IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/wbk/wbrwps/1484.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

The Uruguay Round and South Asia : an overview of the impact and opportunities

Author

Listed:
  • Majd, Nader

Abstract

The author examines the impact of the Uruguay Round on four South Asian countries with similar trade structures: Bangladesh, India, Pakistan, and Sri Lanka. These countries are major exporters of textiles and clothing and some agriculture. Their manufacturing sectors - especially textiles and clothing - would seem to be the main beneficiaries of the Round. The impact on agriculture should be modest. The Round improves market security for both exporters and importers, but these countries must do much more to adjust their domestic policies to the realities of the post-Round global environment. There must be further liberalization and more integration with both the region and the world. The trade regimes of the four countries are a mixed bag. All have launched major trade reform away from an inward orientation. They have liberalized trade by removing quantitative restrictions and reducing tariffs, but the degree of liberalization varies. India has done a lot to open up its economy but has not moved forcefully enough to remove restrictions on most imports of consumer goods. Pakistan retains heavy restrictions on many imports but is reducing tariff rates and their dispersion. Quantitative restrictions on imported inputs impede efficiency in Bangladesh textile and pharmaceutical industries. Sri Lanka's trade regime is the most liberal in the region, but anomalies still exist in incentives. Binding tariffs in the four countries must be greatly reduced before these countries can benefit from the Round's disciplines in agriculture. The dismantling of the Multifiber Agreement will increase South Asia's output of textiles by 17 percent, and their exports of textiles by 26 percent. Output on clothing will increase ninefold, and exports more than twentyfold. The region may also benefit from the more liberalized post-Round markets for semi-manufacturing exports. In general, negotiations about new issues - trade in services, trade-related aspects of intellectual property rights, and trade-related investment measures - will affect South Asia in different ways. The impact on the movement of labor, in which the region has a comparative advantage, seems to be more effective than in other areas. More disciplined rules to protect intellectual property rights and more transparency about investment and competition policies will benefit the region in the longer run.

Suggested Citation

  • Majd, Nader, 1995. "The Uruguay Round and South Asia : an overview of the impact and opportunities," Policy Research Working Paper Series 1484, The World Bank.
    • Handle: RePEc:wbk:wbrwps:1484
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www-wds.worldbank.org/external/default/WDSContentServer/WDSP/IB/1995/07/01/000009265_3961019121856/Rendered/PDF/multi0page.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ingco, Merlinda D., 1995. "Agricultural trade liberalization in the Uruguay Round : one step forward, one step back?," Policy Research Working Paper Series 1500, The World Bank.
    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. Brahmbhatt, Milan & Srinivasan, T.G. & Murrell, Kim, 1996. "India in the global economy," Policy Research Working Paper Series 1681, The World Bank.
    2. DeRosa, Dean A. & Govindan, Kumaresan, 1996. "Agriculture, trade, and regionalism in South Asia," Journal of Asian Economics, Elsevier, vol. 7(2), pages 293-315.
    3. Wannaphong Durongkaveroj & Taehyun Ryu, 2019. "Relative effects of trade liberalization on poverty: Evidence from Thailand," Progress in Development Studies, , vol. 19(4), pages 264-283, October.
    4. Rahapakse, Purnima & Arunatilake, Nisha, 1997. "Would a reduction in trade barriers promote intra-SAARC trade?: A Sri Lankan perspective," Journal of Asian Economics, Elsevier, vol. 8(1), pages 95-115.
    5. Tangermann, Stefan & Honma, Masayoshi & Josling, Timothy E. & Lee, Jaeok & MacLaren, Donald & McClatchy, Don & Miner, William M. & Pursell, Garry & Sumner, Daniel A. & Valdes, Alberto, 1997. "Implementation Of The Uruguay Round Agreement On Agriculture And Issues For The Next Round Of Agricultural Negotiations," Commissioned Papers 14618, International Agricultural Trade Research Consortium.

    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. Rahman, Mustafizur, 1997. "Recent policy of trade liberalization in Bangladesh and issues of regional cooperation in South Asia," Journal of Asian Economics, Elsevier, vol. 8(1), pages 117-141.
    2. 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.
    3. Arvind PANAGARIYA, 2000. "The Millennium Round And Developing Countries: Negotiating Strategies And Areas Of Benefits," G-24 Discussion Papers 1, United Nations Conference on Trade and Development.
    4. Bernard Hoekman & Kym Anderson, 2000. "Developing-Country Agriculture and the New Trade Agenda," Economic Development and Cultural Change, University of Chicago Press, vol. 49(1), pages 171-180.
    5. Pawlak, Karolina, 2013. "The development and significance of foreign trade in agri-food products in selected preferential trade agreements," Problems of World Agriculture / Problemy Rolnictwa Światowego, Warsaw University of Life Sciences, vol. 13(28), pages 1-9, December.
    6. Philip C. Abbott & Philip L. Paarlberg, 1998. "Tariff rate quotas: structural and stability impacts in growing markets," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 19(3), pages 257-267, December.
    7. Maitre d'Hotel, E. & Bosc, P.M., 2009. "Public Policies Still Alive Within a Liberalized Environment: Insights From Costa Rica," Working Papers MoISA 200901, UMR MoISA : Montpellier Interdisciplinary center on Sustainable Agri-food systems (social and nutritional sciences): CIHEAM-IAMM, CIRAD, INRAE, L'Institut Agro, Montpellier SupAgro, IRD - Montpellier, France.
    8. Gregory Shaffer & L. Alan Winters, 2016. "FTAs as Applicable Law in WTO Dispute Settlement: Was the Appellate Body Wrong in Peru-Additional Duty (DS457)?," RSCAS Working Papers 2016/65, European University Institute.
    9. Kamal Saggi & Mark Wu, 2018. "Understanding Agricultural Price Range Systems as Trade Restraints: Peru–Agricultural Products," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Kamal Saggi (ed.), Economic Analysis of the Rules and Regulations of the World Trade Organization, chapter 20, pages 455-482, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    10. Hertel, Thomas W. & Bach, Christian F. & Dimaranan, Betina & Martin, Will, 1996. "Growth, globalization, and gains from the Uruguay Round," Policy Research Working Paper Series 1614, The World Bank.
    11. Ballayram & Davis, Carlton G., 1997. "Caribbean Community Agro-Economy and the GATT/WTO Rules on Agriculture: Imperitives for Subregional Growth and Development," International Working Paper Series 237440, University of Florida, Food and Resource Economics Department.
    12. AfDB AfDB, 2008. "Working Paper 95 - Agricultural Trade Policy Reform in South Africa," Working Paper Series 2308, African Development Bank.
    13. Fabiosa, Jacinto F., 2000. "Impact Of Gatt In The Functioning Of Agricultural Markets: An Examination Of Market Integration And Efficiency In The World Beef And Wheat Market Under The Pre-Gatt And Post-Gatt Regimes," 2000 Annual meeting, July 30-August 2, Tampa, FL 21868, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    14. Anderson, Kym, 1995. "Agricultural Competitiveness After the Uruguay Round," Review of Marketing and Agricultural Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 63(03), pages 1-12, December.
    15. Moon, Wanki, 2011. "Is agriculture compatible with free trade?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 71(C), pages 13-24.
    16. Pilzecker Fonseca Duarte, A., 1997. "Handelspolitische Reformen und Preisstabilität: Die Auswirkungen der GATT-Urugay-Runde auf die Schwankungen der Weizenpreise," Proceedings “Schriften der Gesellschaft für Wirtschafts- und Sozialwissenschaften des Landbaues e.V.”, German Association of Agricultural Economists (GEWISOLA), vol. 33.
    17. Srinivasan, P. V. & Jha, Shikha, 2001. "Liberalized trade and domestic price stability. The case of rice and wheat in India," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(2), pages 417-441, August.
    18. Chitiga, Margaret & Kandiero, Tonia & Ngwenya, P., 2008. "Agricultural trade policy reform in South Africa," Agrekon, Agricultural Economics Association of South Africa (AEASA), vol. 47(1), pages 1-26, March.
    19. David, Cristina C., 1999. "Constraints to Food Security: The Philippine Case," Discussion Papers DP 1999-31, Philippine Institute for Development Studies.
    20. David, Cristina C., 1997. "Agricultural policy and the WTO Agreement: The Philippine Case," Discussion Papers DP 1997-13, Philippine Institute for Development Studies.

    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:wbk:wbrwps:1484. 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: Roula I. Yazigi (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/dvewbus.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.