Trade Policy Dialogue on the Multiple Dimensions of Market Access and Development Regional Trade Liberalization as a Complement to Multilateral Liberalization?

1
Trade Policy Dialogue on the Multiple
Dimensions of Market Access and
DevelopmentRegional Trade Liberalization as a
Complement to Multilateral Liberalization?
Carlos A. Primo Braga Senior Adviser World
Bank OECD Global Forum on Trade Mexico City,
23-24 October 2006
2
Planning ahead
3
Trade, Regionalism and DevelopmentKey Messages

• Regional trade agreements (RTAs) are
  proliferating and now cover one third of world
  trade, but their liberalizing effect has often
  been modest.
• RTAs can create trade and bring many other
  benefits for development but results are not
  automatic and depend critically on design and
  implementation.
• RTAs have systemic consequences that adversely
  affect excluded countries, requiring
  international attention.

4
Regional Trade Agreements are proliferating
Annual number
Total in force
Cumulative in force
New agreements annually
and now potentially cover more than one-third of
global trade
5
South-South RTAs predominate in number, but not
in trade covered
Number of RTAs
Percent of World Trade Covered
South-South
South-South
US
US
European Union
European Union
6
Why this proliferation?
High-income countries, such as US and EU

• Grant trade access to support foreign policy
  goals, including development
• Slow progress on multilateral agenda
  competitive liberalization
• Access to services markets, protection of
  intellectual property, and rules for investment

Developing countries

• Secure access to markets, especially large
  markets
• Lock in reforms to promote domestic agenda
• More FDI
• Among neighbors, lowering trade cost at border
• Framework for regional cooperation

7
but RTAs provide less new market access than it
might appear
Share of trade covered (), 2003
8
and regional agreements are a relatively small
driver of trade reform
Decomposing tariff reductions in response to
multilateral, regional and own initiatives
Decomposing 20 pt. decline
Av. Tariffs, 1983 and 2003
29.9
9.3
Source Martin and Ng, 2004
9
Assessing effects of RTAs on members two ways

• 1 Prospective general equilibrium models
• Most agreements projected to create more trade
  than they divert
• Projected gains less than multilateral
• Excluded countries almost always lose
• Market access is a key determinant on net
  benefits
• 2 Retrospective econometric, gravity model
• Different studies different results
• Meta analysis suggest that half of agreements
  have been net trade diverting

10
Effects on members Do RTAs create or divert
-- trade?
Estimated exponential impact on trade
Overall exports
Overall imports
Intra-regional trade
Note The bars show the magnitude of the dummy
variables capturing respectively the extent to
which intraregional trade, overall imports and
overall exports differ from the normal levels
predicted by the gravity model on the basis of
economic size, proximity and relevant
institutional and historical variables, such as a
common language.
11
Agreements with high external tariffs risk trade
diversion
Average weighted tariffs
Note Tariffs are import-weighted at the country
level to arrive at PTA averages Source UN
TRAINS, accessed through WITS
12
Lower external tariffs are associated with
greater regional integration
Average external tariffs
MNA
SAS
SSA
LAC
ECA
EAP
13
RTAs go far beyond trade
Lets consider trade faciliation, services,
investment, intellectual property rights and
temporary movement of labor
14
Delays at border drives up trading costs

• RTAs can provide framework for mutual efforts to
  reduce costs
• Single customs document
• Harmonize driving weight regulations
• Computerize both sides of the border

Trade/GDP
Potential of RTAs to reduce border costs not yet
realized
15
Services liberalization deepest in N-S agreements

• US and EU (less systematically) agreements
  establish
• National treatment
• MFN treatment for members
• Nonrestrictive rules of origin of investor
• Pre-establishment access subject to negative
  lists (US) or positive lists (EU)
• Upside potential great because risks of losses
  through diversion minimal.
• but achievements in additional liberalization
  subject to question
• South-south gone much less far

16
Investment accords provide for new access and new
investor protections

• Potential benefits include greater FDI flows
  because
• Liberalized market access
• increased payoff to trade integration,
• reduced risk premium
• enhanced credibility of investment climate
• Reduced international policy spillovers
• Rent shifting via TRIMs, etc.
• However, market access more important than
  investor protections as no evidence that
  protections significantly increase FDI flows to
  developing countries
• RTAs that create large ex-post market results
  and, provided good investment climate, do attract
  more FDI. A 10 increase in post-FTA market
  size is associated with a 0.5 percent increase in
  FDI in the host country.

17
Intellectual property rights figure prominently
in N-S RTAs, particularly US FTAs

• US FTAs contain TRIPS Plus provisions that
  provide greater IPR protection.
• Brings generics under market and data exclusivity
  arrangements
• No analysis of economic consequences prior to
  signing

• Open questions
• Will FTAs foreclose use of Doha flexibilities on
  TRIPS for generics?
• Will stronger IPRs contribute to more FDI and
  high tech trade?
• Are TRIPS Plus measures appropriate to all
  countries?

Conclusion Development consequences of
investment and IPR rules depend heavily on market
access these rules leverage
18
Labor services are area of potential

• Types of labor services treatment
• Full labor mobility (EFTA, ANZCERTA)
• Access for certain groups (NAFTA, Japan-Singapore
  FTA)
• Mode-4 type access (ASEAN, EU-Mexico)
• No provisions (APEC, COMESA)
• Patterns include
• Limited mobility
• Skilled labor only mainly intra-corporate
• In conclusionnot much movement

Ironically, areas with least progress services
and labor have greatest development potential
while areas with most progress e.g., IPR are
those with more uncertain development
consequences
19
Perceptions of risk and opportunities vary
20
Both North-South and South-South accords can be
improved
Some sweeping generalization
North-South
Index of ROO Restrictiveness

• Strengths
• Compatibility among economies
• Services liberalization
• Move to international standards
• Weaknesses
• Restrictive rules of origin
• Exemptions, esp. agriculture
• Inappropriate rules
• No or limited movement of workers

Estevadeordal, 2004
21
Both North-South and South-South accords can be
improved
Some sweeping generalization
North-South
South- South

• Strengths
• Compatibility among economies/large markets
• Services liberalization
• Move to international standards
• Weaknesses
• Restrictive rules of origin
• Exemptions, esp. agriculture
• Inappropriate rules
• No movement of workers

• Strengths
• Focus on trade
• Nonrestrictive rules of origin
• Adjacency permit trade facilitation

• Weaknesses
• Small markets/Higher external barriers
• Exemptions
• Minimal services
• No movement of workers

22
Design are crucial to achieving objectives

• Design
• Large ex-post market
• Low external tariff barriers
• Nonrestrictive rules of origin
• Wide product coverage with minimal exemptions
• Liberalization of services
• Facilitating trade at borders
• Appropriate rules
• Implementation Avoiding paper agreements

.Open regionalism
23
Overlapping African agreements
Nile River Basin
COMESA
IGAD
ECCAS
AMU
CEMAC
Somalia
Sao Tomé Principe
Algeria Libya Morocco Mauritania Tunisia
Egypt
Cameroon Central African Rep. Gabon Equat.
Guinea Rep.Congo
ECOWAS
Djibouti Ethiopia Eritrea Sudan
Burundi Rwanda
Ghana Nigeria
Conseil de LEntente
Cape Verde Gambia
Chad
DR Congo
Kenya Uganda
Benin Niger Togo
Burkina Faso Cote dIvoire
Angola
Guinea-Bissau Mali
Senegal
EAC
Liberia Sierra Leaone
Guinea
Tanzania
Mauritius Syechelles
Malawi Zambia Zimbabwe
SACU
Comoros Madagascar
WAEMU
Mano River Union
South Africa Botswana Lesotho
CLISS
Namibia Swaziland
Reunion
AMU Arab Maghreb Union CBI
Cross Border Initiative CEMAC Economic
Monetary Community of Central Africa CILSS
Permanent Interstate Committee on Drought
Control in the Sahel COMESA Common Market for
Eastern and Southern Africa EAC East
African Cooperation ECOWAS Economic Community
of Western African Studies IGAD
Inter-Governmental Authority for Government IOC
Indian Ocean Commission SACU
Southern African Customs Union SADC
Southern African Development Community WAEMU
West African Economic Monetary Union
CBI
Mozambique
SADC
IOC
24
Systemic issuesuneven and discriminatory access

• Preferences hurt excluded countries

• Hub and spokes put weaker countries at
  disadvantage

• Multiple arrangements burden customs
• Disincentives to engage in multilateral
  liberalization

25
Policy implications

• International community through the WTO
• Get Doha done
• Concentrate on transparency/Article XXIV
• High income countries have systemic
  responsibility
• Widen coverage in FTAs (i.e. agriculture)
• Move toward conformity in rules of origin, and
  make less restrictive
• Promote rules tailored to local capacities
• Developing countries should adopt a 3 part
  strategy, using each instrument to its most
  appropriate objective
• Unilateral driving competitiveness
• Multilateral seeking broad market access
• Regional deep market access and institutional
  reforms (customs, ports, trade-related standards)

26
The importance of being prepared


27
cbraga_at_worldbank.org

• Source
• World Bank (2005) Global Economic Prospects
• Thank you !