IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/pra/mprapa/37893.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Rules of Origin and Sensitive List under SAFTA and Bilateral FTAs among South Asian Countries: Quantitative Assessments of Potential Implications for Nepal

Author

Listed:
  • Raihan, Selim

Abstract

This study analyzes the implications of the proliferation of ROO and sensitive list under SAFTA and bilateral FTAs among South Asian countries with particular reference to Nepal. In this regard this study makes a comparative assessment of different ROO arrangements under different bilateral FTAs as well as under SAFTA and BIMSTEC with a view to finding out the relative flexibility of SAFTA ROO vis-à-vis ROO in other regional and bilateral FTAs in South Asia. In addition, this study also explores the impact of the sensitive list maintained by India, under SAFTA, on the rise in exports from Nepal to India. The study uses a partial equilibrium model, namely the WITS/SMART model, to simulate different scenarios. It appears that when there is no ROO requirement and there is no sensitive list, the South Asian countries, under a full SAFTA scenario, are able to increase their exports within the region quite substantially. India appears to be the largest gainer from such scenario. However, Nepal also turns out to be important gainer as her exports to the South Asian region as whole increase by around US$ 90 million. Interestingly almost all of hear export increase would be targeted to Indian market (99 percent) under such a scenario. The analysis on trade creation and trade diversion for Nepal suggests that under a full SAFTA scenario, the trade creation effect (US$ 160821 thousand) will be higher than the negative trade diversion effect (US$ 19454 thousand) resulting in a net trade effect equal to US$ 141367. It also appears that the revenue loss and welfare gains for Nepal, resulting from such a scenario, would be US$ 90881 thousand and US$ 20486 thousand, In the second scenario, because of ROO (and assuming no sensitive list in India) 34 percent of the potential rise in exports from Nepal to India appears to be unrealized. In the third simulation, because of SAFTA sensitive list in India (and assuming no ROO) as high as 47 percent of the potential rise in exports from Nepal to India appears to be lost. In the final simulation, it appears that SAFTA ROO and sensitive list in India eats up more than two-third of the potential rise in exports from Nepal to India. It can therefore, be argued that since the value-additions of most of Nepal’s export products are very low, a 30 percent value-addition requirement under SAFTA as well as under the India-Nepal Trade Treaty would act as a significant barrier for her export expansion in India. This is also true for other LDCs in South Asia. Therefore, the problem of ROO will need to be resolved, keeping an eye on the manufacturing/processing capability of the LDCs. In addition, the other criteria of the ROO, namely the change in tariff head, under SAFTA should also be made consistent with those that are currently in force in the bilateral trade agreements within the SAARC region, which happen to be more liberal than the prevailing SAFTA rules. It also appears that SAFTA sensitive list is too stringent to allow significant rise in exports from the LDCs (in this case Nepal) to the Indian market. In almost all the cases, the products, which are included in the sensitive list, have significantly high export potentials. It can thus be concluded that if these sensitive lists are not phased out, there will be very little to gain from SAFTA by Nepal and other LDCs in this region.

Suggested Citation

  • Raihan, Selim, 2008. "Rules of Origin and Sensitive List under SAFTA and Bilateral FTAs among South Asian Countries: Quantitative Assessments of Potential Implications for Nepal," MPRA Paper 37893, University Library of Munich, Germany.
  • Handle: RePEc:pra:mprapa:37893
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/37893/1/MPRA_paper_37893.pdf
    File Function: original version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Anne O. Krueger, 1993. "Free Trade Agreements as Protectionist Devices: Rules of Origin," NBER Working Papers 4352, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    2. Paul Brenton & Miriam Manchin, 2014. "Making EU Trade Agreements Work: The Role of Rules of Origin," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: INTERNATIONAL TRADE, DISTRIBUTION AND DEVELOPMENT Empirical Studies of Trade Policies, chapter 14, pages 299-313, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    3. Dorothea C. Lazaro & Erlinda M. Medalla, 2006. "Rules of Origin - Evolving Best Practices for RTAs/FTAs," Trade Working Papers 22006, East Asian Bureau of Economic Research.
    4. Kala Krishna, 2005. "Understanding Rules of Origin," NBER Working Papers 11150, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    5. Kala Krishna & Anne Krueger, 1995. "Implementing Free Trade Areas: Rules of Origin and Hidden Protection," NBER Working Papers 4983, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Raihan, Selim, 2017. "Enhanced Regional Economic Cooperation through Dealing with NTMs in the BBIN Sub-Region in South Asia: A Political Economy Approach," MPRA Paper 110470, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    2. Asanka Wijesinghe & Chathurrdhika Yogarajah, 2022. "Trade Policy Impact on Global Value Chain Participation of the South Asian Countries," Journal of Asian Economic Integration, , vol. 4(1), pages 24-48, April.

    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. Medalla, Erlinda M. & Lazaro, Dorothea C., 2006. "Rules of Origin: Evolving Best Practices for RTAs/FTAs," Discussion Papers DP 2006-01, Philippine Institute for Development Studies.
    2. Patricia Augier & Michael Gasiorek & Charles Lai-Tong, 2007. "Multilateralising Regionalism: Relaxing the Rules of Origin Or Can Those Pecs Be Flexed?," CARIS Working Papers 03, Centre for the Analysis of Regional Integration at Sussex, University of Sussex.
    3. Aaditya Mattoo & Devesh Roy & Arvind Subramanian, 2003. "The Africa Growth and Opportunity Act and its Rules of Origin: Generosity Undermined?," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 26(6), pages 829-851, June.
    4. Medalla, Erlinda M. & Balboa, Jenny D., 2009. "ASEAN Rules of Origin: Lessons and Recommendations for Best Practice," Discussion Papers DP 2009-36, Philippine Institute for Development Studies.
    5. Fabien Candau & Sébastien Jean, 2005. "What Are EU Trade Preferences Worth for Sub-Saharan Africa and Other Developing Countries?," Working Papers 2005-19, CEPII research center.
    6. Kala Krishna, 2005. "Understanding Rules of Origin," NBER Working Papers 11150, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    7. Patricia Augier & Michael Gasiorek & Charles Lai Tong, 2005. "The impact of rules of origin on trade flows [‘Rules of origin and the EU-Med partnership: the case of textiles’]," Economic Policy, CEPR;CES;MSH, vol. 20(43), pages 568-624.
    8. Erlinda M. Medalla & M. Supperamaniam, 2008. "Suggested Rules of Origin Regime for EAFTA," Trade Working Papers 22014, East Asian Bureau of Economic Research.
    9. Honório Kume & Guida Piani & Pedro Miranda, 2005. "Acordos Preferenciais de Comércio: Os Regimes de Origem Substituem as Tarifas?," Discussion Papers 1107, Instituto de Pesquisa Econômica Aplicada - IPEA.
    10. Georges, Patrick & Mérette, Marcel, 2011. "Trade Diversification Away from the U.S. or North American Customs Union? A Review of Canada’s Trade Policy Options," Conference papers 332084, Purdue University, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Global Trade Analysis Project.
    11. Medalla, Erlinda M. & Supperamaniam, M., 2008. "Suggested Rules of Origin Regime for EAFTA," Discussion Papers DP 2008-22, Philippine Institute for Development Studies.
    12. Patrick Georges, 2017. "Canada’s Trade Policy Options under Donald Trump: NAFTA’s rules of origin, Canada-U.S. security perimeter, and Canada’s geographical trade diversification opportunities," Working Papers 1707E, University of Ottawa, Department of Economics.
    13. Ram Upendra Das, 2010. "Rules of Origin under Regional Trade Agreements," Trade Working Papers 22791, East Asian Bureau of Economic Research.
    14. Patrick Georges, 2007. "Modeling the Removal of NAFTA Rules of Origin: A Dynamic Computable General Equilibrium Analysis," Working Papers 0705E, University of Ottawa, Department of Economics.
    15. Patrick Georges, 2008. "Liberalizing NAFTA Rules of Origin: A Dynamic CGE Analysis," Review of International Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 16(4), pages 672-691, September.
    16. Erlinda M. Medalla & M. Supperamaniam, 2008. "Suggested Rules of Origin Regime for EAFTA," Trade Working Papers 22664, East Asian Bureau of Economic Research.
    17. Patrick Georges, 2010. "Dispensing with NAFTA Rules of Origin? Some Policy Options," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 33(11), pages 1606-1637, November.
    18. Erlinda M. Medalla, 2008. "Rules of Origin : Regimes in East Asia and Recommendations for Best Practice," Trade Working Papers 22665, East Asian Bureau of Economic Research.
    19. Medalla, Erlinda M., 2008. "Rules of Origin: Regimes in East Asia and Recommendations for Best Practice," Discussion Papers DP 2008-19, Philippine Institute for Development Studies.
    20. Pelzman Joseph & Shoham Amir, 2010. "Measuring the Welfare Effects of Country of Origin Rules: A Suggested Methodology," Global Economy Journal, De Gruyter, vol. 10(1), pages 1-25, February.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    SAFTA; Rules of Origin; Sensitive List; Regional Trading Arrangement; Nepal;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • F15 - International Economics - - Trade - - - Economic Integration
    • C53 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric Modeling - - - Forecasting and Prediction Models; Simulation Methods
    • F17 - International Economics - - Trade - - - Trade Forecasting and Simulation

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:pra:mprapa:37893. 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: Joachim Winter (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/vfmunde.html .

    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.