IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/b/wbk/wbpubs/9437.html
   My bibliography  Save this book

Trade Preference Erosion : Measurement and Policy Response

Author

Listed:
  • Bernard Hoekman
  • Will Martin
  • Carlos A. Primo Braga

Abstract

The multilateral trade system rests on the principle of nondiscrimination. The most-favored-nation (MFN) clause embodied in article one of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) was the defining principle for a system that emerged in the post, Second World War era, largely in reaction to the folly of protectionism and managed trade that contributed to the global economic depression of the 1930s. From its origins, however, the GATT has allowed for exemptions from the MFN rule in the case of reciprocal preferential trade agreements. It also permits granting unilateral (nonreciprocal) preferences to developing countries. To provide some background for the debate on the potential extent and implications of preference erosion, the chapters in this volume review the value of preferences for beneficiary countries, assess the implications of preference erosion under different global liberalization scenarios, and discuss potential policy responses. One set of chapters focuses on the nonreciprocal preference schemes of individual industrial countries, particularly, Australia, Canada, Japan, the United States, and the member states of the European Union (EU). A second set of chapters considers sectoral features of these preference schemes, such as those applying to agricultural and nonagricultural products, and the important arrangements for textiles and clothing. A final set of chapters considers the overall effects of preferences and the options for dealing with preference erosion resulting from nondiscriminatory trade liberalization.

Suggested Citation

  • Bernard Hoekman & Will Martin & Carlos A. Primo Braga, 2009. "Trade Preference Erosion : Measurement and Policy Response," World Bank Publications - Books, The World Bank Group, number 9437, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:wbk:wbpubs:9437
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/bitstream/handle/10986/9437/48339.pdf?sequence=1
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Nuno Limão, 2018. "Preferential Trade Agreements as Stumbling Blocks for Multilateral Trade Liberalization: Evidence for the United States," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Policy Externalities and International Trade Agreements, chapter 13, pages 353-371, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    2. José Anson & Olivier Cadot & Antoni Estevadeordal & Jaime de Melo & Akiko Suwa‐Eisenmann & Bolormaa Tumurchudur, 2005. "Rules of Origin in North–South Preferential Trading Arrangements with an Application to NAFTA," Review of International Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 13(3), pages 501-517, August.
    3. 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..
    4. Mary Amiti & John Romalis, 2007. "Will the Doha Round Lead to Preference Erosion?," IMF Staff Papers, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 54(2), pages 338-384, June.
    5. Howard Pack & Kamal Saggi, 2006. "Is There a Case for Industrial Policy? A Critical Survey," The World Bank Research Observer, World Bank, vol. 21(2), pages 267-297.
    6. Pack, Howard & Saggi, Kamal, 2006. "The case for industrial policy : a critical survey," Policy Research Working Paper Series 3839, The World Bank.
    7. Baybars Karacaovali & Nuno Limão, 2018. "The clash of liberalizations: Preferential vs. multilateral trade liberalization in the European Union," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Policy Externalities and International Trade Agreements, chapter 14, pages 373-401, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    8. Joseph Francois & Bernard Hoekman & Miriam Manchin, 2006. "Preference Erosion and Multilateral Trade Liberalization," The World Bank Economic Review, World Bank, vol. 20(2), pages 197-216.
    9. Rodrik, Dani, 2004. "Industrial Policy for the Twenty-First Century," CEPR Discussion Papers 4767, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    10. Nuno Limão & Marcelo Olarreaga, 2018. "Trade Preferences to Small Developing Countries and the Welfare Costs of Lost Multilateral Liberalization," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Policy Externalities and International Trade Agreements, chapter 15, pages 403-426, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    11. Francois, Joseph F & Wooton, Ian, 2001. "Trade in International Transport Services: The Role of Competition," Review of International Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 9(2), pages 249-261, May.
    12. Bernard Hoekman, 2005. "Operationalizing the Concept of Policy Space in the WTO: Beyond Special and Differential Treatment*," Journal of International Economic Law, Oxford University Press, vol. 8(2), pages 405-424, June.
    13. Marcelo Olarreaga & Çaglar Özden, 2005. "AGOA and Apparel: Who Captures the Tariff Rent in the Presence of Preferential Market Access?," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 28(1), pages 63-77, January.
    14. Bernard Hoekman & Çağlar Özden (ed.), 2006. "Trade Preferences and Differential Treatment of Developing Countries," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 3320.
    15. Antoine Bouët & Yvan Decreux & Lionel Fontagné & Sébastien Jean & David Laborde, 2004. "A Consistent, Ad-Valorem Equivalent Measure of Applied Protection Across the World: The MAcMap-HS6 Database," Working Papers 2004-22, CEPII research center.
    16. André Sapir & Rolf Langhammer, 1987. "Economic impact of generalized tariff preferences," ULB Institutional Repository 2013/8090, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
    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. Valentina Raimondi & Margherita Scoppola & Alessandro Olper, 2012. "The Impact of European Union Preferential Policies in the Rice Industry: A Dynamic Panel Gravity Approach," FOODSECURE Working papers 4, LEI Wageningen UR.
    2. Valentina Raimondi & Margherita Scoppola & Alessandro Olper, 2012. "Preference erosion and the developing countries exports to the EU: a dynamic panel gravity approach," Review of World Economics (Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv), Springer;Institut für Weltwirtschaft (Kiel Institute for the World Economy), vol. 148(4), pages 707-732, December.
    3. Bekkers, Eddy & Cariola, Gianmarco, 2022. "The impact of LDC graduation on trade: A quantitative assessment," WTO Staff Working Papers ERSD-2022-5, World Trade Organization (WTO), Economic Research and Statistics Division.
    4. Fugazza, Marco & Nicita, Alessandro, 2011. "Measuring preferential market access," MPRA Paper 38565, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    5. Federica Demaria & Sophie S. Drogue & Marie-Luise Rau, 2015. "EU preferences for agri-food products from developing countries: winning and losing due to the EU GSP reform 2013," Post-Print hal-02796661, HAL.
    6. Kym Anderson, 2016. "Contributions Of The Gatt/Wto To Global Economic Welfare: Empirical Evidence," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 30(1), pages 56-92, February.
    7. Marco Fugazza & Alessandro Nicita, 2011. "On The Importance Of Market Access For Trade," UNCTAD Blue Series Papers 50, United Nations Conference on Trade and Development.
    8. Gnutzmann-Mkrtchyan, Arevik & Volmer, Maximilian, 2022. "EU trade policy reform: towards reciprocal concessions with developing countries," Hannover Economic Papers (HEP) dp-697, Leibniz Universität Hannover, Wirtschaftswissenschaftliche Fakultät.
    9. Marco Fugazza & Claudia Trentini, 2014. "Empirical Insights On Market Access And Foreign Direct Investment," UNCTAD Blue Series Papers 63, United Nations Conference on Trade and Development.
    10. Mia Mikic & Pedro J. Martinez Edo, 2011. "Trade beyond Doha: Prospects for the Asia-Pacific Least Developed Countries," Studies in Trade and Investment 76, United Nations Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific (ESCAP).
    11. Fugazza, Marco & Nicita, Alessandro, 2013. "The direct and relative effects of preferential market access," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 89(2), pages 357-368.

    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. Hoekman. Bernard & Prowse, Susan, 2005. "Economic policy responses to preference erosion : from trade as aid toaid for trade," Policy Research Working Paper Series 3721, The World Bank.
    2. Joseph Francois & Bernard Hoekman & Miriam Manchin, 2006. "Preference Erosion and Multilateral Trade Liberalization," The World Bank Economic Review, World Bank, vol. 20(2), pages 197-216.
    3. Persson, Maria, 2012. "From trade preferences to trade facilitation: Taking stock of the issues," Economics - The Open-Access, Open-Assessment E-Journal (2007-2020), Kiel Institute for the World Economy (IfW Kiel), vol. 6, pages 1-33.
    4. 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.
    5. Low, Patrick & Piermartini, Roberta & Richtering, Jurgen, 2005. "Multilateral solutions to the erosion of non-reciprocal preferences in NAMA," WTO Staff Working Papers ERSD-2005-05, World Trade Organization (WTO), Economic Research and Statistics Division.
    6. Persson, Maria, 2013. "Trade Preferences from a Policy Perspective," Working Papers 2013:3, Lund University, Department of Economics.
    7. Arne Melchior, 2006. "The Most and the Least Favoured Nations: Norway's Trade Policy in Perspective," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 29(10), pages 1329-1346, October.
    8. Emanuel Ornelas, 2016. "Special and Differential Treatment for Developing Countries," CESifo Working Paper Series 5823, CESifo.
    9. Scott McDonald & Terrie Walmsley, 2008. "Bilateral Free Trade Agreements and Customs Unions: The Impact of the EU Republic of South Africa Free Trade Agreement on Botswana," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 31(8), pages 993-1029, August.
    10. S. Sinelnikov-Murylev & A. Radygin & L. Freinkman & N. Glavatskaya (ed.), 2014. "RUSSIAN ECONOMY IN 2013 Trends and Outlooks (Issue 35)," Books, Gaidar Institute for Economic Policy, edition 1, volume 35, number 5, November.
    11. Tovar, Patricia, 2019. "Preferential and multilateral liberalization: Evidence from Latin America’s use of tariffs, antidumping and safeguards," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 141(C).
    12. Harrison, Ann & Rodríguez-Clare, Andrés, 2010. "Trade, Foreign Investment, and Industrial Policy for Developing Countries," Handbook of Development Economics, in: Dani Rodrik & Mark Rosenzweig (ed.), Handbook of Development Economics, edition 1, volume 5, chapter 0, pages 4039-4214, Elsevier.
    13. Annalisa Caloffi & Marco Mariani, 2018. "Regional policy mixes for enterprise and innovation: A fuzzy-set clustering approach," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 36(1), pages 28-46, February.
    14. Wu, Yiyun & Zhu, Xiwei & Groenewold, Nicolaas, 2019. "The determinants and effectiveness of industrial policy in china: A study based on Five-Year Plans," China Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 53(C), pages 225-242.
    15. Baybars Karacaovali & Nuno Limão, 2018. "The clash of liberalizations: Preferential vs. multilateral trade liberalization in the European Union," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Policy Externalities and International Trade Agreements, chapter 14, pages 373-401, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    16. Antoni Estevadeordal & Caroline Freund & Emanuel Ornelas, 2008. "Does Regionalism Affect Trade Liberalization Toward Nonmembers?," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 123(4), pages 1531-1575.
    17. Ingo Borchert, 2009. "Trade diversion under selective preferential market access," Canadian Journal of Economics/Revue canadienne d'économique, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 42(4), pages 1390-1410, November.
    18. Will Martin & Kym Anderson, 2006. "Agricultural Trade Reform and the Doha Development Agenda," World Bank Publications - Books, The World Bank Group, number 6889, December.
    19. Hayakawa, Kazunobu, 2017. "Asymmetric tariff pass-through to trade prices," IDE Discussion Papers 631, Institute of Developing Economies, Japan External Trade Organization(JETRO).
    20. Benhassine, Najy & Raballand, Gaël, 2009. "Beyond ideological cleavages: A unifying framework for industrial policies and other public interventions," Economic Systems, Elsevier, vol. 33(4), pages 293-309, December.

    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:wbpubs:9437. 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: Tal Ayalon (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.