Advanced Search
MyIDEAS: Login

The Evolution of Trade Treaties and Trade Creation: Lessons for Latin America

Contents:

Author Info

  • Sarath Rajapatirana

Abstract

This paper examines the main distinctions between the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) and regional trading arrangements (RTAs), noting that under the former, liberalization of trade is based on the most favored nation (MFN) principle, while under the latter, there is a departure from that principle leading to preferential trade liberalization. Properly instituted RTAs must confirm to Article XXIV of the GATT. But the article has not been followed by nearly all the countries that have created regional integration schemes. This has meant that while the integration schemes for the 1980s and 1990s have not lead to increased protection against third countries, there has not been across the board trade liberalization among the groups forming RTAs. Developing countries have sought and received formal exemption from Article XXIV through the enabling clause at the Tokyo round. Departures from the MFN principle and Article XXIV have meant that there is potential for greater trade diversion with the proliferation of RTAs. The paper finds that there is no general tendency for RTAs to become increasingly integrated entities. The European Economic Community has been an exception, where greater integration has taken place with trade within the region growing steadily. In contrast, the Association of South East Asian nations (ASEAN) has been a loose agreement. Nevertheless, trade among the group has increased rapidly on the basis of multilateral trade liberalization undertaken by the countries in the group. Latin American countries also attempted to create RTAs in the 1960s based on their national protectionist policies which led to reduced trade within the regional as well as the rest of the world. RTAs carry with them the danger of trade diversion and that there is no inexorable logic that RTAs would lead to increased integration with lower protection. Countries venturing into RTAs must attempt to achieve GATT-plus trade liberalization, implying that RTAs are used to have greater trade liberalization than what could be achieved through GATT based trade. The lessons for Latin America to avoid unnecessary costs of these RTAs arising from trade diversion are to have low protection in the first place, to have open RTAs so that there is easy accession of new partners, to continue with the trade liberalization on a MFN basis, to avoid free trade areas (in preference for common markets) which could lead to new barriers through rules of origin and to coordinate regulatory and competition policies as well as to remove barriers arising from transport, ports and communications.

Download Info

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
File URL: http://www.worldbank.org/html/lat/english/papers/trade/evolu4.txt
Download Restriction: no

Bibliographic Info

Paper provided by World Bank Latin America and the Caribean Region Department in its series Reports with number _005.

as in new window
Length:
Date of creation: 1995
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:wop:bawlad:_005

Contact details of provider:
Postal: 1818 H Street, N.W., Washington, DC 20433
Phone: (202) 477-1234
Email:
Web page: http://www.worldbank.org/
More information through EDIRC

Related research

Keywords:

Other versions of this item:

Find related papers by JEL classification:

References

References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
as in new window
  1. Anderson Kym & Snape Richard H., 1994. "European and American Regionalism: Effects on and Options for Asia," Journal of the Japanese and International Economies, Elsevier, vol. 8(4), pages 454-477, December.
  2. repec:fth:eeccco:94 is not listed on IDEAS
  3. Sapir, Andre, 1992. "Regional Integration in Europe," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 102(415), pages 1491-506, November.
  4. Susan Hickok & James Orr & M.A. Akhtar & K. Wulfekuhler, 1991. "The Uruguay Round of GATT trade negotiations," Research Paper 9119, Federal Reserve Bank of New York.
  5. Sebastian Edwards, 1994. "Trade and Industrial Policy Reform in Latin America," NBER Working Papers 4772, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  6. Steinberg, Richard H., 1993. "Antidotes To Regionalism: Responses to Trade Diversion Effects of the North American Free Trade Agreement," UCAIS Berkeley Roundtable on the International Economy, Working Paper Series qt6tj728h5, UCAIS Berkeley Roundtable on the International Economy, UC Berkeley.
  7. Diana Brand, 1992. "Regional bloc formation and world trade," Intereconomics: Review of European Economic Policy, Springer, vol. 27(6), pages 274-281, November.
  8. Whalley, John, 1990. "Non-discriminatory Discrimination: Special and Differential Treatment under the GATT for Developing Countries," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 100(403), pages 1318-28, December.
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 in new window

Cited by:
  1. Park, Innwon & Park, Soonchan, 2009. "Consolidation and Harmonization of Regional Trade Agreements (RTAs): A Path Toward Global Free Trade," MPRA Paper 14217, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 23 Mar 2009.
  2. Rajapatirana, Sarath, 1996. "Evaluating Bolivia's choices for trade integration," Policy Research Working Paper Series 1632, The World Bank.
  3. Nigel Nagarajan, 1998. "MERCOSUR and Trade Diversion: What Do The Import Figures Tell Us?," European Economy - Economic Papers 129, Directorate General Economic and Monetary Affairs (DG ECFIN), European Commission.
  4. Innwon Park & Soonchan Park, 2009. "Free Trade Agreements versus Customs Unions: An Examination of East Asia," Asian Economic Papers, MIT Press, vol. 8(2), pages 119-139, June.
  5. Valdes, Alberto, 1995. "Joining an Existing Regional Trade Agreement: Issues and Policies from the Perspective of a Small Open Economy in Latin America," 1995: Economic Integration in the Western Hemisphere Symposium, June 7-9, 1995, San Jose, Costa Rica 50807, International Agricultural Trade Research Consortium.
  6. Hamanaka, Shintaro, 2012. "Evolutionary paths toward a region-wide economic agreement in Asia," Journal of Asian Economics, Elsevier, vol. 23(4), pages 383-394.
  7. Innwon Park & Soonchan Park, 2011. "Best practices for regional trade agreements," Review of World Economics (Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv), Springer, vol. 147(2), pages 249-268, June.

Lists

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

Statistics

Access and download statistics

Corrections

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:wop:bawlad:_005. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Thomas Krichel).

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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

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