Economic Implications of WTO Negotiations on Non‐agricultural Market Access

The economic implications of current WTO negotiations are likely to be far reaching. The World Bank and UNCTAD estimate annual global gains in agriculture and non‐agricultural products (including fish) of about $70−150 billion each under various scenarios and technical assumptions. Liberalising trade in services could be even more important, especially if agreement were reached to facilitate the temporary movement of labour (Mode 4 under the General Agreement on Trade in Services, GATS). Some qualifications, however, are in order. First, gains are likely to be spread unevenly across countries and across sectors; and, second, short‐term adjustment costs might precede long‐term gains. Much depends on how ambitious liberalisation is and on policies to facilitate adjustment. This paper examines the Doha mandate in non‐agricultural market access (NAMA) and the current state of the WTO negotiations, in particular some key proposals being considered at the December 2005 Ministerial Meeting in Hong Kong. We analyse various scenarios and their implications for trade, welfare, output, employment, revenues and preferences, as well as the distributional effects across countries and sectors. We note possible adjustment problems related to balance of payments and structural adjustment, as well as revenue and preference losses. These suggest the need for ‘aid for trade’ to help developing countries realise gains possible from WTO negotiations.     

Trade in Educational Services: Trends and Emerging Issues

This paper examines the trends and emerging issues in trade in educational services. It provides rough estimates of the size of the international market in educational services drawing on the limited data available in services trade statistics and data on foreign students in tertiary education in OECD countries. It outlines the current commitments for trade in educational services under the General Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS). It also reviews the implications of the on‐going GATS negotiations for further multilateral trade liberalisation in this sector. It points out that OECD countries have been noticeably reluctant to make proposals for further liberalisation of trade in educational services. One reason for this is the concern in many countries about the potential threats posed to cultural values and national traditions by growing trade liberalisation in educational services. Finally, the paper reviews some of the main policy issues arising from trade in educational services.     

Mini‐symposium on the WTO Non‐agricultural Market Access (NAMA) Negotiations

NAMA liberalisation alone will not be sufficient to achieve the development goals of the Doha Round. The structure of developing countries’ economies and weaknesses in their infrastructure and institutions mean that adjustment to liberalisation is often costly and export responses slow. To make NAMA work, developing countries will need technical and financial support to raise their ability to adapt to greater openness and globalisation pressures and to increase their export capabilities. Although developing countries should decide how to raise their ability to adjust and to increase exports, bilateral donors and multilateral agencies will need to fund NAMA support programmes. The WTO, however, is not the appropriate or competent international agency to provide or disburse such funding. It can provide technical advice and offers a negotiating vehicle for industrial countries to signal that the development aims of the Doha Round are recognised in substantive terms. If industrial countries support developing countries’ NAMA‐related adjustment costs in addition to offering NAMA tariff cuts, the chances of a successful Doha agreement and genuine pro‐development outcomes will be boosted significantly.     

Liberalisation and Protection under Overlapping Free Trade Agreements: Dynamic Interplay between Free Trade Agreements and Investment

Two decades into the most recent wave of regionalism many of its implications remain to be fully understood. A vast literature has explored the impacts of free trade agreements (FTAs) on investment flows, but less attention has been given to how existing patterns of investment alter FTA liberalisation. It is contended here that the dynamic interplay between overlapping FTA areas and the investment sunk in them shapes governments' and firms' positions regarding further FTA liberalisation. During trade negotiations, a country may decide to exclude a sector from FTA liberalisation to prevent (concession prevention) future FTA partners from making similar demands. Concession prevention could also occur when a foreign firm, holding a dominant market position in a host country, relinquishes liberalisation demands in an FTA between host and home countries to prevent its current position being eroded if the host country grants similar (or better) concessions to competing firms from other countries in future FTAs. Conversely, investment sunk into a country's sensitive sector in the territory of partners from previous FTAs could pre‐empt (concession pre‐emption) the protectionist position of that country when it subsequently negotiates FTAs with the investment‐source countries. These arguments were tested in the negotiations around the liberalisation of the automotive industry that Thailand and Malaysia had with Japan in their respective bilateral FTAs. The distinct interaction between investment and the FTAs in which these countries participate resulted either in entrenchment of protectionism in the sector or its liberalisation across subsequent FTAs.     

Trade Liberalisation: The Effects of Free Trade Agreements on the Competitiveness of the Dairy Sector

In recent years, preferential trade agreements (PTAs), free trade agreements (FTAs) in particular, have proliferated while WTO negotiations have stagnated. This paper contributes to the literature on trade liberalisation and the agricultural sector by analysing the effects of FTAs on the competitiveness of the dairy sector across 76 countries and over a 20‐year period from 1990 to 2009. With a longitudinal econometric model, the results demonstrate that when a country has a revealed comparative advantage in the dairy sector, FTAs positively influence several indicators of competitiveness in the dairy sector, such as production, market share and trade balance. The results also indicate that multilateral FTAs are more beneficial than bilateral FTAs. There is strong empirical evidence that FTAs are more beneficial to developed countries than to developing countries. There is no statistical evidence to support the hypothesis about a relationship between FTAs and farm‐gate price.     

Trade Policies in Southeast Asia in the Wider Asian Perspective

This paper takes stock of trade policies in Southeast Asia after the Asian crisis and in the wake of the current global economic crisis. It compares trade policies in individual Southeast Asian countries; places them in the context of regional and global economic integration; and particularly draws implications for the region from the rise of China and India. The first section looks at recent trade and FDI patterns in Southeast Asia. Then follows an overview of key trade‐policy trends, in the region overall and in individual countries. The next sections examine ASEAN countries in international trade negotiations and agreements: first in the WTO, especially in the Doha Round; then within ASEAN; and finally on cross‐regional FTAs. The paper concludes that ASEAN countries cannot rely on external tracks ‘from above’ for meaningful trade policy reform. Since the Asian crisis there has been a slowdown of reform momentum, and too much reliance on trade negotiations – especially FTAs. Rather, countries in the region have to rely on themselves –‘from below’ as it were. The engine of liberalisation and regulatory reform has to be home‐driven – as it was before the Asian crisis – with governments taking unilateral measures in response to internal and external conditions.     

Assessing the Benefits to Developing Countries of Liberalisation in Services Trade

This paper discusses the potential impacts of services trade liberalisation on developing countries and reviews existing quantitative studies. Its purpose is to distill themes from current literature rather than to advocate specific policy changes. The picture emerging is one of valiant attempts to quantify in the presence of formidable analytical and data problems yielding only a clouded image of likely impacts on trade, consumption, production and welfare emerging to the point that the policy implications of results are not always clear. A central intuition would seem to be that with genuine two‐sided (OECD/non‐OECD) liberalisation in services that are seemingly considerably labour‐intensive in delivery, the potential should be there for significant developing country gains from global liberalisation allowing full cross‐border delivery. However, this picture is neither fully endorsed by available studies, neither is it explicitly contradicted. This seems to be the case for a number of reasons. One difficulty with the studies is that the conceptual underpinnings of what determines trade in services and how this trade differs analytically from that of trade in goods (if at all) is an issue prior to assessments of impacts of liberalisation of trade in services on developing countries being discussed. Key issues here are the treatment of mobility for service providers (both firms and workers), and the differing analytical structures needed to analyse individual service items (banking, insurance, telecoms, etc.). Some recent analytical work suggests that liber‐alisation in some service items, such as banking, need not always yield gains, and this contrasts with quantitative studies where analytical structures mirror conventional trade in goods treatments. The discussion and measurement of barriers to service trade in both developed and developing countries is also problematic. One is talking of domestic regulation, entry barriers, portability of providers, competition policy regimes more so than only barriers at national borders, as with tariffs. Both representing and quantifying such barriers raise major difficulties, and these are also spelled out in the paper. Which barriers actually restrict trade, and which do not because they are redundant is one issue, for instance. It is also often misleading to represent barriers in simple ad valorem equivalent form. As a result, numerical modelling work on the effects of service trade barriers which is based on ad valorem equivalent modelling is often not fully convincing. In addition, individual country results vary considerably across studies in ways that it is frequently hard for outsiders to understand. Studies do, however, point towards a tentative conclusion that effects are small and positive for developed and most developing countries if FDI flow changes accompanying service trade liberalisation are excluded from the analysis, but much larger and more variable across countries if they are present. This could be taken to suggest that mode 3 GATS liberalisation (roughly captured in some studies) might be important for developing countries; but mode 4 GATS liberalisation could be even more important given large barriers to labour flows across countries. Thus, if service trade liberalisation is thought of primarily as a surrogate for improved functioning of global factor markets in which more capital flows to developing countries and more labour flows from them to developed countries, then developing countries could benefit in a major way from genuine two‐sided (OECD/non‐OECD) liberalisation. Developing countries fear, however, that in global negotiations on services liberalisation where there is an asymmetry of power that largely one‐sided liberalisation may be the outcome, and their gains will be correspondingly limited. The paper concludes by evaluating econometric studies on linkage between services liberalisation and country growth rules, and briefly discusses some key sectoral issues in health services and transportation.     

On the European Responsibility in the Agricultural Multilateral Trade Negotiations: Modelling the Impacts of the Common Agricultural Policy

The present round of multilateral trade negotiations is still deadlocked over agricultural trade. The European Union (EU) is urged by its trading partners to open its agricultural markets. Economic evaluations of trade liberalisation scenarios unanimously conclude that a substantial opening of agricultural markets is required for a successful (welfare‐improving) Doha Round. In this paper, we perform new evaluations to identify precisely the contributions of the European farm policy and to examine the robustness of these evaluations in the representation of this complex policy. Using the same specifications as in major previous studies, our first simulations show that the EU has a major responsibility in delivering significant gains to the developing countries. On the other hand, when we conduct the same experiments with a more relevant calibration and modelling of the European farm policy instruments, the gains that these developing countries may reap from the EU liberalisation are considerably reduced. Accordingly the current charge against the EU is simply inopportune.     

Special and Differential Treatment of Developing Countries in the WTO: Moving Forward After Cancún

The issue of special and differential treatment (SDT) for developing countries in the WTO has become a source of tension in North‐South trade relations. The absence of an effective SDT regime clearly contributed to the failure of the Cancún Ministerial meeting of the WTO. This paper argues for a new approach that puts the emphasis on efforts to improve the development relevance of WTO rules and create mechanisms which allow greater differentiation across WTO members in determining the applicability of WTO disciplines; complemented by non‐discriminatory liberalisation of trade in goods and services in which developing countries have an export interest. The former is key in allowing the WTO to expand its reach to new ‘behind the border’ policies; and the latter is important to establishing a development dimension in multilateral trade negotiations.     

Movement of Natural Persons and the GATS

Trade in services has expanded considerably in recent years, However, numerous regulatory barriers constrain such trade, especially when it involves the temporary cross-border movement of labour, also termed, movement of natural persons. Many developing countries have the potential to export services through cross-border movement of professional, semi-skilled and unskilled labour. The General Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS) seeks to progressively liberalise trade in services via different modes of supply, including the movement of natural persons. Under the first round of GATS negotiations, member countries have made sectoral and cross-sectoral commitments to promote trade in services for these different modes of supply. This paper discusses the significance of and various constraints to the movement of natural persons in service trade. It also assesses the nature of liberalisation that has occurred in this mode of supply under GATS and notes the limited progress made in this regard. In view of the ongoing round of GATS negotiations, it suggests ways to stregthen the overall GATS framework through greater transparency and specificity in the commitments on movement of natural persons and through the introduction of various multilateral disciplines.     

Productivity Versus Employment: Quantifying the Economic Effects of an EU–Japan Free Trade Agreement

The European Union and Japan recently entered into negotiations over a bilateral free trade agreement intended to stimulate growth and create wealth. Since customs duties are already low, the success of the liberalisation process hinges on the elimination of non‐tariff barriers. The purpose of this paper is to shed light on two possible liberalisation scenarios: a less ambitious liberalisation and a comprehensive liberalisation. In contrast to classic studies, our paper builds on the modern trade literature, accounting for the dominance of intra‐industry trade in both economies and the existence of heterogeneous firms. Furthermore, we model a search‐and‐matching labour market, allowing us to quantify employment effects of trade liberalisation. We find that a comprehensive liberalisation increases Japanese GDP by 0.86 per cent, whereas the EU experiences only an additional 0.21 per cent of real GDP growth. Most of the growth in real GDP is due to firms' efficiency gains, whereas unemployment is reduced by only a small amount. Other world regions experience small reductions of GDP due to trade diversion effects.     

Economic Partnership Agreements Between Sub‐Saharan Africa and the EU: A Development Perspective

This paper draws on Hinkle and Schiff (2003). It analyses the planned Economic Partnership Agreements (EPAs) between the EU and Sub‐Saharan Africa (SSA) from a development perspective. It does not take a position on whether SSA should enter into EPAs with the EU. Rather, it starts from the notion that the process of forming EPAs is unlikely to be reversed and examines the conditions that will maximise SSA's benefits from the EPAs. If this notion is correct, then the analysis presented in the paper applies. On the other hand, Pascal Lamy, the EU Trade Commissioner, made a proposal at the May 2004 G‐90 summit in Dakar that might lead to a change in the EPA process. He proposed that the G‐90, a group consisting of ACP and non‐ACP LDC countries, should not have to make concessions at the WTO Doha Round of multilateral trade negotiations, i.e., he proposed a ‘free round’ for the G‐90. This proposal opens the door to the possibility that the same might apply to the ACP countries in the EU‐ACP negotiations and that the EPA process might be reversed. The paper considers the key issues raised by the planned EPAs, their relationship to the WTO's Doha Round and the EU's Everything‐but‐Arms Initiative, the changes needed to make the EPAs internally consistent, the domestic reforms in SSA that would need to accompany trade liberalisation in both goods and services, and the potential effects of the EPAs on regional integration in SSA. The EPAs will pose a number of policy challenges for SSA countries, including: restructuring of indirect tax systems, reduction of MFN tariffs, liberalisation of service imports on an MFN basis and related regulatory reforms in the services sector, and liberalisation of trade in both goods and services within the regional trading blocs in SSA. The paper also finds that the EPAs provide an opportunity to accelerate regional and global trade integration in SSA. To realise the potential development benefits of the planned EPAs, two steps are essential. First, the EU must, as it has stated, truly treat the EPAs as instruments of development, subordinating its commercial interests in the agreements to the development needs of SSA. Second, the SSA countries need to implement a number of EPA‐related trade policy reforms. However, the latter is far from certain, given the lack of reform momentum in SSA.     

A Meta‐Analysis of General and Partial Equilibrium Simulations of Trade Liberalisation under the Doha Development Agenda

Model‐based simulation of welfare effects is commonly used to make a case for trade liberalisation and to inform participants and stakeholders in trade negotiations. However, the simulated welfare effects of trade liberalisation vary greatly, even across studies that model similar liberalisation scenarios. This undermines confidence in the reliability of model‐based simulations. A meta‐analysis of over 100 studies that model WTO Doha Development Agenda trade negotiation outcomes is employed to identify characteristics of models, databases and liberalisation experiments that influence simulated welfare effects. Meta‐regressions produce plausible results and explain a significant proportion of the variation in simulated welfare effects in a representative sample of Doha Development Agenda trade liberalisation studies. Results also reveal that many quantitative trade policy simulation studies fail to adequately document the assumptions and data on which they are based.     

International Trade Agreements and International Migration

Despite large potential economic gains, bilateral and multilateral negotiations focusing on liberalisation of migration have not shared the high profile of international trade negotiations and agreements. Migration and trade have been traditionally viewed rather separately and the relevance of the many, and complex, interdependencies has been given remarkably little attention in the literature to date. In this article, we focus on the two‐way interaction between international migration and agreements designed to enhance cross‐border trade and investment. Liberalisation of international trade in services and in the movement of people potentially offers much greater economic gains than liberalisation of remaining barriers to goods trade. However, progress within multilateral frameworks is fraught with difficulty. The World Trade Organization’s General Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS) has yielded little real progress so far and negotiations within more flexible unilateral and bilateral frameworks are likely to be more successful in liberalising the movement of labour. We discuss a range of specific examples, focusing particularly on the interesting case of New Zealand. We find that trade agreements are increasingly including agreements on migration, though typically favouring temporary migration and involving numerically modest quotas. We conclude that migration regulatory frameworks are likely to be further and more strongly linked to trade and investment agreements in the future, particularly given changing economic and demographic forces. The primary focus of migration policies may nonetheless remain different from that of trade policies. While further migration liberalisation is likely to be through bilateral and regional agreements, it will be important to try to lock in the gains of such agreements, while simultaneously working to consolidating these in a way that will help to facilitate future multilateral agreement.     

Tariff Liberalisation and Increased Administrative Protection: Is There a Quid Pro Quo?

Theoretical models and intuition suggest that the amount of non‐traditional protection such as anti‐dumping duties will increase as more traditional forms such as tariffs are lowered under multilateral trade agreements. This paper is the first empirical study of the role of tariff liberalisation in the spread of anti‐dumping. Through both correlations and regression approaches we analyse the relationship between tariff concessions made during the Uruguay Round trade negotiations and the filing of anti‐dumping petitions, with particular interest in whether multilateral trade reductions have spurred the recent growth in new users of anti‐dumping policies. We find that, at least for developing economies, tariff reductions agreed to under the Uruguay Round not only increased the likelihood of a country using anti‐dumping protection but also the total number of anti‐dumping petitions filed by countries.     

Beyond Border Barriers: The Liberalisation of Services Trade in Tunisia and Egypt

Tunisia and Egypt have both recently undertaken significant steps toward trade reform. They have committed to a partnership agreement with the European Union. Both countries have also joined the WTO and are participating in Doha Round discussions on the liberalisation of non‐tariff barriers on both goods and services trade. These developments provide an interesting context within which to investigate not only the changes in welfare associated with reforms affecting the trade in goods, but also the impacts of services liberalisation. Using open‐economy computable general equilibrium models for both Tunisia and Egypt, this paper explores the reasons why structural differences in these two economies imply different opportunities and challenges with trade reform and services liberalisation. The gains from eliminating barriers at the border for goods trade are significantly greater for Tunisia than Egypt. Both countries, however, gain substantially from liberalisation of foreign direct investment in services. Furthermore, economic growth is more evenly distributed across sectors than with liberalisation of trade in goods alone. In addition to reporting on the impact of alternative policies on income, output, employment and trade, sector‐level effects are also considered.     

Adjustment Costs and the Sequencing of Trade Liberalisation

A common feature of trade agreements between countries is that the integration of markets proceeds in stages. This paper examines conceptually the role played by adjustment costs in determining the best way to structure an agreement between two countries when there are multiple sectors to be liberalised. Adjustment costs to liberalisation of industries might influence the timing of liberalisation, with the analysis bearing similarity to why tariff reductions tend to be phased in over time. When two industries have no ‘spillover effects’, trade agreements with sequential liberalisation will be less costly to sustain. However, if the liberalisation of one industry influences permanently the flow of benefits from liberalising the other industry, simultaneous liberalisation may be easier to sustain.     

Thai Trade Policy: From Non‐discriminatory Liberalisation to FTAs

FTAs have dominated Thai trade policy recently, reflecting the general trend in east Asia. But they also reflect domestic political changes, especially the decision‐making style of the Thaksin government. Thai FTAs have become very politicised. In particular, the US‐Thai FTA negotiations have run into a storm of domestic protest. The first section of the paper surveys the national trade‐policy framework. It highlights the slowdown of unilateral trade and FDI liberalisation after the Asian crisis, though a descent back into protectionism was successfully resisted. Thailand punches well below its weight in the WTO, and not very forcefully in ASEAN, because political attention and negotiating resources have switched to FTAs. The second section identifies the main actors in Thai trade policy, and briefly describes the trade‐policy decision‐making process as well as recent developments during the Thaksin administration. The following central section deals with Thailand's FTAs. These have been driven by vague foreign‐policy goals, while credible economic strategy has been lacking. The residual commercial logic is narrowly mercantilist and ‘trade‐light’, seeking an exchange of concessions in a narrow range of sectors rather than comprehensive, trade‐creating FTAs. Weak and partial FTAs are the result. The sole exception has been the Thailand‐USA FTA negotiations, as the USA wants a strong, deep‐integration FTA. However, negotiations were suspended in 2006 in the wake of the Thai political crisis. Overall, Thai trade policy post‐Asian crisis is highly unbalanced. It stands on a shaky FTA leg, while the other WTO leg has gone to sleep and the ASEAN arm is limp. Above all, core unilateral liberalisation and related regulatory reform are lacking.     

More or Less Ambition in the Doha Round: Winners and Losers from Trade Liberalisation with a Development Perspective

What is at stake in the standoff and suspension of the Doha Round of trade talks? What impact would an agreement based on greater or lesser levels of ambition have on developing countries, whose economies are relatively dependent on agriculture? Using the MIRAGE computable general equilibrium model of the global economy, in this article we compare different scenarios for the Doha agricultural and NAMA negotiations, taking real numbers from the proposals on the table from the United States (US) and the European Union (EU) in December 2005. The results for both scenarios demonstrate the high stakes for successful completion of this negotiation given the positions articulated by the countries involved. A cooperative reform outcome by the US and the EU – based on the most ambitious components of their negotiating proposals – delivers noticeably more benefits than an unambitious outcome. We measure the degree of ambition in each scenario by the construction of a Mercantilist Trade Restrictiveness Index and focus the analysis on the impacts on developing countries.     

South Asia: Does Preferential Trade Liberalisation Make Sense?

This paper systematically analyses the issue of trade liberalisation in the South Asia region and offers a qualitative assessment of alternative approaches. I compare two broad approaches to trade liberalisation: non‐discriminatory and preferential. The former approach can be pursued on a unilateral basis by each country in the region, on a concerted basis by the countries in the region, or multilateral basis under the auspices of the WTO. The latter approach can take the form of criss‐crossing bilateral free trade areas between various countries in the region or a region‐wide free trade area. The view I take in the paper is that the move towards preferential trading is a mistake, at least from the viewpoint of India. India continues to have very high trade barriers so that the scope for trade diversion and the losses accompanying it are likely to be considerable. Business lobbies being relatively powerful in most of the countries in the region, they are likely to exploit the rules of origin and sectoral exceptions in these arrangements in ways that will maximise trade diversion and minimise trade creation. Inasmuch as the rules of origin give bureaucrats power, employment and opportunities to share in the rents created by tariff preferences, they too will become active parties to the diversionary tactics of business lobbies. Therefore, the member countries are better advised to proceed along non‐discriminatory lines in achieving further liberalisation.