IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ess/wpaper/id1166.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Market Access: Unfinished Business: Post-Uruguay Round Inventory and Issues

Author

Listed:
  • Marc Bacchetta.

Abstract

This study has two closely related objectives: to evaluate post-Uruguay Round market access conditions and to contribute to a clarification of the stakes in the ongoing process of multilateral trade negotiations in the market access area. Industrial tariffs are included along with and agriculture and services, even though they are not currently the subject of a negotiating mandate, because their inclusion contributes to both objectives. The study also provides a brief overview of the progress to date in the mandateda negotiations on agriculture and services. Overall, this survey of market-access conditions confirms that the Uruguay Round, as well as previous rounds, have contributed to a substantial reduction of the overall level of protection. However, this survey also shows that in various areas, trade is still significantly affected by barriers. To give only three examples, trade in agricultural products and trade in textiles and clothing, and in services. Special Study undertaken by WTO's Economic Research and Analysis Division.

Suggested Citation

  • Marc Bacchetta., 2007. "Market Access: Unfinished Business: Post-Uruguay Round Inventory and Issues," Working Papers id:1166, eSocialSciences.
    • Handle: RePEc:ess:wpaper:id:1166
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.eSocialSciences.com/data/articles/Document12782007310.5480768.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Francois, Joseph & Martin, Will, 1995. "Multilateral Trade Rules and the Expected Cost of Protection," CEPR Discussion Papers 1214, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    2. Michalopoulos,Constantine, 1999. "Trade policy and market access issues for developing countries : implications for the Millennium Round," Policy Research Working Paper Series 2214, The World Bank.
    3. Martin,Will & Winters,L. Alan (ed.), 1996. "The Uruguay Round and the Developing Countries," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521586016.
    4. Rudolf Adlung, 1999. "Liberalizing trade in services: from Marrakech to Seattle," Intereconomics: Review of European Economic Policy, Springer;ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics;Centre for European Policy Studies (CEPS), vol. 34(5), pages 211-222, September.
    5. Kono, Masamichi & Low, Patrick & Luanga, Mukela & Mattoo, Aaditya & Oshikawa, Maika & Schuknecht, Ludger, 1997. "Opening markets in financial services and the role of the GATS," WTO Special Studies, World Trade Organization (WTO), Economic Research and Statistics Division, volume 1, number 1.
    6. Thomas W. Hertel, 2000. "Potential gains from reducing trade barriers in manufacturing, services and agriculture," Review, Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis, vol. 82(Jul), pages 77-104.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. WTO Economic Research and Analysis Division, 2001. "Market Access: Unfinished Business - Post Uruguay Round Inventory and Issues," WTO Special Studies, World Trade Organization (WTO), Economic Research and Statistics Division, volume 6, number 6.
    2. Ianchovichina, Elena, 2001. "Trade Liberalization in China’s Accession to WTO," Journal of Economic Integration, Center for Economic Integration, Sejong University, vol. 16, pages 421-445.
    3. Christen, Elisabeth & Francois, Joseph & Hoekman, Bernard, 2013. "Computable General Equilibrium Modeling of Market Access in Services," Handbook of Computable General Equilibrium Modeling, in: Peter B. Dixon & Dale Jorgenson (ed.), Handbook of Computable General Equilibrium Modeling, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 0, pages 1601-1643, Elsevier.
    4. Ji Chou & Shiu-Tung Wang & Kun-Ming Chen & Nai-Fong Kuo, 2003. "Taiwan's Accession into the WTO and Trade in Services: A Computable General Equilibrium Analysis," NBER Chapters, in: Trade in Services in the Asia-Pacific Region, pages 99-136, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    5. Rivera, Sandra A. & Tsigas, Marinos E., 2005. "How does China’s growth affect India? An Economywide Analysis," Conference papers 331359, Purdue University, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Global Trade Analysis Project.
    6. Konan, Denise Eby & Maskus, Keith E., 2006. "Quantifying the impact of services liberalization in a developing country," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 81(1), pages 142-162, October.
    7. Mattoo, Aaditya, 1999. "Financial services and the World Trade Organization - liberalization commitments of the developing and transition economies," Policy Research Working Paper Series 2184, The World Bank.
    8. Sébastien Jean & David Laborde & Will Martin, 2008. "Choosing Sensitive Agricultural Products in Trade Negotiations," Working Papers 2008-18, CEPII research center.
    9. Joseph Francois & Bernard Hoekman, 2010. "Services Trade and Policy," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 48(3), pages 642-692, September.
    10. Siebert, Horst, 2005. "TAFTA - a dead horse or an attractive open club?," Kiel Working Papers 1240, Kiel Institute for the World Economy (IfW Kiel).
    11. Kym Anderson, 2005. "On the Virtues of Multilateral Trade Negotiations," The Economic Record, The Economic Society of Australia, vol. 81(255), pages 414-438, December.
    12. Götz, Christian & Heckelei, Thomas & Rudloff, Bettina, 2010. "What makes countries initiate WTO disputes on food-related issues?," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(2), pages 154-162, April.
    13. Ingo Borchert & Batshur Gootiiz & Aaditya Mattoo, 2014. "Policy Barriers to International Trade in Services: Evidence from a New Database," The World Bank Economic Review, World Bank, vol. 28(1), pages 162-188.
    14. Lucian Cernat & Sam Laird & Alessandro Turrini, 2003. "How Important are Market Access Issues for Developing Countries in the Doha Agenda?," International Trade 0302004, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    15. J. Mutti & R. Sampson & B. Yeung, 2000. "The effects of the Uruguay round: empirical evidence from U.S. industry," Contemporary Economic Policy, Western Economic Association International, vol. 18(1), pages 59-69, January.
    16. Hans Binswanger & Ernst Lutz, 2003. "Agricultural trade barriers, trade negotiations and the interests of developing countries," Chapters, in: John Toye (ed.), Trade and Development, chapter 8, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    17. Walmsley, Terrie L. & Hertel, Thomas W. & Ianchovichina, Elena, 2001. "Assessing the Impact of China’s WTO Accession on Foreign Ownership," Conference papers 330941, Purdue University, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Global Trade Analysis Project.
    18. repec:hal:wpspec:info:hdl:2441/8070 is not listed on IDEAS
    19. Fugazza, Marco & Maur, Jean-Christophe, 2008. "Non-tariff barriers in CGE models: How useful for policy?," Journal of Policy Modeling, Elsevier, vol. 30(3), pages 475-490.
    20. J.M. Finger & Philip Schuler, 2002. "Implementation of Uruguay Round Commitments: The Development Challenge," Chapters, in: Institutions and Trade Policy, chapter 17, pages 258-272, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    21. James R. Markusen & Thomas F. Rutherford & David Tarr, 2000. "Foreign Direct Investments in Services and the Domestic Market for Expertise," NBER Working Papers 7700, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ess:wpaper:id:1166. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Padma Prakash (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.esocialsciences.org .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.