IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/
MyIDEAS: Login to save this paper or follow this series

WTO and regional trade negotiation outcomes: quantitative assessments of potential implications on Bangladesh

  • Raihan, Selim
  • Razzaque, Mohammad A

Despite being somewhat paradoxical, the world has in recent times witnessed ambitious multilateral trade negotiations along with a proliferation of regional trading blocs. Almost all countries are now involved in both types of trading arrangements, with Bangladesh actively participating in several important trade talks under the World Trade Oganisation (WTO) alongside its commitments to the South Asian Free Trade Area (SAFTA). Different multilateral and regional trade negotiations have, however, different implications. For example, while the liberalisation of global agricultural trade – by reducing subsidies in rich countries and thereby causing prices to rise – will benefit many developing country farmers, it may hurl a formidable challenge for the net food importing countries in ensuring food security for their poor populations. Similarly, WTO negotiations in non-agricultural goods aim at improving market access for many, but for the least developed countries, including Bangladesh, currently enjoying tariff preferences in a large range of products in major markets, the ensuing outcomes could lead to preference erosion, undermining their competitiveness. Regional trading arrangements can also be challenging as they tend to replace global imports with less efficient regional supplies resulting in adverse welfare consequences. Effective trade negotiations partly depend on a priori assessments of possible negotiation outcomes. As such, it is very important to provide the policymakers and trade negotiators with informed inputs on the potential implications of negotiating issues. Since trade negotiations comprise subject matters of conflicting interests – often amongst countries at comparable levels of development that otherwise share and support similar views and positions – only country-specific objective analyses based on appropriate research methods can inform the negotiators in the best possible way. This book is an endeavour in that direction. It focuses on some of the major issues in the on-going multilateral and regional trade negotiations, and employs state-of-the-art analytical tools to empirically assess their likely implications for Bangladesh. While the analyses and results presented would be useful for policymakers and trade negotiators, this volume would also be of interest to trade analysts involved in empirical research.

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://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/38475/1/MPRA_paper_38475.pdf
File Function: original version
Download Restriction: no

Paper provided by University Library of Munich, Germany in its series MPRA Paper with number 38475.

as
in new window

Length:
Date of creation: Jun 2007
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:pra:mprapa:38475
Contact details of provider: Postal: Schackstr. 4, D-80539 Munich, Germany
Phone: +49-(0)89-2180-2219
Fax: +49-(0)89-2180-3900
Web page: http://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de

More information through EDIRC

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. John C. Beghin & David Roland-Holst & Dominique van der Mensbrugghe, 2002. "Global Agricultural Trade and the Doha Round: What are the Implications for North and South?," Food and Agricultural Policy Research Institute (FAPRI) Publications 02-wp308, Food and Agricultural Policy Research Institute (FAPRI) at Iowa State University.
  2. Dimaranan, Betina V. & Hertel, Thomas W. & Keeney, Roman, 2003. "OECD Domestic Support and the Developing Countries," 2003 Annual meeting, July 27-30, Montreal, Canada 22000, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
  3. Francois, Joseph & Hoekman, Bernard & Manchin, Miriam, 2005. "Preference Erosion and Multilateral Trade Liberalization," CEPR Discussion Papers 5153, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
  4. Antoine Bouët & Lionel Fontagné & Sébastien Jean, 2005. "Is Erosion of Tariff Preferences a Serious Concern?," Working Papers 2005-14, CEPII research center.
  5. Roberta Piermartini & Patrick Low & Jurgen Richtering, 2005. "Multilateral Solutions to the Erosion of Non-Reciprocal Preferences in NAMA," Working Papers id:289, eSocialSciences.
  6. Muscatelli, Vito Antonio & Srinivasan, T G & Vines, David, 1990. "The Empirical Modelling of NIE Exports: An Evaluation of Different Approaches," CEPR Discussion Papers 426, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
  7. Debapriya Bhattacharya & Mustafizur Rahman, 2000. "USA Trade and Development Act 2000: A Response from Bangladesh Perspective," CPD Working Paper 6, Centre for Policy Dialogue (CPD).
  8. Prema-chandra Athukorala & J. Reidel, 1993. "Export Growth and Terms of Trade: The Case of the Curious Elasticities," Working Papers 1993.22, School of Economics, La Trobe University.
  9. repec:dgr:uvatin:20030060 is not listed on IDEAS
  10. Hulya Ulku & Tito Cordella, 2004. "Grants Versus Loans," IMF Working Papers 04/161, International Monetary Fund.
  11. Harrison, W Jill & Pearson, K R, 1996. "Computing Solutions for Large General Equilibrium Models Using GEMPACK," Computational Economics, Society for Computational Economics, vol. 9(2), pages 83-127, May.
  12. Riedel, James, 1988. "The Demand for LDC Exports of Manufactures: Estimates from Hong Kong," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 98(389), pages 138-48, March.
  13. Hertel, Thomas W. & Kym Anderson & Joseph Francois & Will Martin, 2002. "Agriculture and Non-Agricultural Liberalization in the Millennium Round," GTAP Working Papers 235, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Department of Agricultural Economics, Purdue University.
  14. Shah, Shekhar & Mishra, Deepak & Panagariya, Arvind, 1996. "Demand elasticities in international trade : are they really low?," Policy Research Working Paper Series 1712, The World Bank.
  15. Debapriya Bhattacharya & Mustafizur Rahman, 2000. "Experience With Implementation Of Wto-Atc And Implications For Bangladesh," CPD Working Paper 7, Centre for Policy Dialogue (CPD).
  16. Muscatelli, Vito Antonio & Stevenson, Andrew A & Montagna, Catia, 1995. "Modeling Aggregate Manufactured Exports for Some Asian Newly Industrialized Economies," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 77(1), pages 147-55, February.
  17. Mustafizur Rahman & Wasel Bin Shadat, 2005. "NAMA Negotiations in the WTO and Preference Erosion: Concerns of Bangladesh and Other Regional LDCs," CPD Working Paper 51, Centre for Policy Dialogue (CPD).
  18. repec:cup:cbooks:9780521462341 is not listed on IDEAS
  19. van Tongeren, Frank W. & van Meijl, Hans, 2006. "Multilateral Trade Liberalisation and Developing Countries: A North-South Perspective on Agriculture and Processing Sectors," 2006 Annual Meeting, August 12-18, 2006, Queensland, Australia 25462, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
  20. Muscatelli, V A & Srinivasan, T G & Vines, D, 1992. "Demand and Supply Factors in the Determination of NIE Exports: A Simultaneous Error-Correction Model for Hong Kong," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 102(415), pages 1467-77, November.
Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

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

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:pra:mprapa:38475. 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: (Ekkehart Schlicht)

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.

This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.