IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ecr/col025/4369.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Multilateral rules on competition policy: an overview of the debate

Author

Listed:
  • Paasman, Berend R.

Abstract

Summary Competition policy has become an important topic in the context of the global trade and capital liberalization processes of the past decade. The average tariff rate on imports has decreased substantially and various non-tariff restrictions have been abolished. Barriers to trade erected by private parties have hardly been tackled, however, although these business practices can distort trade and investment flows and lead to conflicts between countries. Competition policy deals with anti-competitive business practices (sometimes called restrictive business practices). Competition laws were first introduced in the United States and later in European countries. Latin American countries have only recently adopted competition laws. The subject is complex and interdisciplinary. It combines the fields of international law, corporate law, industrial organization, innovation policy, transnational corporations, international trade and transport. Competition policy seeks to prevent companies from reducing the efficiency of market mechanisms. It is aimed at keeping firms from forming cartels or monopolies and from abusing a dominant market position and at ensuring that mergers and acquisitions and subjected to proper scrutiny. These practices often limit competition and take away incentives to excel, innovate, reduce prices and improve customer service. Anti-competitive practices mayalso act as trade barriers that distort trade and investment flows. They may reduce gl obal welfare and lead to conf l i ct s between countries. Hence, some sort of international agreement may be necessary to forestall or eliminate these new kinds of trade barriers. Such an agreement could, in addition, take the place of anti-dumping measures and thus avoid their detrimental effects. The United States was the first country to introduce competition policies. The European Union has a supranational system of competition policies that regulate anti-competitive practices, mergers and acquisitions having transborder effects. Competition laws in Latin American countries are relatively new, and their structure and wording resemble those of Western countries. Enforcement activity in these countries has, however, been less than energetic. There have been various unsuccessful attempts in the past to establish a multilateral agreement on competition policy. International organizations such as the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) and the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD) have studied and discussed the topic extensively. UNCTAD has been involved in many competition policy initiatives and has assisted developing countries with the introduction of suitable legislation. In addition, UNCTAD has made available a set of non-binding multilateral rules to control restrictive practices. OECD perceives competition policies as a step towards the creation of contestable markets at the international level. It recommends that all countries adopt competition policies and establish the required enforcement agencies. The OECD countries should cooperate to restrain anti-competitive practices that have effects on more than one country. Currently, competition policies are being discussed in various international organizations. The World Trade Organization (WTO) has a working group that is studying the subject, and some countries even want to establish a multilateral agreement on competition rules. Furthermore, the OECD are also studying the topic and have published several proposals. In Latin America, discussion groups are taking place on the theme. Various subregional groups, including the Southern Common Market (MERCOSUR), Group of Three, the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) and the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) have formed working groups that are examining questions related to competition policy. The topic is also included in the preparatory work for the creation of a Free Trade Area of the Americas (FTAA). The United States does not support a new international agreement on competition policy. Instead, it advocates bilateral agreements whose scope would be confined to cooperation between national competition-policy enforcement agencies. Furthermore, the United States prefers to keep its domestic anti-dumping legislation. The European Union, on the other hand, is more enthusiastic about multilateral rules on competition policy. The European Union would also like other countries to make their courts accessible to foreign firms. The next step would be the adoption of common rules by all countries and international cooperation between enforcement agencies. The developing countries position on multilateral rules governing competition policy is more vague. Before Latin American countries commit themselves to international agreements on competition policy, they should carefully study the issue as it relates to their development needs. On the one hand, it is in their own interest to adopt competition policies. However, there are a number of as yet unanswered questions concerning the impact of competition policies on foreign direct investment. Nevertheless, certain modifications can be made in the legislation to address those concerns. For instance, exemptions for certain practices and sectors might be given. The authority of the enforcement agency might even be extended to such an extent that it could act as a general promoter of economic liberalization. It is sometimes argued that developing countries should adopt more lenient policies in order to build large, competitive domestic enterprises. This probably has a negative overall welfare effect, however, and should be avoided. The final point made in this study is that multilateral negotiations are more in the interest of Latin American countries than bilateral agreements with industrialized countries. This paper reviews the current debate on competition policy. It starts with an introduction to the subject, followed by a short survey of competition policy in the United States, Europe and Latin America. An overview of anti-competitive business practices is then provided. Subsequently, the paper examines the reasons for the adoption of multilateral rules on competition policy. Chapter II describes the different domestic competition policies in the United States, Europe and Latin American countries. The following chapter deals with the rationale for multilateral rules on competition policy and reviews previous attempts to establish multilateral rules, as well as the work of UNCTAD and OECD on competition policies. The current discussions at WTO are outlined in chapter IV, with emphasis on the negotiating positions of the United States, the European Union and developing countries. The paper closes with a discussion of issues that could be important to the formulation of a negotiating position for Latin American and Caribbean countries. It addresses questions such as (1) whether it is favourable or necessary for Latin American countries to adopt domestic competition laws, (2) whether these laws need a specific form (different from the laws in developed countries) to meet their development needs and (3) whether multilateral rules are in the interest of developing countries.

Suggested Citation

  • Paasman, Berend R., 1999. "Multilateral rules on competition policy: an overview of the debate," Comercio Internacional 4369, Naciones Unidas Comisión Económica para América Latina y el Caribe (CEPAL).
  • Handle: RePEc:ecr:col025:4369
    Note: Includes bibliography
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://repositorio.cepal.org/handle/11362/4369
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. -, 1995. "Trade liberalization in the Western Hemisphere," Coediciones, Naciones Unidas Comisión Económica para América Latina y el Caribe (CEPAL), number 1389 edited by Idb.
    2. Larach, María Angélica, 1999. "Las barreras medioambientales a las exportaciones latinoamericanas de camarones," Comercio Internacional 4326, Naciones Unidas Comisión Económica para América Latina y el Caribe (CEPAL).
    3. Gilbert, Christopher L., 1987. "International commodity agreements: Design and performance," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 15(5), pages 591-616, May.
    4. Anonymous, 1948. "International Trade Organization," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 2(3), pages 537-537, September.
    5. Anonymous, 1948. "International Trade Organization," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 2(2), pages 365-373, June.
    6. Hoekman, Bernard & Mavroidis, Petros C, 1994. "Antitrust-based Remedies and Dumping in International Trade," CEPR Discussion Papers 1010, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    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. Kuwayama, Mikio, 2005. "Latin American South-South integration and cooperation: from a regional public goods perspective," Comercio Internacional 4390, Naciones Unidas Comisión Económica para América Latina y el Caribe (CEPAL).
    2. Izam, Miguel, 2003. "Rules of origin and trade facilitation in preferential trade agreements in Latin America," Comercio Internacional 4370, Naciones Unidas Comisión Económica para América Latina y el Caribe (CEPAL).
    3. Pérez Caldentey, Esteban, 2005. "Export promotion policies in CARICOM: main issues, effects and implications," Comercio Internacional 4398, Naciones Unidas Comisión Económica para América Latina y el Caribe (CEPAL).
    4. Marconini, Mario A., 2006. "Services in regional agreements between Latin American and developed countries," Comercio Internacional 4414, Naciones Unidas Comisión Económica para América Latina y el Caribe (CEPAL).
    5. Feinberg, Robert M., 2006. "Exploring the patterns and determinants of U.S. antidumping actions against Latin American imports, 1980-2004," Comercio Internacional 4422, Naciones Unidas Comisión Económica para América Latina y el Caribe (CEPAL).
    6. Sáez, Sebastián, 2005. "Trade in services negotiations: a review of the experience of the United States and the European Union in Latin America," Comercio Internacional 4403, Naciones Unidas Comisión Económica para América Latina y el Caribe (CEPAL).
    7. Kuwayama, Mikio & Durán Lima, José Elías & Silva, Verónica, 2005. "Bilateralism and regionalism: re-establishing the primacy of multilateralism a Latin American and Caribbean perspective," Comercio Internacional 4401, Naciones Unidas Comisión Económica para América Latina y el Caribe (CEPAL).
    8. Sáez, Sebastián, 2005. "Implementing trade policy in Latin America: the cases of Chile and Mexico," Comercio Internacional 4396, Naciones Unidas Comisión Económica para América Latina y el Caribe (CEPAL).
    9. Pizarro, Ramiro, 1999. "Comparative analysis of regionalism in Latin America and Asia-Pacific," Comercio Internacional 4402, Naciones Unidas Comisión Económica para América Latina y el Caribe (CEPAL).
    10. Sáez, Sebastián, 2005. "Trade policy making in Latin America: a compared analysis," Comercio Internacional 4397, Naciones Unidas Comisión Económica para América Latina y el Caribe (CEPAL).

    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. Avidan Kent, 2014. "Implementing the principle of policy integration: institutional interplay and the role of international organizations," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 14(3), pages 203-224, September.
    2. Senti Richard, 2006. "Argumente für und wider die Reziprozität in der WTO – Die Reziprozität als merkantilistisches Erbe in der geltenden Welthandelsordnung / The merits of reciprocity in the WTO," ORDO. Jahrbuch für die Ordnung von Wirtschaft und Gesellschaft, De Gruyter, vol. 57(1), pages 315-340, January.
    3. Ish Puneet Singh, 2009. "Trade and Precaution: Their Progressive Interlace," American Journal of Economics and Business Administration, Science Publications, vol. 1(4), pages 320-333, December.
    4. Ludmila Štěrbová, 2013. "Investment Regulatory Environment and the European Union [Investiční regulatorní prostředí a Evropská unie]," Současná Evropa, Prague University of Economics and Business, vol. 2013(2), pages 67-85.
    5. Paidipaty, Poornima & Ramos Pinto, Pedro, 2021. "Revisiting the “Great Levelling”: the limits of Piketty’s Capital and Ideology for understanding the rise of late 20th century inequality," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 110941, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    6. Irish Maureen, 2011. "Special and Differential Treatment, Trade and Sustainable Development," The Law and Development Review, De Gruyter, vol. 4(2), pages 72-98, February.
    7. F.M. Scherer, 1997. "Competition Policy Convergence: Where Next?," Empirica, Springer;Austrian Institute for Economic Research;Austrian Economic Association, vol. 24(1), pages 5-19, January.
    8. Richard Senti, 1986. "Protektionismus in der grenzüberschreitenden Versicherungstätigkeit," Swiss Journal of Economics and Statistics (SJES), Swiss Society of Economics and Statistics (SSES), vol. 122(III), pages 471-498, September.
    9. Tisdell, Clement A., 2000. "Globalisation and the WTO: Attitudes Expressed by Pressure Groups and by Less Developed Countries," Economics, Ecology and Environment Working Papers 48003, University of Queensland, School of Economics.
    10. Cymbal, W. & Veeman, M.M., 1994. "Canadian Agriculture and GATT: An Economic Analysis of Article XI," Project Report Series 232387, University of Alberta, Department of Resource Economics and Environmental Sociology.
    11. James Scott & Rorden Wilkinson, 2012. "Changing of the guard: expert knowledge and ‘common sense’ in the Doha Development Agenda," Global Development Institute Working Paper Series 16612, GDI, The University of Manchester.
    12. T. N. Srinivasan, 2007. "The Dispute Settlement Mechanism of the WTO: A Brief History and an Evaluation from Economic, Contractarian and Legal Perspectives," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 30(7), pages 1033-1068, July.
    13. Kuwayama, Mikio, 2005. "Latin American South-South integration and cooperation: from a regional public goods perspective," Comercio Internacional 4390, Naciones Unidas Comisión Económica para América Latina y el Caribe (CEPAL).
    14. Karp, Larry & Perloff, Jeffrey M, 1988. "Dynamic Oligopoly: Estimation and Tests of Market Structure," Department of Agricultural & Resource Economics, UC Berkeley, Working Paper Series qt7fk1119n, Department of Agricultural & Resource Economics, UC Berkeley.
    15. Christopher Gilbert & Panos Varangis, 2004. "Globalization and International Commodity Trade with Specific Reference to the West African Cocoa Producers," NBER Chapters, in: Challenges to Globalization: Analyzing the Economics, pages 131-163, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    16. Deaton, Angus & Laroque, Guy, 1996. "Competitive Storage and Commodity Price Dynamics," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 104(5), pages 896-923, October.
    17. Glenn W Harrison & Thomas F Rutherford & David G Tarr, 1997. "Opciones de Política Comercial para Chile: Una Evaluación Cuantitativa," Latin American Journal of Economics-formerly Cuadernos de Economía, Instituto de Economía. Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile., vol. 34(102), pages 101-137.
    18. Van Groenendaal, W. J. H. & Vingerhoets, J. W. A., 1995. "Can international commodity agreements work?," Journal of Policy Modeling, Elsevier, vol. 17(3), pages 257-278, June.
    19. Shaw, Jon & Charlton, Clive & Gibb, Richard, 1998. "The competitive spirit re-awakens the ghost of railway monopoly," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 5(1), pages 37-49, January.
    20. Kuwayama, Mikio & Durán Lima, José Elías & Silva, Verónica, 2005. "Bilateralism and regionalism: re-establishing the primacy of multilateralism a Latin American and Caribbean perspective," Comercio Internacional 4401, Naciones Unidas Comisión Económica para América Latina y el Caribe (CEPAL).

    More about this item

    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:ecr:col025:4369. 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: Biblioteca CEPAL (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/eclaccl.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.