of substate governments, like Quebec, makes it easier for them to make important concessions during the negotiation but also to accept the outcome of the negotiation. Moreover, substate governments are important actors in legitimising these trade treaties. When they strongly oppose them, like Wallonia did, it has a deleterious effect on the legitimacy of the agreement.

Trade Paradiplomacy and the Politics of International Economic Law: The Inclusion of Quebec and the Exclusion of Wallonia in the CETA Negotiations