Available via license: CC BY-NC-SA 4.0
Content may be subject to copyright.
Artigo
Rev. Conj. Aust. | v.12, n.59 | jul./set. 2021
This is an article published in open access and distribution under the terms of the Creative Commons License for Non-Commercial Attribution Share-Equal 4.0 International (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0), which allows
its use, distribution and reproduction in any medium as well as its transformation and creations from it, as long as the original author and source are credited. Furthermore, the material cannot be used
for commercial purposes, and if it is transformed, or used as a basis for other creations, these must be distributed under the same license as the origina
106
The Impact of the European Union-Mercosur Association Agreement on
gender inequality: A global South perspective
O imp acto do Acordo de Associação UE-Mercosul na desigualdade de gênero: uma perspectiva do sul global
DOI: https://doi.org/10.22456/2178-8839.113907
Carolina Pavese
ESPM, São Paulo, Bra sil
carolpavese@gmail.com
Abstract
Globalization and trade liberalization have wide -ranging effects on employment, labor security, the environment, leading to processes with uneven
gender consequences. Departing from a feminist approach, this study analyzes the potential impact of the latest EU-Me rcosur Agreement on gender
inequality. This re search conducts a qualitative case- study focusing on the Mer cosur, where women face already strong structural e conomic inequality.
It argues that the adoption of a gende r mainstreaming approach is esse ntial for promotion of an interregional trade instrument that contributes to
women’s economic empowerment. The main findings re veal that the sectors affected by trade liberalization are sensitive to female participation. Yet,
the analysis has shown that the draft text negotiated is blind the uneq ual opportunities that interregional trade liberalization poses to men and women,
at least in the case of the Mer cosur. As the document is pending ratification, it can be modified. Therefore, the EU and Me rcosur still could ad opt
provisions that account for the une ven gender impact of the agr eement, fostering gende r equality in the global South.
Keywords: Trade liberalization; Gender inequality; EU-Mercosur agreement;
Resumo
Globalização e liberalização comercial têm consequências abrangentes para o emprego, segur ança do trabalho, meio ambiente, levando a processos com
impactos de gêner o desiguais. Partindo de uma abordagem feminista, e ste artigo analisa o potencial impacto do último Acordo UE-Mercosul na
desigualdade de gênero. Esta pe squisa realiza um estudo de caso qualitativo com foco no Mercosul, onde as mulheres enf rentam já fortes desigualdades
econômicas estruturais. Este ar tigo argumenta que a adoção de uma abordagem de integração de gênero é essencial para a promoção de um instrument o
comercial inter-r egional que contribua com o empoderamento econômico das mulheres. As principais conclusões reve lam qu e os setores af etados pela
liberalização do comércio são sensíveis à participação feminina. Ainda assim, a análise mostrou que o texto negociado é cego no qu e tange às
oportunidades e desafios que a liber alização do comércio inter- regional represe nta para homens e mulheres, pelo menos no caso do Mer cosul. Como o
documento está p endente d e ratificação, ele pode ser modificado. Portanto, a UE e o Mercosul ainda poderiam adotar disposições q ue considerem o
impacto desigual de gênero d o acordo, fortalecendo a igualdade de gêner o no Sul global.
Palavras-chave: L iberalização comercial; Desigualdade de gênero; Acordo UE-Mercosul;
Received: M ay 17, 2021
Accepted: August 20, 2021
Conflic ts of inter est: The author did no t report potenti al conflict s of interests
Rev. Conj. Aust. | Porto Alegre | v.12, n.59 | p.106-118 | jul./set. 2021 | ISS N: 2178-8839
Pavese
The Impact of the European Union-Mercosur Association Agreement on gender inequality: A global South perspective
107
Introduction
According to feminist scholarship, gender inequality results from a system of gendered power relations, based
on different norms and values of male and female responsibilities and roles (ELSON ET AL., 2007). The effects of trade
liberalization on gender (in)equality are multifaceted, deriving from uneven access to capital, properties, labor markets,
earnings, human capital, and correlated public policies, cultural biases and gender norms. They also vary according to the
sectors at stake. When trade liberalization increases activities and improves working conditions in sectors with high
female participation in the labor force, gender inequality might reduce. Conversely, when changes in trade pattern impact
negatively these sectors, the gender gap is likely to widen up. As a result, there is clear correlation between trade
liberalization an economic independence (FONTANA, 2009). Thus, “gender equality cannot be achieved without a change
in a wide variety of policies, including, for example, labor market, fiscal and financial policies. Why then should we assume,
it can be achieved in isolation from trade policy?” (VAN STAVEREN, 2007, p.257).
The primary objective of this research is to understand the gender dimension and the impact of the new EU-
Mercosur trade agreement on inequality, filling a gap in the literature. It argues that the adoption of a gender
mainstreaming approach is essential for promotion of an interregional trade instrument that contributes to women’s
economic empowerment. The research adopts a qualitative case -study approach to explore the consequences of the
agreement for women in the Mercosur.
Feminist theories are important tool for the analysis on the gender dimension of politics and provide the
theoretical basis for this study. From the appraisal of main theoretical assumptions regarding the correlation between
trade liberalization and gender inequality, it is possible to identify the elements that should be present in the empirical
analysis of this correlation, applied to the study of the EU-Mercosur agreement. Primary sources, mainly statistics
provided by international organizations on gender inequality in region, offer material to identify the degree of female
economic empowerment in the Mercosur. Official documents from the negotiation process and the draft text of the
agreement serve as the basis for the analysis of how (and if) gender issues are addressed by the new instrument for EU-
Mercosur trade relations. Crossing the literature review with the assessment of empirical material allows this research to
produce an overall appraisal of the potential impacts of the interregional agreement for gender inequality in the Mercosur.
This article is divided into three main parts. The first provides a literature review on the feminist scholarship in
international political economy, which allows understanding the correlation between globalization, trade liberalization,
gender, and introduces the concept of gender mainstreaming. The second part presents a general overview of gender
economic inequality within Mercosur countries. Finally, the third part analyses the text of the agreement, revealing how
it failed to incorporate a gender mainstreaming approach. The final remarks wrap up the discussion delivered, concluding
that the empirical evidence support the claim that trade policy and gender inequality are intertwined. By ignoring that,
the EU and Mercosur have not jointly addressed the gender dimension of interregional trade in the new agreement.
Globalization, Trade and Gender Equality
The process of globalization has strong cultural, technological, political, social, and economic dimensions. It
implies the strengthening of international exchanges between state and non-state actors. From an economic perspective,
it has resulted in increasing flows of goods, services and investments, the accumulation of capital, and growth of
multinationals. Shaped by the resurgence of neoliberalism, globalization has required structural adjustments that come
at a cost. All these dynamics have uneven impact, both in terms of regions and social groups. Being it controversial in its
nature, there is no consensus on the effects of globalization on gender inequality (BENERIA et al., 2010).
The arguments claiming a positive correlation between the two phenomena defend that globalization has lifted
some of the constraints to inequality in three main ways. First, the diffusion of new information and communication
Rev. Conj. Aust. | Porto Alegre | v.12, n.59 | p.106-118 | jul./set. 2021 | ISS N: 2178-8839
Pavese
The Impact of the European Union-Mercosur Association Agreement on gender inequality: A global South perspective
108
technology has created more direct and indirect economic opportunities for women. Second, greater access to information
has influenced a change in behavior patterns and expectations on the distinct role of women in society , strengthening the
pursue of equality. Finally, inequality can damage the international image of a particular economy, which might increase
domestic and external the pressure for the adoption of gender equality norms. Yet, globalization alone does not close the
gap. It is crucial that governments adopt public policies that size the opportunities that globalization can create to promote
gender parity (WORLD BANK, 2012).
One of the problems with this perspective is that it disregards the uneven regional impacts of globalization. As
Sabaté (1999, p.24) posits:
Globalization is fundamentally understood as an economic process; Howe ver, its meaning should be
broadened since, in practice, it constitutes the worldwide expansion of some forms of thought and
culture - the Western one - that imply mercantilism, the exploitation of nature and, in fact, the
marginalization of the most disadvantaged: women, the poor and non-Western cultures. It is therefore
not surprising that globalization is exacerbating the deterioration of the environment as well as the
living conditions of non-Western women (SABATÉ, 1999, p.24).
For Nagar et. Al. (2002) globalization impacts structures of domination and often results in the deepening of
inequality patterns. Similarly, Peterson (2005) argues that neoliberal globalization is a byproduct of geopolitical elites and
serves the interest of powerful states and their transnational institutions. The control of different groups – and countries-
over this process relies on an uneven rule, in which the rich are allowed to adopt strategic protectionist measures to
compensate for their vulnerabilities, whereas developing economies have little capacity to act alike. In other words, the
global North can strategically choose how to engage with globalization and benefit from it, but the global South is pushed
to embrace neoliberalism fully. Consequently, economic globalization has led to further polarization and inequality
between states and within different social groups.
Regarding polarization and regional distribution of wealth, Jaggar (2002) posits that the subordination of the
global South to the North is the result of a historical process of colonial exploitation and violence. This colonial structure
has been replaced with an economic system that perpetuated inequality and dependence. It deliberately undermines the
attempts of developing countries to pursue their path towards prosperity and self-determination. This argument leads to
the conclusion that the global North is indeed in long debt with the Southern part of the world, for their ongoing
contributions to the wealth of the developed world.
Concerning increased inequalities amongst different social groups, Moghadam (1999) claims that capitalism is
anything but blind to gender and ethnic politics. On the opposite. White and male individuals are the most favored ones
by the forces of neoliberal economies - and they are commonly from the global North. One of the reasons is the fact that
neoliberalism profits from labor exploitation on a global sc ale by operating mostly through large transnational
corporations and some powerful state institutions.
This exploitation of labor across different markets leads to what Standing (1999) defines as “feminization of
employment”. Hoskyns and Rai (2007), explain that this process could be understood as an increase in the participation
of women in the job market. It can be also considered as the general precarization of labor standards and social protection,
which subjects men to poorer working conditions equated to those commonly applied to women.
According to Berger (2009), globalization is characterized by the "mobility of capital" and "immobility of labor",
preventing a tendency to global equalization of labor income. Workers compete indirectly through the incidence of their
salaries on costs. This pressures for wage stagnation in the center and very different salary evolution in the periphery,
depending on the dynamism of labor demand in each country. That is why Waylen (2006) emphasizes that the analysis of
gender as a “constitutive of processes of globalization” requires abandoning the perception of the global (masculine) as
opposed to the local (feminine). In this approach it is important to consider that shifts in the pattern of local activities can
be the product of domestic social and economic changes, and not necessarily a direct consequence of globalization. Also,
Rev. Conj. Aust. | Por to Alegre | v.12, n.59 | p.106-118 | jul./set. 2021 | ISSN: 2178-8839
Pavese
The Impact of the European Union- Mercosur Association Agreement on gender inequality: A global South perspective
109
it is necessary to break with the distinction between public and private spheres that separate s productive from
reproductive economies.
Most analyses and policy responses to inequality often ignore the role of women’s unpaid labor in social
reproduction (WAYLEN, 2006). And there is a purpose for that. The sexual division of work is a patriarchal separation
necessary for the development of capitalism and the organization of political life, with men as the main protagonists of
public life (VALDIVIESO, 2009). Equally concerning, the quantification of economic productivity only in monetary terms
leads to an intentional depreciation of women’s value and contribution to society. Expenditures on social policies that
increase human welfare are often considered as “expenses” and financial burdens, ultimately delegitimating the demand
of women for economic and political support for social services that would improve gender equality (FRASER; GORDON,
1997).
In addressing the negative impacts of neoliberal globalization on gender equality, the departing point is the
assumption that "women" are not a homogeneous concept. Differences in terms of nationality, a ge, class, religion,
ethnicity, sexuality, marital status, and motherhood define the way women are perceived in society, and, ultimately, the
opportunities they must take part in economic, political and social spheres. Thus, the intersectional approach allows
understanding female economic empowerment in relation with local, national, and global contexts (JAGGAR, 2001).
For this reason, an intersectional approach is particularly important in Latin America, as the region has several
ethnic groups that were discriminated against for centuries. In most of these populations, women face overlapping biases,
for being a woman and for their ethnicity. Economic inequality leads to varied interests, rights, and needs among women
from different social classes. In common, however, all women are subjected to patriarchal societies that assign specific
roles for them, often grounded on the exploitation of social and economic relations, in both private and public spheres
(GIRON, 2009).
When considering trade liberalization, three important features common to this type of policy agenda are:
increased imports, exports promotion, and market access provisions. Import liberalization has often a budgetary effect, as
reduced tariffs lead to loss of government revenue. As a result, public spending tends to be reallocated away from social
sectors – impacting women and children - the primary beneficiaries of these policies. At the same time, higher imports
mean cheaper products available to domestic consumers, especially in the case of commodities, having a positive impact
on the household budget. Yet, small producers face greater competition with foreign producers and, given that in many
countries women rely on agriculture as a source of income, they are likely to be more penalized tha n men. Also, the
incentives to cash crops tend to shift the gender division of labor as, traditionally, women manage food production and
men cash crop production (exploiting female and male working force).
Export promotion may lead to the reallocation of resources to export-oriented sectors and influence the size and
scope of business development. Often, larger producers and/or industries have the capacity (including financial resources)
to adapt their activities to enter a foreign market. Smaller producers do not share the same potential gains from increased
exports. How this process impacts gender inequality depends on whether local governments adopt gender -sensitive
policies that guarantee the access of women to land, credit, and technology. Similarly, market access provisions impact the
availability of technical assistance and marketing information. Thus, the gender sensitivity of domestic programs is
important to ensure that women benefit from new economic opportunities (WILLIAMS, 2003). Once more, it is important
to consider that not all women are impacted the same.
Gender Mainstreaming in Trade Agreements
Given that trade liberalization is capable of impacting gender relations in myriad ways, gender mainstreaming
is the most adequate strategy to promote gender equality comprehensively. As a form of feminist politics and policy
practice, the notion gender mainstreaming is grounded on feminist academic scholarship and the work of gender equality
Rev. Conj. Aust. | Por to Alegre | v.12, n.59 | p.106-118 | jul./set. 2021 | ISSN: 2178-8839
Pavese
The Impact of the European Union- Mercosur Association Agreement on gender inequality: A global South perspective
110
practitioners. As Walby (2005, p.454) claims, “it is a process that seeks to advance gender equality by revising all
mainstream policy arenas. It is simultaneously intended as a way of improving the effectiveness of mainline policies by
making visible the gendered nature of assumptions, processes and outcomes.” When translated into practice, Hanna
(2001:1) argues, gender mainstreaming involves “identifying and addressing relevant gender perspectives in data
collection and research, analysis, legislation, policy development, development of projects and programs, as well as in
training and other institutional development activities.”
The principle of gender mainstreaming dates to the 1970s and can be originally credited to development
practitioners. More than two decades later, it was globally endorsed at the UN conference on women in Beijing, in 1995
(MEYER; PRUGL, 1999). Given its multidimensional nature and applicability , gender mainstreaming is conceived to be
applied in all political arenas, including those that are not conventionally considered as gender sensitive areas. Thus, the
Beijing Platform for Action (1995) explicitly refers to trade policies as an area of conc ern for gender mainstreaming. In
paragraph 165, the Platform advises governments to "seek to ensure that national policies related to international and
regional trade agreements do not harm women's new and traditional economic activities". It recommends the "use
gender-impact analyses in the development of macro and micro-economic and social policies to monitor such impact and
restructure policies in cases where harmful impact occurs."
But governmental responses should not be designed only to address negat ive impact of trade policy (and
agreements) on gender inequality. According to Women Watch (2011), an effective gender sensitive approach adopts
norms and mechanisms that improve women's economic and social empowerment, and general wellbeing. Thus, explicit
reference to gender equality in the text of trade agreements is an important strategy to strengthen political commitment
and the availability of funding for gender-related programs of technical cooperation. These provisions are also important
to ensure the monitoring of the gender impact of trade liberalization.
When gender perspectives are not taken into explicit account in the main text, an alternative is to produce ad
hoc documents establishing the obligation to the parties to observe gender equality norms and recommendations that
would be annex parts to the agreement. Finally, gender issues are also addressed in parallel activities and discussions
surrounding the implementation of regional agreements or forums. Here it is worth reminding that gender mainstreaming
is not just about agenda, but also incorporating gender equality into decision-making processes and implementation
practices (WOMEN WATCH, 2011).
Putting forward some recommendations to promote gender mainstreaming in regional trade agreements,
Williams (2002) suggests to departure from the assumption that gender is a cross-cutting issue. The main strategies to be
adopted are the following: a) regional trade agreements should provide an opportunity for the parties to share experiences
in integrating gender into different policy areas, as well as promoting a more gender-balanced decision-making process;
b) gender impact assessment and strategies should be promoted in all stages of negotiation and implementation of the
agreement; c) development and adoption of a coherent policy and institutional framework for gender mainstreaming; d)
prioritization of the collection of sex-disaggregated data; e) support the creation and/or activities of independent women's
leadership and professional organizations; f) conduct research on women in small and micro business enterprises; g)
improve human resources development of female working force. Nevertheless, as Van Staveren (2007) claims,
recommendations of international organizations need to be turned into concre te policy measures to have an impact. So
far, the response has been limited and varies depending on the agreement at stake.
Taking these considerations into account, the next sessions present an overview of gender inequality in
Mercosur. Following, the article analyses how – and whether- gender mainstreaming has been considered in the text of
the EU-Mercosur Association Agreement.
Rev. Conj. Aust. | Por to Alegre | v.12, n.59 | p.106-118 | jul./set. 2021 | ISSN: 2178-8839
Pavese
The Impact of the European Union- Mercosur Association Agreement on gender inequality: A global South perspective
111
“Where are the women”? Gender economic inequality in Mercosur
Latin America features among the most unequal societies in the world in terms of wealth and income distribution.
Mercosur is no exception. Analyzing the GINI index for measuring inequality, all four members of the bloc have a
coefficient of around 40 (in which zero would represent full equality). Brazil, the largest economy in the region, is also the
most unequal country, scoring 53.4 points in 2019 (WORLD BANK, 2021).
Comparing 156 countries across different indicators, the Global Gender Gap Report 2021 reveals the effect of the
overall inequality in the Mercosur on gender. In the overall rank, Argentina performed significantly better than the three
other countries, occupying the 35th global position. Uruguay and Paraguay are in 85th and 86th place, respectively, whereas
Brazil is in the 95th position. In terms of economic participation and opportunity, an indicator that considers labor force
participation, wage equality, and type of work activity, the picture is no better. The best performance is that of Uruguay
(76), followed by Paraguay (86) and Brazil (89), with Argentina recording a very low score, ranking 103 out of 156 countries
surveyed. Overall, economic participation and political empowerment are the two indicators in which Mercosur countries
perform the worst (WORLD ECONOMIC FORUM, 2021).
These data reveal that there is strong economic inequality in the region, consequently, placing women in a more
vulnerable position when it comes to shifts in economic and trade policies and landscape. Given that the impact of the new
EU-Mercosur Association Agreement varies according to the sector and considering that women participate in different
economic activities unevenly, it is important to understand the distribution of economic activities across the bloc, to
identify the possible effects of the agreement on gender inequality.
According to UNCTAD (2018), although Mercosur countries feature among the largest global exporters of
commodities, agriculture is the smallest sector in all four econom ies. In Argentina, Brazil, and Uruguay, agriculture
contributed to 7.6, 5.5, and 6.8 percent of the economy, respectively, being a stronger sector in Paraguay, where it
corresponded to 20 percent of GDP, in 2017. In contrast, in that same year, services accounted for the largest share of the
economy in all countries: 49.7% in Paraguay, 64.4% in Uruguay, 65.8% in Argentina, and 73.3% in Brazil. Regarding
industry, it was the second most important sector in the economies of the bloc. Paraguay leads the rank (30.3%), followed
by Uruguay (28.8%), Argentina (26.7%), and Brazil (21.2%).
Since liberalization impacts different economic structures, the opening of the economies and the incentives of the
global market for the exports of agricultural goods have led to a deindustrialization process in the region. From 1991, when
Mercosur was created, to 2017, the share of manufacturing in GDP almost halved, going from an average of 25% to less
than 13% across the four economies. This early deindustrialization is also seen as contributing to the "defeminization” of
industrial employment.
The proportion of employed women in the industry has decreased in line with regional integration in countries
such as Uruguay, Paraguay, and Argentina. Formal employment in the industry is therefore also predominantly male. The
difference is in the service sector, in which regional integration and trade liberalization have been matched by an increase
in female participation in the labor market. This is even more significant when we consider that the tertiary sector is the
largest source of employment in all four Mercosur countries. and constitutes the largest share of GDP However, women
and men tend to be employed in different types of activities in this sector, occupying mostly functions related to the areas
of education, social services, and health care.
In the case of agriculture, a key sector for the region, there was a recent inversion of occupation in the sector, with
men predominantly assuming the largest share of jobs, from the point of view of formal employment, highlighting here
the difficulty of obtaining statistics that reflect with this panorama, especially since women tend to remain more informal
- and precarious - than men (UNCTAD, 2018).
The numbers prove these arguments. According to the International Labor Organization- ILO (2017), the
employment rate for people ages 15 or older in the four Mercosur countries was 53,3% for women and 76,55% for men, on
Rev. Conj. Aust. | Por to Alegre | v.12, n.59 | p.106-118 | jul./set. 2021 | ISSN: 2178-8839
Pavese
The Impact of the European Union- Mercosur Association Agreement on gender inequality: A global South perspective
112
average, in 2017. Data provided by UNCTAD (2018), explore the effect of regional integration on women’s participation in
economic activities between 1998 and 2017. Assessing the results, it is interesting to observe that the impact varied across
the four founding members of Mercosur. Regarding industry, Brazil is the only country in which there was a small increase
in female employment in the sector (from 9,4% to 10,8%), while the share of women shrunk in Argentina, Uruguay, and
Paraguay. In agriculture, there has been an increase in women's participation in the sector in Uruguay and Argentina,
whereas numbers remained steady in Paraguay. Interestingly, in the case of Brazil, there was a sharp decrease, from 19%
to less than 5%, comparing 1998 to 2017. In all these cases, employment in the sector remains male -dominant (UNCTAD,
2018).
Thus, given that the trade liberalization agreements directly impact the economic structure of the markets
involved, they almost inevitably carry a gender dimension. The way to convert these agreements into an opportunity to
improve equality depends on the extent to which policymakers are not gender blind and instead adopt a gender
mainstreaming approach to negotiations, that ultimately lead to a gender-balanced agreement.
The next session presents an overall analysis of the new EU-Mercosur Association Agreement and scrutinizes if
(and how) gender mainstreaming features in the draft text that is now subjected to ratification.
The EU- Mercosur Association Agreement
EU-Mercosur relations were formalized with the celebration of an Interregional Framework Agreement for
Cooperation, in 1995, entering into force in 1999 and still providing the current legal basis for their relationship. Already in
1995, leaders from Mercosur and the EU met in Rio de Janeiro and decided to promote a new interregional agreement on
trade liberalization. On the occasion, the parties established that all sectors should be covered by the deal, observing the
principle of single undertaking. Negotiations were officially launched in 2000, but, after 13 meetings of the Bi-regional
Negotiations Committee (BNC), they came to a halt, in 2004.
In terms of agenda, the suspension of negotiations was due to discrepancies regarding the exchange of offers.
Whereas Mercosur was not satisfied with the treatment of tariff quotas on agriculture proposed by the EU, the Europeans
were not pleased by the concessions on services and public procurement that they would be granted. Furthermore, the EU
was conditioning the negotiation to the conclusion of the Doha Round negotiations of the World Trade Organization –
which is still pending. Another important externality that eased the EU’s interest in reaching an agreement was the failure
of negotiations of the Free Trade Area of the Americas (FTAA), which posed direct competition with the United States for
the preferential market access within South America (ARANA, 2017).
In addition, the international financial crisis of 2008, the EU enlargement process to central and e astern Europe,
also negatively impacted the interest on interregional trade liberalization. Moreover, both regions experienced political
changes and the redefinition (crisis) of their respective regional integration processes. Yet, at the same time competi tion
with China for market access in Latin America and exports decrease to the continent mobilized greater domestic interest
in the EU to reopen negotiations with Mercosur (SANAHUJA; RODRIGUEZ, 2019).
From the Mercosur’s perspective, deteriorating economic situation and political instability in the member states
were putting its own process of regional integration at stake. With strong intergovernmental nature, Mercosur relies
heavily on domestic support to develop. By early 2004, a wave of left-wing governments was showing certain commitment
to reinforcing integration and strengthening the bloc’s relevance in international trade. But that feeling did not last long.
Mercosur was emerged on its own crises. Furthermore, slow progress in negotiations, the revisiting of the benefits of inter-
regionalism, and changing perceptions of the balance of power within and between regions combined triggered the poor
interest in reaching an agreement with the EU at all costs (DOCTOR, 2007). Yet not everything was lost.
During the Madrid Summit, in 2010, the parties decided to relaunch the discussions of what would be an
“Association Agreement” structured around three pillars (or chapters): political dialogue, cooperation, and trade.
Rev. Conj. Aust. | Por to Alegre | v.12, n.59 | p.106-118 | jul./set. 2021 | ISSN: 2178-8839
Pavese
The Impact of the European Union- Mercosur Association Agreement on gender inequality: A global South perspective
113
Negotiations resumed without the controversial exchanges of offers, which was only unlocked when Brazil and Argentina
elected neoliberal governments, in 2016. Adopting a new approach to the agreement, the two countries were no longer
insisting so emphatically on a balanced deal that would ensure the adoption of commercial defense instruments to account
for asymmetries. Instead, the new administrations advocated for what they considered “an intelligent insertion in the
world”; under this view, a free trade agreement with the EU would be important to decrease growing interdependence
with China.
Exchanges of offers began in May 2016, speeding up from January 2019, when President Jair Bolsonaro took office
in Brasilia. Six months later, the EU and Mercosur announced the conclusion of 20 years of negotiations of the trade part
of the agreement. (GHIOTTO; ECHAIDE, 2019). One year later, in June 2020, the European Union and Mercosur concluded
negotiations on the Political Dialogue and Cooperation part as well as on the Preamble, and the General, Institutional, and
Final Provisions of the EU-Mercosur Association Agreement (EEAS, 2020) The full text of the agreement is ready, yet it is
far from entering into force. The deal is pending on a length and controversial ratification process that engages member
states from both regional organizations.
The Agreement at a glance
Lacking democratic accountability, the full draft text of the EU-Mercosur Association Agreement has not been
made public, as only the trade part of this three-pillar agreement was published by the European Commission. In 2019,
Greenpeace obtained a copy of the full document and leaked it online. The political and cooperation chapter
(encompassing the first two pillars of the Agreement), is composed of 49 articles. There, the parties agree to e stablish a
political agenda for dialogue, promote interregional cooperation in areas of common interest and make efforts to
coordinate their positions to undertake joint initiatives in the appropriate international fora. The agenda for political
cooperation is divided into 19 areas, including strengthening of democracy and the rule of law, disarmament, and non -
proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, promotion of human rights and sustainable development, peace, stability
and security, and the promotion of gender equality, among other issues (GREENPEACE, 2019).
As mentioned at the outset, the draft text of the third pillar, “trade”, is the only one available for public
consultation, yet that happened after negotiations were concluded. As the document is pending ratification, it is still
subjected to change. Therefore, the version available for consultation is a summary of the agreement with no legal value.
According to the document issued by DG Trade (2019a), the agreement entails 17 chapters, addressing a broad range of
issues, including trade in goods, sanitary and phytosanitary measures, services and establishment, public procurement,
competition, subsidies, state-owned enterprises, intellectual property rights, including geographical indications, trade,
and sustainable development, among others.
Regarding trade in goods, the agreement has a strong emphasis on trade liberalization from both partners. In a
transition period of up to 10 years, the EU should open 92% of its imports from Mercosur, whereas the latter has accepted
to liberalize 91% of its imports from the European market. In agriculture, a sensitive area of negotiations, the EU agreed to
liberalize 82% of agriculture imports, with specific conditions being attached to most sensitive products. B eef, poultry,
ethanol, pig meat, corn, honey, and rice are protected with partial liberalization mechanisms, including tariff-rate quotas.
On the other hand, Mercosur granted the EU free access to products such as wine and non-alcoholic beverages, chocolates,
olive oil, pig meat, and fresh and canned fruits. Reciprocal tariff-quotas should apply to cheese, milk powder, and baby
formula.
In terms of industrial goods, the EU will wave all duties on 100% of imports, whereas tariffs on 90% of products
exported to Mercosur will be eliminated, over a transition period of 10 years. Here it is worth point out the fact that the EU
will gain relevant access to sensitive manufactured goods, like cars and parts, machinery, and chemicals, although special
conditions apply.
Rev. Conj. Aust. | Por to Alegre | v.12, n.59 | p.106-118 | jul./set. 2021 | ISSN: 2178-8839
Pavese
The Impact of the European Union- Mercosur Association Agreement on gender inequality: A global South perspective
114
The agreement determines that the parties will remove "unnecessary" discretionary obstacles to facilitate
services exports and the establishment of EU firms in Mercosur from sectors such as financial services, transport,
communication, financial services, e-commerce, postal and courier services, and maritime activities. Public procurement,
another sensitive area, will be also subjected to liberalization, with EU companies being able to compete on equal footing
as a national business in Mercosur. No other international market has been granted this right to be free to bid in public
contracts before. Another important aspect is labor mobility, with provisions facilitating the movement of professionals
“for business purposes” (DG TRADE, 2019a).
Chapter 14, entitled “Trade and Sustainable Development (TSD)”, sets up social and environmental provisions,
distributed across 18 articles. The parties agreed to not lower the standards in these agendas to attract trade and
investments. Regarding labor rights, they agreed to respect and promote the Constitution, conventions, and other
regulations adopted by the International Labor Organization (ILO), including the abolishment of forced labor, child labor,
and any kind of discrimination. The promotion of decent work (including health and safety regulations, fair earning,
regulated working hours, and other relevant working conditions) is another commitment adopted by the parties. Any
infringement to the labor rights referred to in the chapter should be dealt with by domestic judicial and administrative
institutions.
In terms of the environment, each Party reaffirms its commitments to promote and effectively implement,
multilateral environmental agreements (MEAs), protocols, and their amendments, including the Paris Agreement. Specific
articles cover climate change, biodiversity, fisheries and aquaculture, sustainable management of forests, investment-
related initiatives addressing sustainable development, and management of supply chain. To oversee and facilitate the
implementation of the chapter, article 14 establishes the creation of a sub-committee on trade and sustainable
development and contact points.
The chapter is subject to a specific dispute settlement procedure, that differs from the one that covers all other
chapters in the trade agreement. Upon the specific instrument created, a complaint concerning non-compliance is first
considered informal government consultations. If the situation is not resolved, then an independent panel of experts can
be requested to examine the matter and make recommendations, that should be made public (DG TRADE, 2019b). Notably,
there is no binding, independent dispute resolution mechanism in the Agreement in respect of sustainability issues.
Equally concerning, there is no provision allowing the civil society to act against the potential violation of sustainability
standards, eventually using the dispute settlement mechanism created.
The Lack of Gender Mainstreaming in the EU Mercosur Agreement
As demonstrated above, the new Association Agreement is a comprehensive accord that aims at promoting
cooperation in various areas, not only trade. Analyzing the copy of the draft text leaked by Greenpeace (2019) it is possible
to assess the degree of emphasis placed on gender issues. In the first pillar of the agreement, one of the objectives of the
“Political Dialogue” is to promote “gender equality, respect for the rights of all women and girls, with an emphasis on the
gender perspective, and to address discrimination and violence based on sexual orientation, in accordance with the
internal legislation of each country”. That is the sole mention of gender in the first pillar.
In the "Cooperation" pillar, gender is evoked on more occasions. The first is in the section "Cooperation on
democratic principles, human rights, the rule of law and international peace and security". In this part there is an item
entitled "gender equality, peace, and security", which establishes that the parties would work together to: a) promote
greater participation by women in politics, education, and the labor market; b) combating all forms of violence,
strengthening women's rights; c) support for the development and implementation of the national plans provided for by
Security Council Resolution 1325; d) promote effective "gender mainstreaming"; and e) collaborate with relevant UN
bodies and other international organizations. Gender is also mention in other items on the cooperation agenda, such as
Rev. Conj. Aust. | Por to Alegre | v.12, n.59 | p.106-118 | jul./set. 2021 | ISSN: 2178-8839
Pavese
The Impact of the European Union- Mercosur Association Agreement on gender inequality: A global South perspective
115
labor policies and migration, and, with a little more emphasis, in the item on sustainability (GREENPEACE, 2019). Despite
the mention of several issues of gender agenda, neither one of the two pillars provide details on how the parties aim at
achieving these objectives.
In the third and most controversial pillar of the agreement, "Trade", the only mention of gender is in the chapter
"Trade and Development". In its article 13 (“working together in developing trade”), the text-only signals that the parties
will seek the interrelationship between skills development and gender equality (DG TRADE, 2019a). Again, no detail is
provided.
Recalling how the literature suggests approaching gender inequality in regional trade agreements, the AA is
flawed in many aspects. Overall, the draft text of the agreement does not lay out effective strategies measures to promote
gender equality, including a comprehensive institutional framework for gender mainstreaming. Also, it does not make
explicit mention of a gender-balanced decision-making process or to create channels for fostering the participation of civil
society organizations led by women in the implementation and monitoring of the agreement.
Nevertheless, one of the recommendations to achieve gender mainstreaming posited by Williams (2002) was
partially contemplate. Since the resuming of negotiations, in the mid-2000s, the EU has produced Sustainability Impact
Assessment (SIA) periodically. The main objective of these studies is to provide an instrument for assessing the potential
economic, social, human rights, and environmental impact of agreement while they are still in negotiation. Unfortunately,
Mercosur did not adopt the same practice. Therefore, this paper relies on the SIA on Mercosur produced for the European
Commission, in 2009. Even if it does not dedicate a separate chapter to gender, it mentions the issue on several occasions.
Regarding economic empowerment, the SIA report assessed that:
the main concerns about the effects of trade liberalization in agriculture on the well-being of women
and gender relations are related to the potential deepening of the ‘feminization of productive asse ts’,
unequal employment opportunities and working conditions, and poverty. This can result in
differentiated access and control of land and other different effects in terms of food security. [...]
Competition between farmers for new arable land is expected to increase land prices and also land
conflicts in areas where land tenure is weak. Small farmers can be the losers in this process, including
women. Adverse ge nder impacts can arise through the loss of traditional livelihoods and limited
opportunities for women in the formal sector (EUROPEAN COMMISSION, 2009).
The 2020 version of the Sustainable Impact Assessment, the last of one of its kind, did not focus on Mercosur but
included the bloc in its analysis. The conclusion was like the previous report, as it argues for “ the recognition that there is
a latent risk that the agreement in some respects will accentuate inequalities in the Mercosur countries, especially affecting
women who work in the agricultural sector or are in conditions of greater informality or with lower income” (EUROPEAN
COMMISSION, 2020).
Despite the constatation that the Agreement carries potential impact to widen gender economic inequality in
Mercosur, the instrument does not provide guidelines or measures to avoid this effect. Therefore, neither the official text
of the agreement nor the SIA reports contemplate gender mainstreaming in its overarching nature. Additionall y, as
Hoffmann (2014, p.134) claims, neither one of the parties positioned itself as an "exporter of 'gender mainstreaming and
other (economic) interests prevail over gender. The interregional level, so far, does not constitute a central level of diffu sion
and spread of gender norms". Considering where and how women take part in paid economic activity and the broad
sectoral impact of the Agreement in the economies of the bloc, the EU- Mercosur Association Agreement poses a potential
threat to gender economic equality in the four countries from the global South.
Conclusion
This article sought to analyze the possible gendered impacts of the EU-Mercosur Agreement, especially when it
concerns economic empowerment. In as much as mainstream literature tend to be gender blind, there is no such thing as
Rev. Conj. Aust. | Por to Alegre | v.12, n.59 | p.106-118 | jul./set. 2021 | ISSN: 2178-8839
Pavese
The Impact of the European Union- Mercosur Association Agreement on gender inequality: A global South perspective
116
gender neutrality. Yet the review of the literature conducted stressed the importance of paying attention to the uneven
effects of economic activities on gender. As the feminist scholars claims, economic and trade policies and practices reflect
and reinforce unequal power relations in which our societies are structured. In this sense, the often-endorsed “gender
neutral” approach to trade liberalization is strongly bias towards the normalization of inequality, privileging mostly white
men, specially from the global North. In other words, when it comes to gender (and other inequalities), there is no
neutrality. Omission serves the purpose of perpetuating inequality. The implementation of a gender mainstreaming
approach is an effective strategy to alter this course of action, turning trade and economic policies into instruments that
benefit women.
The theoretical debate that this article engaged with, allowed this research to hold the argument that the EU
Mercosur agreement carries an unavoidable uneven gender impact. The literature also backed the claim that the
conclusion on whether this interregional deal hinders, or harms women’s economic empowerment depends on how the
parties addressed the gender dimension of their ne w trade instrument.
To explore the specific case study of Mercosur, this research considered the assumption that “women” cannot be
dealt as a homogeneous group. Consequences of trade liberalization on gender inequality vary according to the patterns
of female participation in economic activities that are affected by the agreement. Assessing gender economic inequality in
the four Mercosur founding members, this research identified strong evidence to support the claim that economic
empowerment remains one of the Achilles heels for gender equality in the region. Overall, a significant share of women in
the global South participates mostly in the informal economy in fragile conditions. Consequently, they are deprived of
social and health protection, as these workers or their employers seldom pay taxes and normally operate below the radar
of labor and safety standards. Interestingly, the data provided reveal that the economic liberalization and regionalism
processes that took place in the region over the past decades did not have a positive impact on inequality. On the contrary,
the economic empowerment gap widened up. Against this background, this research demonstrated that women in the
Mercosur are more vulnerable than men to the effects of a trade agreement with the EU.
As the literature proposes, the promotion of a gender mainstreaming approach to trade negotiations would
ideally establish coordinated mechanisms to address the gender dimensions of an agreement. At least in terms of joint
efforts, this study did not find enough evidence to consider that this was the approach of the EU and Brazil to negotiations.
Analyzing the draft text, it can be claimed that, even if the Association Agreement incorporates gender equality
among the objectives of the first two pillars (political and cooperation), it does not provide details on how to achieve it.
Regarding the "trade pillar", the mention to observe ILO standards in the chapter on sustainability (chapter 14), without
explicit mention of gender, is a source of concern. The Sustainable Impact Assessments (SIAs) mention gender minimally,
missing an important opportunity to highlight the consequences of the agreement to different populations. Overall, nor
the agreement nor the SIA have adopted a robust gender mainstream approach and both instruments ignored the necessity
of an intersectional perspective to trade liberalization and its consequences.
Considering the structural roots of gender inequality and how it manifests so strongly in Mercosur economies,
the omission of a solid gender dimension in the approach to trade cooperation is not at all surprising, but it is equally
worrying. It is very problematic that Mercosur did not publish any SIA report over the course of two decades of
negotiations. If these flaws are not amended in the discussion leading to the ratification process, the EU-Mercosur
Association Agreement might create incentives for new patterns of inequalities, undermining the already difficult
prospects of achieving gender equality in the global South. Nevertheless, the fact that the agreement still has to endure a
lengthy and controversial ratification process before it can enter into force provides a window of opportunity for the EU
and Mercosur to address the gender dimensions of the new deal. For that, the parties should commit to promote gender
impact assessments, prioritize of the collection of sex -disaggregated data, share experience and best practices in
integrating gender into different policy areas and engage women in decision-making processes. Combined, these
Rev. Conj. Aust. | Por to Alegre | v.12, n.59 | p.106-118 | jul./set. 2021 | ISSN: 2178-8839
Pavese
The Impact of the European Union- Mercosur Association Agreement on gender inequality: A global South perspective
117
strategies will allow the EU and Mercosur to develop and implement coherent policies and interregional institutional
framework for gender-mainstreaming. Finally, even if parties have the autonomy to adopt their own approach to the issue,
it is important that actions as coordinated. Interregionalism is based on the voluntary decision to increase
interdependence; shifts in the pattern of inequality in one party is likely to affect the other. Future research addressing the
impact of the agreement in EU would allow an interesting analysis of the correlation between gender inequality across the
two regions.
References
ARANA, Aranza Gomez. The European Union's Policy Towards Mercosur: Responsive Not S trategic. Manchester University Press,
2017.
The Beijing Declaration and the Platform for A ction. Fourth World Conference on Women, Beijing, China, 4-15 September. New
York: De pt. of Public Information, United Nations, 1995.
BENERIA, Lourdes. Gender and the global economy. Cornell: Cornell University, 1998.
BENERIA, Lourdes. Et. Al. Introduction: Globalization and Gender. Feminist Economics, vol 6, n. 3, pp.vii-xviii, 2000.
BERGER, Susan. Troubleshooting Economic Narratives I n: A KNAPEN, Hemerijck; VAN DOOME (eds.) Aftershocks: Economic Crisis
and Institutional Choices, Amsterdam: University of Amsterdam Press, 2009.
DG TRADE. New EU-Mercosur trade agreement: The agreement in principle Brussels, 1 July 2019a. Available at:
https://trade.ec.e uropa.eu/doclib/docs/2019/june/tradoc_157964.pdf (last access: 15 April 2021).
DG TRADE. Text of the EU Mercosur Agreement: Trade and sustainable development. Official Document, 12 July 2019b. Available. at:
https://trade.ec.e uropa.eu/doclib/docs/2019/july/tradoc_158166.%20Trade%20and%20Sustainable%20Development.pdf (last access:
15 April 2021).
DOCTOR, Mahrukh. Why Bother with Inter-Regionalism? Negotiations for a European Union-Mercosur Agreement. Journal of
Common Market Studies, vol 45, n.2, pp.281-314, 2007.
EEAS. EU-Mercosur Association Agreement: conclusion of negotiations on the Political Dialogue and Cooperation pillar. News
stories, 02 July 2020. Available at: https://eeas.europa.eu/headquarters/headquarters-homepage/81950/eu-mercosur-association-
agreement-conclusion-negotiations-political-dialogue-and-cooperation_en (last access: 15 April 2021).
ELSON, Diane Et.Al. Introduction: Why a feminist economics of trade? In: VAN STAVEREN, Irene Et. Al. (eds.) The feminist economics
of trade. London: Routledge, 2007.
EUROPEAN COMMISSION. Sustainability Impact Assessment in Support of the Association Agreement Negotiations between
the European Union and Mercosur. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union, 2020.
FONTANA, Marzia. Gender Justice in Trade Policy: The Gender Effects of Economic Partnership Agreements. London: One World
Action, 2009.
FRASER, Nancy, GORDON, Linda. A genealogy of “dependency”; tracing a keyword of the US welfare state. In: Fraser, Nancy (ed.)
Justice interruptus: Critical reflections on the “postsocialist” condition, ed. Nancy Fraser. New York: Routledge, 1997.
GIRON, Alicia (ed.). Gnero y globabizacin. Buenos Aires: Consejo Latinoamericano de Ciencias Sociales - CLACSO, 2009.
GHIOTTO, Luciana; ECHAIDE, Javier. Analysis of the agreement between the EU and Mercosur. Buenos Aires. Brussels, December
2019. Available at: https://www.annacavazzini.eu/wp-content/uploads/2020/01/Study-on-the-EU-Mercosur-agreement-09.01.2020-
1.pdf (last access: 05 April 2021).
HANNAN, Carolyn. The United Nations commitment to gender mainstreaming: a global strategy for promoting equality between
women and men. Paper pre pare d for the 2001 ODCCP Field Representatives Seminar. Office of the Special Adviser on Gender Issues
and Advancement of Women, New York, 2001.
HOFFMAN, Andrea R. Gender mainstreaming in Mercosur and Mercosur–EU trade relations. In: van der Vleuten, A.,Et.Al. (eds),
Gender Equality Norms in Regional Governance - Transnational Dynamics in Europe, South America and Southern Africa. New
York: P algrave MacMillan, 2014.
HOSKYNS, Catherine; RAI, Shirin M. Recasting the Global Political Economy: Counting Women's Unpaid Work. New Political
Economy, vol 12, n. 3, pp. 297-317, 2007.
INTERNATIONAL LABOR ORGANIZATION, World Employment Social Outlook. Trends for Women. Geneva: ILO, 2017
Rev. Conj. Aust. | Por to Alegre | v.12, n.59 | p.106-118 | jul./set. 2021 | ISSN: 2178-8839
Pavese
The Impact of the European Union- Mercosur Association Agreement on gender inequality: A global South perspective
118
JAGGAR, Alison. Is Globalization Good for Women? Comparative Literature, vol. 53, no. 4, pp. 298-314, 2001.
MARCHAND, Marianne; RUNYAN, Anne S. Gender and Global Restructuring, Sighting, Sites and Resistances. London and New
York: Routledge, 2011.
MEYER, Mary; PRUGL, Elizabeth (eds). Gender Politics in Global Governance. Lanham: Rowman and Littlefield, 1999.
NAGA R, Richa Et.Al. Locating Globalization: Feminist (Re)readings of the Subjects and Spaces of Globalization. Economic Geography,
vol. 78, No. 3, pp. 257-284, 2002.
TRUE, Jacquie. Trading-Off Gender Equality for Global Europe? The European Union and Free Trade Agreements. European foreign
affairs review, vol. 14, n.5, pp.723-742, 2002.
PETERSON, Spike. V. How (the meaning of) gender matters in political economy. New Political Economy, vol 10, n.4, pp. 499–521,
2005.
POMATTO, Valentina. Gender, trade, and employment. 2019. Available at: https://europa.e u/capacity4dev/public-
gender/minisite/gender-trade-and-employment (last access: 30 March 20 21).
SABAT, Ana. Gnero, medio ambiente y globalizacin: una perspectiva desde el sur In: VILLOTA, Paloma. (ed.) Globalizacin y
gnero. Madrid: Sntesis, 1999.
SANAHUJA, José Antonio; RODRIGUEZ, Jorge Damián. Veinte años de negociaciones Unión Eu ropea-Mercosur: Del
interregionalismo a la crisis de la globalización. Documentos de Trabajon. 13, Madri: Fundación Carolina, 2019.
STANDING, Guy. Global Feminization Through Flexible Labor. World Development, vol. 17, n.7, pp. 1077-95, 1999.
UNCTAD. Teaching Material on trade and gender volume 1: Unfolding the Links. (UNCTAD/DITC/2018/2). Geneva: United Nations
Conference on Trade and Development, 2018.
VAN STAVEREN, Irene. Genders indicators for monitoring trade agreements. In: VAN STAVEREN, Irene (et. Al.) (eds.) The feminist
economics of Trade. Oxon: Routledge, 2007.
WALBY, Sylvia. Introduction: Comparative gender mainstreaming in a global era. International Feminist Journal of Politics, vol 7, n.
4, pp. 453-47, 2005.
WAYLEN, Georgina. You Still Don't Understand: Why Troubled Engagements Continue between Feminists and (Critical) IPE. Review
of International Studies, vol. 32, n.1, pp. 145- 164, 2006.
WILL IAMS, Mariama. Gender Mainstreaming in the Multilateral Trading System. A handbook for policymakers and other
stakeholders. London: Commonwealth Secretariat. 2003.
WOMEN WATCH. Gender Equality and Trade Policy. United Nations Inter‐Agency Network on Women and Gender Equality
(IANWGE), Resource Paper, 2011.
WORLD BANK. Gender Equality and Development. World Development Report. 2012. Available at:
https://elibrary.worldbank.org/doi/pdf/10.1596/9780821388105_ch6 (last acce ss: 12 July 2021).
WORLD BANK. Gini Index (World Bank estimate). 20 21. Available at:
https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SI.POV.GINI?end=2019&start=1967&view=chart (last access: 10 April 2021).
Authors’ Contributor Roles
Carolina Pavese :
Conceptualiza tion; Me thodology; Data Curation; Project Administration; Investigation; Supervision; Writing (Original Draft
Preparat ion); Writing (Review & Edit ing);
Information pr ovided by the authors according to the Taxonomy of a uthor contributions (CRediT)
