IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/zbw/wtowps/ersd202114.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Services Domestic Regulation - Locking in good regulatory practices: Analyzing the prevalence of Services Domestic Regulation disciplines and their potential linkages with economic performance

Author

Listed:
  • Baiker, Laura
  • Bertola, Elena
  • Jelitto, Markus

Abstract

Services is the fastest-growing sector of today's global economy and trade in services is the most dynamic segment of world trade. However, its potential remains constrained by a variety of barriers: trade costs are estimated to be almost double those in goods, and more than 40% of trade costs are accounted for by regulation-related factors. Regulatory measures related to the permission to supply a service, i.e. those related to licensing and qualifications requirements and procedures, and technical standards, can particularly affect service suppliers' ability to trade. With a view to mitigating the unintended trade-restrictive effects of such measures, since 2017, a group of Members has been negotiating a set of regulatory disciplines in the context of the Joint Initiative on Services Domestic Regulation. Since the launch of negotiations in the Joint Initiative at the margins of the 11th WTO Ministerial Conference, a number of delegations have approached the WTO Secretariat for assistance on assessing to what extent their domestic regulatory regimes are consistent with the disciplines on services domestic regulation that the Joint Initiative has developed ("SDR disciplines"), as well as to understand what potential benefits the implementation of such disciplines might bring to their economies. This Paper expands on the individual assistance provided to WTO Members and has the following three objectives: (i) to examine the prevalence of the SDR disciplines in regional and bilateral trade agreements; (ii) to evaluate to what extent Members have already implemented SDRrelated measures in their national regulatory frameworks; and (iii) to analyze the potential linkages between the application of the SDR disciplines and economic performance. Firstly, based on a sample of 74 agreements concluded by 151 Members, we show that the adoption of domestic regulatory disciplines in trade agreements is a fairly established practice, particularly among "new generation" agreements concluded after 2005. Almost 40% of the Members in our sample, across all income levels and regions, being participants of the Joint Initiative or not, have committed on average to at least half of the SDR disciplines. Secondly, we analyze the level of implementation of the SDR disciplines in national regulatory frameworks using a sample of 86 Members. Not only have Members signed on to the SDR disciplines in their trade agreements, but they have also undertaken substantive regulatory reforms that implement these measures at the national level. We find that more than half of the economies in our sample have implemented in their regulatory regimes at least two thirds of the SDR disciplines under study. Lastly, while our research does not claim to establish causal relationships, we provide initial insights on the potential linkages between the application of the SDR disciplines and various indicators of economic performance, including services value-added, share of services trade, participation in global value chains, and level of entrepreneurship.

Suggested Citation

  • Baiker, Laura & Bertola, Elena & Jelitto, Markus, 2021. "Services Domestic Regulation - Locking in good regulatory practices: Analyzing the prevalence of Services Domestic Regulation disciplines and their potential linkages with economic performance," WTO Staff Working Papers ERSD-2021-14, World Trade Organization (WTO), Economic Research and Statistics Division.
  • Handle: RePEc:zbw:wtowps:ersd202114
    DOI: 10.30875/b7c357b1-en
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/242937/1/1771291788.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.30875/b7c357b1-en?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Gari, Gabriel, 2020. "Recent Preferential Trade Agreements’ Disciplines for Tackling Regulatory Divergence in Services: How Far beyond GATS?," World Trade Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 19(1), pages 1-29, January.
    2. G. M.P. Swann, 2009. "The Economics of Innovation," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 13211.
    3. Klapper, Leora & Laeven, Luc & Rajan, Raghuram, 2006. "Entry regulation as a barrier to entrepreneurship," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 82(3), pages 591-629, December.
    4. Iza Lejárraga & Ben Shepherd, 2013. "Quantitative Evidence on Transparency in Regional Trade Agreements," OECD Trade Policy Papers 153, OECD Publishing.
    5. Philippe Aghion & Richard Blundell & Rachel Griffith & Peter Howitt & Susanne Prantl, 2009. "The Effects of Entry on Incumbent Innovation and Productivity," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 91(1), pages 20-32, February.
    6. Rajan, Raghuram & Laeven, Luc & Klapper, Leora F., 2004. "Business Environment and Firm Entry: Evidence from International Data," CEPR Discussion Papers 4366, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    7. Bruno Casella & Richard Bolwijn & Daniel Moran & Keiichiro Kanemoto, . "Improving the analysis of global value chains: the UNCTAD-Eora Database," UNCTAD Transnational Corporations Journal, United Nations Conference on Trade and Development.
    8. Przemyslaw Kowalski & Javier Lopez Gonzalez & Alexandros Ragoussis & Cristian Ugarte, 2015. "Participation of Developing Countries in Global Value Chains: Implications for Trade and Trade-Related Policies," OECD Trade Policy Papers 179, OECD Publishing.
    9. Lee Branstetter & Francisco Lima & Lowell J. Taylor & Ana Venâncio, 2014. "Do Entry Regulations Deter Entrepreneurship and Job Creation? Evidence from Recent Reforms in Portugal," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 124(577), pages 805-832, June.
    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. Olga Biryukova, 2022. "Joint Initiative on Services Domestic Regulation in the WTO: The Case of Russia," Global Policy, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 13(4), pages 594-605, September.

    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. Amoroso, Sara & Martino, Roberto, 2020. "Regulations and technology gap in Europe: The role of firm dynamics," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 129(C).
    2. Philipp Lergetporer & Jens Ruhose & Lisa Simon, 2018. "Entry Barriers and the Labor Market Outcomes of Incumbent Workers: Evidence from a Deregulation Reform in the German Crafts Sector," CESifo Working Paper Series 7274, CESifo.
    3. Elena Podrecca, 2013. "Riforme del mercato dei prodotti e crescita della produttivit?. Teoria ed evidenza empirica," ECONOMIA E SOCIET? REGIONALE, FrancoAngeli Editore, vol. 0(2), pages 10-41.
    4. Chen, Shaojian & Mao, Hui & Feng, Zongxian, 2020. "Political uncertainty and firm entry: Evidence from Chinese manufacturing industries," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 120(C), pages 16-30.
    5. Miguel García-Posada & Juan Mora-Sanguinetti, 2015. "Entrepreneurship and enforcement institutions: disaggregated evidence for Spain," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 40(1), pages 49-74, August.
    6. Da Rin, Marco & Di Giacomo, Marina & Sembenelli, Alessandro, 2011. "Entrepreneurship, firm entry, and the taxation of corporate income: Evidence from Europe," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 95(9), pages 1048-1066.
    7. repec:hum:wpaper:sfb649dp2009-034 is not listed on IDEAS
    8. Prantl, Susanne & Spitz-Oener, Alexandra, 2009. "How does entry regulation influence entry into self-employment and occupational mobility?," SFB 649 Discussion Papers 2009-034, Humboldt University Berlin, Collaborative Research Center 649: Economic Risk.
    9. Sameeksha Desai & Johan E. Eklund & Emma Lappi, 2020. "Entry Regulation and Persistence of Profits in Incumbent Firms," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 57(3), pages 537-558, November.
    10. Hall, B.H., 2011. "Innovation and productivity," MERIT Working Papers 2011-028, United Nations University - Maastricht Economic and Social Research Institute on Innovation and Technology (MERIT).
    11. Sónia Félix & Chiara Maggi, 2019. "What is the Impact of Increased Business Competition?," IMF Working Papers 2019/276, International Monetary Fund.
    12. Tedi Skiti, 2020. "Institutional entry barriers and spatial technology diffusion: Evidence from the broadband industry," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 41(7), pages 1336-1361, July.
    13. Fabiano Schivardi & Eliana Viviano, 2011. "Entry Barriers in Retail Trade," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 121(551), pages 145-170, March.
    14. Jonathan Munemo, 2018. "Entrepreneurial Success in Africa: How Relevant Are Foreign Direct Investment and Financial Development?," African Development Review, African Development Bank, vol. 30(4), pages 372-385, December.
    15. Davud Rostam-Afschar, 2014. "Entry regulation and entrepreneurship: a natural experiment in German craftsmanship," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 47(3), pages 1067-1101, November.
    16. Cui, Chuantao & Li, Leona Shao-Zhi, 2023. "Trade policy uncertainty and new firm entry: Evidence from China," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 163(C).
    17. Kaku Attah Damoah & Giorgia Giovannetti & Marco Sanfilippo, 2021. "Markup Dispersion and Firm Entry: Evidence from Ethiopia," Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, Department of Economics, University of Oxford, vol. 83(2), pages 299-327, April.
    18. Klapper, Leora & Love, Inessa & Randall, Douglas, 2014. "New firm registration and the business cycle," Policy Research Working Paper Series 6775, The World Bank.
    19. Vujanović, Nina & Radošević, Slavo & Stojčić, Nebojša & Hisarciklilar, Mehtap & Hashi, Iraj, 2022. "FDI spillover effects on innovation activities of knowledge using and knowledge creating firms: Evidence from an emerging economy," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 118(C).
    20. Majumdar, Sumit K., 2015. "Competitor entry impact on jobs and wages in incumbent firms: retrospective evidence from a natural experiment," Business and Politics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 17(2), pages 291-326, August.
    21. Susanne Prantl & Alexandra Spitz‐Oener, 2009. "How does entry regulation influence entry into self‐employment and occupational mobility?1," The Economics of Transition, The European Bank for Reconstruction and Development, vol. 17(4), pages 769-802, October.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    services domestic regulation; trade in services; trade agreements; economic performance;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • F13 - International Economics - - Trade - - - Trade Policy; International Trade Organizations
    • F15 - International Economics - - Trade - - - Economic Integration
    • L8 - Industrial Organization - - Industry Studies: Services
    • K33 - Law and Economics - - Other Substantive Areas of Law - - - International Law

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:wtowps:ersd202114. 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/wtoerch.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.