Will growth also be ethical?

In his speech on the state of the nation of past February 12, Barack Obama announced the launch of the negotiations with the European Union (EU) in view of a transatlantic partnership on investment and trade, because a "trade that is free and fair across the Atlantic supports millions of good-paying American jobs". The decision, welcomed by Brussels, Berlin and London, was greatly anticipated on the European side of the Atlantic, given the scant amount of good news in the ongoing economic downturn. In fact, the challenge is twofold: economic and ethical. "A global and ambitious agreement between the EU and the United States could bring overall annual gains of 0.5% increase in GDP for the EU and a 0.4% increase in GDP for the US by 2027", stated the European Commission in a communiqué released after the announcement of the US president. In the light of the recession that hit eurozone countries in 201, with zero growth in 2013, and given that employment is considered an economic activity, this figures cannot be overlooked. The political decision was based on the final statement by a high-level working group for employment and growth, set up in November 2011 under the presidency of the European Commissioner for Trade Karel de Gucht and by the US Trade Representative Ron Kirk. The document calls for the opening of negotiations in three main phases. The first regards access to the market with the primary objective of eliminating all duties on bilateral trade between the world’s two major economies. Considering that the duties are already low (on average, 5.2% for the EU and 3.5% for the United States) an agreement is expected to come rather smoothly, although in some areas the quantity challenge is more important. As a result, the price of vehicles manufactured in the United States and sold in Europe could fall by 10%, and a European van would no longer be subjected to a 25% duty fee upon its arrival on the US market. This part of the agreement equally covers the provision of services such as transport, liberalization and protection of investments and access to public markets. Second, the future partners in the world’s largest free trade area intend to adjust or mutually accept their technical and health standards and procedures for the reciprocal approval of products. Such obstacles usually entail high costs for enterprises. From this angle the enormous leverage of the agreement is hard to achieve. Europe’s precautionary approach whereby products are taxed in the testing phase prior to the marketing of the product is miles apart from the US’ ‘ex post’ approach whereby complications are subjected to high penalty fees. Health and hygiene regulations on foodstuffs are bound to add up to the hurdles: it will suffice to consider the opposite views on GMOs and the debate on hormone meat. The last major chapter of the agreement regards international issues, promoting a high level of intellectual property protection, including enforcement, while jointly sustaining social and environmental aspects of trade and sustainable development. This last aspect falls within the realm of ecclesial organizations devoted to international cooperation, although the global agreement deserves an overarching ethical evaluation. It’s important to keep guard in order to prevent the competitive devaluation of the two strong currencies in a free trade area. It is equally important to prioritize the interests of the weaker brackets and measures aimed at environmental protection. Christians in Europe and in the United States could thus jointly draw up a declaration on common values drawing inspiration from the hopeful message of Benedict XVI, put into writing in the encyclical Caritas in Veritate "in all cultures there are examples of ethical convergence, an expression of the one human nature", (59). The statement would enrich the agreement that would thus act as a document for openness to the whole world.