IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/zbw/ieadps/313945.html

Barriers to prosperity: Developing countries and the need for trade liberalisation

Author

Listed:
  • Mohan, Sushil
  • Khorana, Sangeeta
  • Choudhury, Homagni

Abstract

Trade expert Sushil Mohan, in a paper published by the IEA, argues that non-tariff barriers are an important impediment to trade for less developed countries and need to be brought to the forefront of the trade debate.Non-tariff barriers are an important impediment to trade for less developed countries. Such barriers can be very high on both processed and unprocessed agricultural products. These barriers include:EU rules of origin and rules relating to traceability.The combination of these rules with preferential trade agreements which becomes more onerous as the degree of processing increases.Health and safety regulations.Labelling schemes such as fair trade and organic.Environmental standards, such as those relating to palm oil exports.Both export and import procedures imposed by developing countries themselves: for example, exporting in India involves 12 separate processes.Non-tariff barriers need to be brought to the forefront of the trade debate if developing countries are to move into the export of higher value added products.Currently, developing countries have a low share of exports of final processed products which normally have a higher value added than primary agricultural products. For example, developing countries account for 91 per cent of raw coffee exports but only 3 per cent of processed coffee exports.This situation is frequently blamed on developed countries applying trade barriers and escalating tariffs on processed commodities.However, there is little truth in this allegation, at least in relation to the important commodities of coffee, tea and cocoa. However, tariffs barriers do exist in relation to other commodities such as cotton, rice and so on.Not only are tariff barriers close to zero on coffee, tea and cocoa, there is also very little tariff escalation - that is the level of tariffs on processed products is not significantly greater than the level of tariffs on unprocessed products. Japan is the only major exception to this general pattern.On the other hand, tariff barriers between developing countries themselves can be very high. For example, tariffs on roasted coffee are 71 per cent in Mexico and 99 per cent in India. There is, however, little evidence of tariff escalation on trade between developing countries: tariffs are often very high on both processed and unprocessed agricultural products.There may well be important tariff barriers with regard to higher degrees of processing of more complex products (such as chocolate). These are especially prevalent in product lines where there is competition between developed and under-developed countries or where developed countries produce some of the ingredients for these products (for example, milk and sugar for chocolate).Non-tariff barriers are often home grown within developing countries themselves. The experience of trade reform suggests that the benefits from their removal will mainly flow to developing countries. Non-tariff barriers must therefore be a clear priority in future trade policy and in domestic policy making in poor countries.

Suggested Citation

  • Mohan, Sushil & Khorana, Sangeeta & Choudhury, Homagni, 2012. "Barriers to prosperity: Developing countries and the need for trade liberalisation," IEA Discussion Papers 44, Institute of Economic Affairs (IEA).
  • Handle: RePEc:zbw:ieadps:313945
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/313945/1/iea-dp044.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Arvind Panagariya, 2002. "EU Preferential Trade Arrangements and Developing Countries," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 25(10), pages 1415-1432, November.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Salvador Gil-Pareja & Rafael Llorca-Vivero & José Antonio Martínez-Serrano, 2018. "Reciprocal vs nonreciprocal trade agreements: which have been best to promote exports?," Working Papers 1802, Department of Applied Economics II, Universidad de Valencia.
    2. Jagdambe, Subhash & Kannan, Elumalai, 2020. "Effects of ASEAN-India Free Trade Agreement on agricultural trade: The gravity model approach," World Development Perspectives, Elsevier, vol. 19(C).
    3. T. Mesut Eren, 2013. "The Effects and Issues of Turkey's Free Trade Agreements on Its Foreign Trade," Journal of Finance Letters (Maliye ve Finans Yazıları), Maliye ve Finans Yazıları Yayıncılık Ltd. Şti., vol. 28(98), pages 28-47, January.
    4. Bureau, Jean-Christophe & Jean, Sebastien & Matthews, Alan, 2005. "Concessions and Exemptions for Developing Countries in the Agricultural Negotiations: The Role of the Special and Differential Treatment," Working Papers 18858, TRADEAG - Agricultural Trade Agreements.
    5. Anania, Giovanni, 2010. "EU Economic Partnership Agreements and WTO negotiations. A quantitative assessment of trade preference granting and erosion in the banana market," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(2), pages 140-153, April.
    6. Burfisher, Mary E. & Robinson, Sherman & Thierfelder, Karen, 2004. "Regionalism: Old And New, Theory And Practice," MTID Discussion Papers 16137, CGIAR, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    7. Salvador Gil-Pareja & Rafael Llorca-Vivero & José Antonio Martínez-Serrano, 2019. "Reciprocal vs nonreciprocal trade agreements: Which have been best to promote exports?," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(2), pages 1-15, February.
    8. Muhammad, Andrew & Ngeleza, Guyslain K., . "The role of the Generalised System of Preferences (GSP) in determining carnation demand in the United Kingdom: implications for Colombian and Kenyan exports," Agrekon, Agricultural Economics Association of South Africa (AEASA), vol. 48(3), pages 1-16.
    9. Mary E. Burfisher & Sherman Robinson & Karen Thierfelder, 2004. "Regionalism: Old and New, Theory and Practice," Chapters, in: Giovanni Anania & Mary E.. Bohman & Colin A. Carter & Alex F. McCalla (ed.), Agricultural Policy Reform and the WTO, chapter 23, pages 593-622, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    10. Muhammad, Andrew & Ngeleza, Guyslain K., 2009. "European Union preferential trade agreements with developing countries and their impact on Colombian and Kenyan carnation exports to the United Kingdom," IFPRI discussion papers 862, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    11. Arvind Panagariya, 2003. "Aid through Trade: An effective option," International Trade 0308011, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    12. Yongzheng Yang & Mr. Alvin Hilaire, 2003. "The United States and the New Regionalism/ Bilateralism," IMF Working Papers 2003/206, International Monetary Fund.
    13. Winters, Alan, 2003. "Trade Liberalisation and Poverty: What Do We Know?," Conference papers 331162, Purdue University, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Global Trade Analysis Project.
    14. Ayele, Getaneh Mihret, 2021. "The Effect of Everything But Arms Trade Preference on the Exports of Ethiopia: Empirical Evidence Using Gravity Model," Ethiopian Journal of Economics, Ethiopian Economics Association, vol. 30(02), October.
    15. Samuel Admassu, 2019. "An empirical analysis of the trade-creation effect of African regional economic communities," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 56(3), pages 843-863, March.
    16. Wusheng Yu & Trine Vig Jensen, 2005. "Tariff Preferences, WTO Negotiations and the LDCs: The Case of the ‘Everything But Arms’ Initiative," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 28(3), pages 375-405, March.
    17. Emmanuelle Lavallée & Julie Lochard, 2012. "Independence and trade: the specic effects of French colonialism," Post-Print hal-01609942, HAL.
    18. Jose Jaime Baena-Rojas & Susana Herrero-Olarte, 2020. "From Preferential Trade Arrangements to Free Trade Agreements: One of the Downturns of Cooperation in International Relations?," Social Sciences, MDPI, vol. 9(8), pages 1-17, August.
    19. Aziz Elbehri & Thomas Hertel, 2006. "A Comparative Analysis of the EU-Morocco FTA vs. Multilateral Liberalization," Journal of Economic Integration, Center for Economic Integration, Sejong University, vol. 21, pages 496-525.
    20. Yongzheng Yang & Mr. Sanjeev Gupta, 2005. "Regional Trade Arrangements in Africa: Past Performance and the Way Forward," IMF Working Papers 2005/036, International Monetary Fund.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    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:zbw:ieadps:313945. 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: ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ieaaauk.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.