Amending Executive Order 13675 To Expand Membership on the President's Advisory Council on Doing Business in Africa

Overview

Context and Purpose

Executive Order 13734, signed by President Barack Obama on August 3, 2016, primarily aims to expand the membership of the President's Advisory Council on Doing Business in Africa, an entity established through an earlier order, Executive Order 13675 in 2014. The expansion of the council is motivated by the need to incorporate a broader range of private sector perspectives and experiences as the United States seeks to strengthen its commercial engagement with Africa. This move is situated against the backdrop of the U.S. government’s broader strategy to enhance economic ties with the African continent through initiatives like the Trade Africa Initiative and the U.S. Strategy Toward Sub-Saharan Africa.

Structure and Content

The executive order is relatively concise, comprising two main sections that amend the earlier Executive Order 13675. The first section articulates the policy rationale behind the amendment, emphasizing the need for diversified private sector inclusion to better support the U.S.-Africa commercial relationship. The second section details the amendment itself, modifying the council’s membership capacity from a limit of 15 private sector representatives to 26, thereby facilitating a more comprehensive representation of interests and capabilities.

Strategic Intent

In addressing the U.S.-Africa economic relationship, Executive Order 13734 reflects a strategic intent to leverage private sector resources and expertise. This approach is seen as crucial for driving economic growth and job creation both in America and in African nations, underlining a win-win scenario where increased trade and investment flows benefit both regions. It also represents a clear policy preference for engaging with emerging markets in Africa, recognizing their potential as economic partners amid shifting global trade dynamics.

Foundation and History

The Executive Order builds on a foundation laid by prior policies, particularly Executive Order 13675, which established the advisory council to work on U.S.-Africa trade. It recognizes Africa’s burgeoning markets and potential as vital to the global economic landscape. By revising the composition parameters of the advisory council, the order seeks input from a more diverse cross-section of corporate sector players, aiming for comprehensive policy advisement.

Implications Beyond Borders

This order does not merely reflect internal policy shifts but also suggests international diplomatic intentions. By fostering greater business ties with African nations, the U.S. positions itself as a partner in Africa's development, counterbalancing other global powers’ influence on the continent. Thus, it extends beyond economic reasoning to encompass geopolitical strategy, projecting soft power by supporting economic growth and stability.

Legal and Policy Implications

Constitutional Considerations

The executive order functions within the bounds of constitutional authority vested in the President, allowing for the formation and modification of advisory councils to aid in executive decision-making. As such, it does not prompt constitutional queries, as it operates within the discretionary powers afforded to the President to manage foreign policy and economic relations. This decision reflects an expansive interpretation of executive power regarding international trade and economic strategy.

Statutory Guidance and Amendments

By amending Executive Order 13675, Executive Order 13734 updates the composition of the President’s Advisory Council to reflect broader participation from the private sector. While it does not alter statutory laws, it effectively operates under the auspices of existing legislative frameworks related to trade and international economic cooperation. It functions as a strategic directive, guiding federal department activities consistent with statutory objectives of fostering trade.

Policy Consistency and Expansion

The order ensures policy consistency with a broader U.S. government strategy to reinforce economic engagements with Africa, which includes previous initiatives like the African Growth and Opportunity Act (AGOA). By expanding the advisory council, the order aligns policy implementation with strategic goals of inclusive economic diplomacy, utilizing increased corporate input to drive effective engagement.

Bureaucratic Considerations

The executive order's implementation relies heavily on the cooperation of the Department of Commerce, which is tasked with organizing the advisory council. This involves coordination across various government structures to ensure logistical and administrative support. Therefore, while largely focused at the policy level, the order necessitates bureaucratic coordination to realize its intended outcomes.

Fiscal Implications

Though the order stipulates that implementation is subject to available appropriations, its financial impact is minimal, primarily involving administrative costs associated with increasing council membership. The expansion aims to yield longer-term economic benefits by fostering deeper trade relations, underpinned by a minimal immediate budgetary burden.

Who Benefits

U.S. Corporations and Private Sector

The clear beneficiaries of this executive order are U.S. corporations and business entities seeking to expand operations into African markets. By increasing the diversity of the advisory council's membership, more businesses receive an opportunity to influence trade policy and access emerging markets, thus potentially increasing their profitability and global footprint.

Sub-Saharan African Economies

Economies in Sub-Saharan Africa also stand to benefit as the order emphasizes boosting trade their way. The policy encourages investment and commercial partnerships, which often translate into job creation, infrastructure development, and overall economic growth, enhancing the economic landscape for many African communities.

Entrepreneurial and Innovative Sectors

Particularly, industries geared towards innovation and entrepreneurship are likely to gain as both regions look to technology solutions and modern trade practices to bridge gaps and create efficiencies. Firms in sectors like technology, renewable energy, and agribusiness may witness heightened activity and support due to such policy emphasis.

Developing Trade Infrastructure

The order's implicit emphasis on trade infrastructure means that ancillary industries—such as logistics, shipping, and financial services—may experience increased demand. This not only boosts their revenue streams but also propels infrastructural improvements, rendering trade more efficient and economies more integrated.

Diplomatic Relations

Diplomatically, governments in Africa benefit from strengthened bilateral relations with the U.S., gaining not just economic but also political capital. This bolstered relationship might lead to favorable diplomatic dynamics, facilitating further agreements and collaborations beyond trade.

Who Suffers

Market Protectionists

Those who advocate for protectionist market policies within the U.S. may view this expansion with concern, apprehensive of increased foreign competition in domestic markets. There is a fear that encouraging aggressive U.S. business engagements abroad might detract from domestic industry support, challenging some businesses to compete with international entities.

Local Competitors in Africa

Local businesses in African countries may face intensified competition from well-established U.S. corporations, potentially disadvantaging newcomers and smaller enterprises. Without adequate protection and support mechanisms, these smaller entities could struggle to maintain market share against larger, resourced firms.

Critics of Corporate Influence in Policy

The expansion of corporate presence on the advisory council can attract skepticism from those wary of corporate entanglement in foreign policy. Concerns over potential biases towards corporate interests—over equitable and sustainable economic development—may come to the fore, raising questions about the depth and nature of such corporate influence.

Trade Regulation Advocates

Those advocating for stringent trade regulation might resist this expansion, wary of potential deregulation and oversight dilution. The increased focus on corporate perspectives may align policies more closely with business interests, at times contravening strict regulatory standards.

Labor and Environmental Concerns

Labor groups and environmental advocates might argue that increased trade emphasis, fueled by corporate interests, could sideline critical labor rights and environmental standards. Efforts to maximize trade efficiencies and business interests may conflict with broader sustainability and equitable trade advocacy goals.

Historical Context

Obama Administration’s Trade Legacy

This executive order is a continuation of the Obama administration's broad emphasis on enhancing America's economic relationships worldwide, particularly in underdeveloped regions like Sub-Saharan Africa. The administration took significant steps, through initiatives such as AGOA, to expand trade relations and promote sustainable development, making this order a natural extension of such policy directions.

Efforts to Balance Global Trade

At the time of signing, the order reflects an acknowledgment of Africa’s rising economies as critical players in global trade. It underscores a pivot towards markets that would be deemed burgeoning mid-to-long-term partners, away from traditional Euro-centric trade policies, thus aligning with broader global economic shifts observed during Obama's tenure.

Counterweight to Emerging Global Powers

The increased focus on Africa by the U.S. juxtaposes against the growing influence of nations like China within the continent. Through this order, the Obama administration signals its intent to reassert and fortify American influence via economic means, counterbalancing other global powers vying for footprint in Africa.

Part of a Consistent Strategy

The order exemplifies a continuous strategic focus by the executive branch on leveraging economic tools to bolster foreign policy and national interests, without resorting to military or coercive means. It underscores international economic engagement as a pillar of U.S. diplomacy during the Obama years.

A Broader Pivot

Executive Order 13734 reflects this broader pivot towards utilizing advisory councils to shape nuanced foreign policy, blending private sector insights with public sector initiatives to pursue mutually beneficial outcomes. It continues a legacy of pragmatically blending government objectives with private industry acumen.

Potential Controversies or Challenges

Corporate Influence Concerns

One primary area of potential controversy involves concerns over excessive corporate influence on government policy. Expanding the advisory council composition to include more private sector representatives inevitably invites scrutiny over whose interests are truly being served, questioning whether strategic national interests might be diluted by corporate priorities.

Public Oversight and Accountability

The expansion prompts questions about the accountability mechanisms in place to ensure the council’s recommendations remain unbiased and rooted in public interest. It raises issues related to the transparency of the advisory process and the potential need for enhanced oversight to counterbalance increased business influence.

Legislative Scrutiny

The order could incite scrutiny from Congress, where legislators might challenge the scope of executive power in trade policy matters traditionally encompassing identifiable statutory domains. Lack of specific legislative endorsement may contribute to disputes over the legality or efficacy of implemented policies, prompting potential countermeasures from large legislative bodies.

Judicial Challenges

Though thus far untested in court, the executive order could face judicial challenges revolving around the delineation of executive versus legislative powers in foreign trade policy. While judicial challenge is speculative, interpretations of separation of powers remain a consistent legal undercurrent in numerous policy discussions.

Geopolitical Sensitivities

On the international stage, potential sensitivities around perceived neocolonial economic strategies might arise, urging the U.S. to tactfully manage partner relationships amidst accusations of resource exploitation or inequitable business practices. The U.S. must carefully navigate these dynamics to maintain their commercial partnerships and diplomatic goodwill on the continent.