PROJECT REPORT ON

World Trade Organization

Submitted to:
Miss. Svati Kalra

Submitted by:
Naina Sharma M.B.A 1ST Sem Roll no.- 32022

Asra Group Of Institute

DECLARATION
I hereby declare that project entitled World Trade Organization. Submitted by me for the award of degree Master Degree Of Business under Punjabi University, Patiala is the original worth conducted by me and the material has neither been copied nor reproduced from any other source. The data provided in the study is correct to the best of knowledge & belief.

NAINA SHARMA

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
No work is considered complete unless the due indebtedness is expressed to all those, who made the work successful. Concentration, dedication, hard work and application are essential but not the only factors to achieve the desired goal. These must be supplemented by guidance , assistance and co-operation of people to make it a success. Every complete successful assignment is the result of many hands joined together. A formal statement of acknowledgement is hardly sufficient to express my gratitude towards the personalities who have helped me to undertake this training. It was really nice experience to work in their guidance and helping me in knowing practical things, which was my main objective, before entering the corporate world. They have provided me an unconditional support during the project work. I am highly thankful to Prof : Svati Kalra for their guidance. They have been constant source of inspiration and

their critical evaluation during our course in the institute has helped me to complete this project properly. Last but not the least it is the grace of Almighty which has lead and guided me all the way in my life to make this work a fruitful one.

World Trade Organization

The World Trade Organization (WTO) is an organization that intends to supervise andliberalize international trade. The organization officially commenced on January 1, 1995 under the Marrakech Agreement, replacing the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT), which commenced in 1948. The organization deals with regulation of trade between participating countries; it provides a framework for negotiating and formalizing trade agreements, and a dispute resolution process aimed at enforcing participants' adherence to WTO agreements which are signed by representatives of member governments and ratified by their parliaments.[4][5] Most of the issues that the WTO focuses on derive from previous trade negotiations, especially from the Uruguay Round (19861994). The organization is currently endeavoring to persist with a trade negotiation called the Doha Development Agenda (or Doha Round), which was launched in 2001 to enhance equitable participation of poorer countries which represent a majority of the world's population. However, the negotiation has been dogged by "disagreement between exporters of agricultural bulk commodities and countries with large numbers of subsistence farmers on the precise terms of a 'special safeguard measure' to protect farmers from surges in imports. At this time, the future of the Doha Round is uncertain."[6] The WTO has 153 members,[7] representing more than 97% of the world's population,[8] and 30 observers, most seeking membership. The WTO is governed by a ministerial conference, meeting every two years; a general council, which implements the conference's policy decisions and is responsible for day-to-day administration; and a director-general, who is appointed by the

ministerial conference. The WTO's headquarters is at the Centre William Rappard, Geneva, Switzerland. The World Trade Organization (WTO) is the only global international organization dealing with the rules of trade between nations. At its heart are the WTO agreements, negotiated and signed by the bulk of the worlds trading nations and ratified in their parliaments. The goal is to help producers of goods and services, exporters, and importers conduct their business.

History
The WTO's predecessor, the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT), was established after World War II in the wake of other new multilateral institutions dedicated to international economic cooperation notably the Bretton Woods institutions known as the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund. A comparable international institution for trade, named theInternational Trade Organization was successfully negotiated. The ITO was to be a United Nations specialized agency and would address not only trade barriers but other issues indirectly related to trade, including employment, investment, restrictive business practices, and commodity agreements. But the ITO treaty was not approved by the U.S. and a few other signatories and never went into effect.[10][11][12] In the absence of an international organization for trade, the GATT would over the years "transform itself" into a de facto international organization.[13]

GATT rounds of negotiations

The GATT was the only multilateral instrument governing international trade from 1945 until the WTO was established in 1995.[14] Despite attempts in the mid 1950s and 1960s to create some form of institutional mechanism for international trade, the GATT continued to operate for almost half a century as a semi-institutionalized multilateral treaty regime on a provisional basis.[15]

From Geneva to Tokyo Seven rounds of negotiations occurred under GATT. The first real GATT trade rounds concentrated on further reducing tariffs. Then, the Kennedy Round in the mid-sixties brought about a GATT anti-dumping Agreement and a section on development. The Tokyo Round during

the seventies was the first major attempt to tackle trade barriers that do not take the form of tariffs, and to improve the system, adopting a series of agreements on non-tariff barriers, which in some cases interpreted existing GATT rules, and in others broke entirely new ground. Because theseplurilateral agreements were not accepted by the full GATT membership, they were often informally called "codes". Several of these codes were amended in the Uruguay Round, and turned into multilateral commitments accepted by all WTO members. Only four remained plurilateral (those on government procurement, bovine meat, civil aircraft and dairy products), but in 1997 WTO members agreed to terminate the bovine meat and dairy agreements, leaving only three.[14]

Uruguay Round

During the Doha Round, the US government blamed Brazil and India for being inflexible, and the EU for impeding agricultural imports.[16] The Ex-President of Brazil, Luiz Incio Lula da

Silva, responded to the criticisms by arguing that progress would only be achieved if the richest countries (especially the US and countries in the EU) make deeper cuts in their agricultural subsidies, and further open their markets for agricultural goods.[17] Well before GATT's 40th anniversary, its members concluded that the GATT system was straining to adapt to a new globalizing world economy.[18][19] In response to the problems identified in the 1982 Ministerial Declaration (structural deficiencies, spill-over impacts of certain countries' policies on world trade GATT could not manage etc.), the eighth GATT round known as the Uruguay Round was launched in September 1986, in Punta del Este, Uruguay.[18] It was the biggest negotiating mandate on trade ever agreed: the talks were going to extend the trading system into several new areas, notably trade in services and intellectual property, and to reform trade in the sensitive sectors of agriculture and textiles; all the original GATT articles were up for review.[19] The Final Act concluding the Uruguay Round and officially establishing the WTO regime was signed April 15, 1994, during the ministerial meeting at Marrakesh, Morocco, and hence is known as the Marrakesh Agreement.[20] The GATT still exists as the WTO's umbrella treaty for trade in goods, updated as a result of the Uruguay Round negotiations (a distinction is made between GATT 1994, the updated parts of GATT, and GATT 1947, the original agreement which is still the heart of GATT 1994).[18] GATT 1994 is not however the only legally binding agreement included via the Final Act at Marrakesh; a long list of about 60 agreements, annexes, decisions and understandings was adopted. The agreements fall into a structure with six main parts:

The Agreement Establishing the WTO Goods and investment the Multilateral Agreements on Trade in Goods including the GATT 1994 and the Trade Related Investment Measures Services the General Agreement on Trade in Services Intellectual property the Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS)

Dispute settlement (DSU) Reviews of governments' trade policies (TPRM)[21]

Ministerial conferences
The topmost decision-making body of the WTO is the Ministerial Conference, which usually meets every two years. It brings together all members of the WTO, all of which are countries or customs unions. The Ministerial Conference can take decisions on all matters under any of the multilateral trade agreements. The inaugural ministerial conference was held in Singapore in 1996. Disagreements between largely developed and developing economies emerged during this conference over four issues initiated by this conference, which led to them being collectively referred to as the "Singapore issues". The second ministerial conference was held in Geneva in Switzerland. The third conferencein Seattle, Washington ended in failure, with massive demonstrations and police and National Guard crowd control efforts drawing worldwide attention. The fourth ministerial conference was held in Doha in the Persian Gulf nation of Qatar. The Doha Development Round was launched at the conference. The conference also approved the joining of China, which became the 143rd member to join. The fifth ministerial conferencewas held in Cancn, Mexico, aiming at forging agreement on the Doha round. An alliance of 22 southern states, the G20 developing nations(led by India, China,[22] Brazil, ASEAN led by the Philippines), resisted demands from the North for agreements on the so-called "Singapore issues" and called for an end to agricultural subsidies within the EU and the US. The talks broke down without progress. The sixth WTO ministerial conference was held in Hong Kong from 1318 December 2005. It was considered vital if the four-year-old Doha Development Agenda negotiations were to move forward sufficiently to conclude the round in 2006. In this meeting, countries agreed to phase out all their agricultural export subsidies by the end of 2013, and terminate any cotton export subsidies by the end of 2006. Further concessions to developing countries included an agreement to introduce duty free, tariff free access for goods from the Least Developed Countries, following the Everything but Arms initiative of the European Union but with up to 3% of tariff lines exempted. Other major issues were left for further negotiation to be completed by the end of 2010. The WTO General Council, on 26 May 2009, agreed to hold a seventh WTO ministerial conference session in Geneva from 30 November-3 December 2009. A statement by chairman Amb. Mario Matusacknowledged that the prime purpose was to remedy a breach of protocol requiring two-yearly "regular" meetings, which had lapsed with the Doha Round failure in 2005, and that the "scaled-down" meeting would not be a negotiating session, but "emphasis will be on transparency and open discussion rather than on small group processes and informal negotiating

structures". The general theme for discussion was "The WTO, the Multilateral Trading System and the Current Global Economic Environment"[23]

Doha Round

The WTO launched the current round of negotiations, the Doha Development Agenda (DDA) or Doha Round, at the fourth ministerial conference in Doha, Qatar in November 2001. The Doha round was to be an ambitious effort to make globalization more inclusive and help the world's poor, particularly by slashing barriers and subsidies in farming.[24] The initial agenda comprised both further trade liberalization and new rule-making, underpinned by commitments to strengthen substantial assistance to developing countries. [25] The negotiations have been highly contentious and agreement has not been reached, despite the intense negotiations at several ministerial conferences and at other sessions. Disagreements still continue over several key areas including agriculture subsidies.[26]

Functions
Among the various functions of the WTO, these are regarded by analysts as the most important:

It oversees the implementation, administration and operation of the covered agreements.[28][29] It provides a forum for negotiations and for settling disputes.[30][31]

Additionally, it is the WTO's duty to review and propagate the national trade policies, and to ensure the coherence and transparency of trade policies through surveillance in global economic policy-making.[29][31] Another priority of the WTO is the assistance of developing, leastdeveloped and low-income countries in transition to adjust to WTO rules and disciplines through technical cooperation and training.[32]

The WTO is also a center of economic research and analysis: regular assessments of the global trade picture in its annual publications and research reports on specific topics are produced by the organization.[33] Finally, the WTO cooperates closely with the two other components of the Bretton Woods system, the IMF and the World Bank.[30]

Principles of the trading system

The WTO establishes a framework for trade policies; it does not define or specify outcomes. That is, it is concerned with setting the rules of the trade policy games.[34] Five principles are of particular importance in understanding both the pre-1994 GATT and the WTO: 1. Non-Discrimination. It has two major components: the most favoured nation (MFN) rule, and the national treatment policy. Both are embedded in the main WTO rules on goods, services, and intellectual property, but their precise scope and nature differ across these areas. The MFN rule requires that a WTO member must apply the same conditions on all trade with other WTO members, i.e. a WTO member has to grant the most favorable conditions under which it allows trade in a certain product type to all other WTO members.[34]"Grant someone a special favour and you have to do the same for all other WTO members."[35] National treatment means that imported goods should be treated no less favorably than domestically produced goods (at least after the foreign goods have entered the market) and was introduced to tackle non-tariff barriers to trade (e.g. technical standards, security standards et al. discriminating against imported goods).[34] 2. Reciprocity. It reflects both a desire to limit the scope of free-riding that may arise because of the MFN rule, and a desire to obtain better access to foreign markets. A related point is that for a nation to negotiate, it is necessary that the gain from doing so be greater than the gain available from unilateral liberalization; reciprocal concessions intend to ensure that such gains will materialise. [36] 3. Binding and enforceable commitments. The tariff commitments made by WTO members in a multilateral trade negotiation and on accession are enumerated in a schedule (list) of concessions. These schedules establish "ceiling bindings": a country can change its bindings, but only after negotiating with its

trading partners, which could mean compensating them for loss of trade. If satisfaction is not obtained, the complaining country may invoke the WTO dispute settlement procedures. [35][36] 4. Transparency. The WTO members are required to publish their trade regulations, to maintain institutions allowing for the review of administrative decisions affecting trade, to respond to requests for information by other members, and to notify changes in trade policies to the WTO. These internal transparency requirements are supplemented and facilitated by periodic country-specific reports (trade policy reviews) through the Trade Policy Review Mechanism (TPRM). [37] The WTO system tries also to improve predictability and stability, discouraging the use of quotas and other measures used to set limits on quantities of imports.[35] 5. Safety valves. In specific circumstances, governments are able to restrict trade. There are three types of provisions in this direction: articles allowing for the use of trade measures to attain noneconomic objectives; articles aimed at ensuring "fair competition"; and provisions permitting intervention in trade for economic reasons.[37] Exceptions to the MFN principle also allow for preferential treatment of developed countries, regional free trade areas and customs unions.[citation needed] 6.National treatment: Treating foreigners and locals equally Imported and locally-produced

goods should be treated equally at least after the foreign goods have entered the market. The same should apply to foreign and domestic services, and to foreign and local trademarks, copyrights and patents. This principle of national treatment (giving others the same treatment as ones own nationals) is also found in all the three main WTO agreements (Article 3 of GATT, Article 17 of GATS and Article 3 of TRIPS), although once again the principle is handled slightly differently in each of these. National treatment only applies once a product, service or item of intellectual property has entered the market. Therefore, charging customs duty on an import is not a violation of national treatment even if locally-produced products are not charged an equivalent tax.

7.Freer trade: gradually, through negotiation back to top

Lowering trade barriers is one of the most obvious means of encouraging trade. The barriers concerned include customs duties (or tariffs) and measures such as import bans or quotas that restrict quantities selectively. From time to time other issues such as red tape and exchange rate policies have also been discussed. Since GATTs creation in 1947-48 there have been eight rounds of trade negotiations. A ninth round, under the Doha Development Agenda, is now underway. At first these focused on lowering tariffs (customs duties) on imported goods. As a result of the negotiations, by the mid-1990s industrial countries tariff rates on industrial goods had fallen steadily to less than 4%.

But by the 1980s, the negotiations had expanded to cover non-tariff barriers on goods, and to the new areas such as services and intellectual property. Opening markets can be beneficial, but it also requires adjustment. The WTO agreements allow countries to introduce changes gradually, through progressive liberalization. Developing countries are usually given longer to fulfil their obligations.

8.Predictability: through binding and transparency back to top

Sometimes, promising not to raise a trade barrier can be as important as lowering one, because the promise gives businesses a clearer view of their future opportunities. With stability and predictability, investment is encouraged, jobs are created and consumers can fully enjoy the benefits of competition choice and lower prices. The multilateral trading system is an attempt by governments to make the business environment stable and predictable.

The Uruguay Round increased bindings Percentages of tariffs bound before and after the 1986-94 talks Before Developed countries Developing countries Transition economies 78 21 73 After 99 73 98

(These are tariff lines, so percentages are not weighted according to trade volume or value)

In the WTO, when countries agree to open their markets for goods or services, they bind their commitments. For goods, these bindings amount to ceilings on customs tariff rates. Sometimes countries tax imports at rates that are lower than the bound rates. Frequently this is the case in developing countries. In developed countries the rates actually charged and the bound rates tend to be the same. A country can change its bindings, but only after negotiating with its trading partners, which could mean compensating them for loss of trade. One of the achievements of

the Uruguay Round of multilateral trade talks was to increase the amount of trade under binding commitments (see table). In agriculture, 100% of products now have bound tariffs. The result of all this: a substantially higher degree of market security for traders and investors. The system tries to improve predictability and stability in other ways as well. One way is to discourage the use of quotas and other measures used to set limits on quantities of imports administering quotas can lead to more red-tape and accusations of unfair play. Another is to make countries trade rules as clear and public (transparent) as possible. Many WTO agreements require governments to disclose their policies and practices publicly within the country or by notifying the WTO. The regular surveillance of national trade policies through the Trade Policy Review Mechanism provides a further means of encouraging transparency both domestically and at the multilateral level.

9.Promoting fair competition back to top The WTO is sometimes described as a free trade institution, but that is not entirely accurate. The system does allow tariffs and, in limited circumstances, other forms of protection. More accurately, it is a system of rules dedicated to open, fair and undistorted competition. The rules on non-discrimination MFN and national treatment are designed to secure fair conditions of trade. So too are those on dumping (exporting at below cost to gain market share) and subsidies. The issues are complex, and the rules try to establish what is fair or unfair, and how governments can respond, in particular by charging additional import duties calculated to compensate for damage caused by unfair trade. Many of the other WTO agreements aim to support fair competition: in agriculture, intellectual property, services, for example. The agreement on government procurement (a plurilateral agreement because it is signed by only a few WTO members) extends

competition rules to purchases by thousands of government entities in many countries. And so on.

10.Encouraging development and economic reform back to top The WTO system contributes to development. On the other hand, developing countries need flexibility in the time they take to implement the systems agreements. And the agreements themselves inherit the earlier provisions of GATT that allow for special assistance and trade concessions for developing countries. Over three quarters of WTO members are developing countries and countries in transition to market economies. During the seven and a half years of the Uruguay Round, over 60 of these countries implemented trade liberalization programmes autonomously. At the same time, developing countries and transition economies were much more active and influential in the Uruguay Round negotiations than in any previous round, and they are even more so in the current Doha Development Agenda. At the end of the Uruguay Round, developing countries were prepared to take on most of the obligations that are required of developed countries. But the agreements did give them transition periods to adjust to the more unfamiliar and, perhaps, difficult WTO provisions

particularly so for the poorest, least-developed countries. A ministerial decision adopted at the end of the round says better-off countries should accelerate implementing market access commitments on goods exported by the least-developed countries, and it seeks increased technical assistance for them. More recently, developed countries have started to allow dutyfree and quota-free imports for almost all products from least-developed countries. On all of this, the WTO and its members are still going through a learning process. The current Doha Development Agenda includes developing countries concerns about the difficulties they face in
implementing the Uruguay Round agreements.

Organizational structure The General Council has multiple bodies which oversee committees in different areas, re the following: Council for Trade in Goods There are 11 committees under the jurisdiction of the Goods Council each with a specific task. All members of the WTO participate in the committees. The Textiles Monitoring Body is separate from the other committees but still under the jurisdiction of Goods Council. The body has its own chairman and only 10 members. The body also has several groups relating to textiles.[38] Council for Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights Information on intellectual property in the WTO, news and official records of the activities of the TRIPS Council, and details of the WTOs work with other international organizations in the field.[39] Council for Trade in Services The Council for Trade in Services operates under the guidance of the General Council and is responsible for overseeing the functioning of the General Agreement on Trade in

Services (GATS). It is open to all WTO members, and can create subsidiary bodies as required.[40] Trade Negotiations Committee The Trade Negotiations Committee (TNC) is the committee that deals with the current trade talks round. The chair is WTOs director-general. The committee is currently tasked with the Doha Development Round.[41] The Service Council has three subsidiary bodies: financial services, domestic regulations, GATS rules and specific commitments.[38] The General council has several different committees, working groups, and working parties.[42] There are committees on the following: Trade and Environment; Trade and Development (Subcommittee on Least-Developed Countries); Regional Trade Agreements; Balance of Payments Restrictions; and Budget, Finance and Administration. There are working parties on the following: Accession. There are working groups on the following: Trade, debt and finance; and Trade and technology transfer.

Decision-making The WTO describes itself as "a rules-based, member-driven organization all decisions are made by the member governments, and the rules are the outcome of negotiations among members".[43] The WTO Agreement foresees votes where consensus cannot be reached, but the practice of consensus dominates the process of decision-making.[44] Richard Harold Steinberg (2002) argues that although the WTO's consensus governance model provides law-based initial bargaining, trading rounds close through power-based bargaining favouring Europe and the U.S., and may not lead to Pareto improvement.[45]

Dispute settlement

In 1994, the WTO members agreed on the Understanding on Rules and Procedures Governing the Settlement of Disputes (DSU) annexed to the "Final Act" signed in Marrakesh in

1994.[46] Dispute settlement is regarded by the WTO as the central pillar of the multilateral trading system, and as a "unique contribution to the stability of the global economy". [47] WTO members have agreed that, if they believe fellow-members are violating trade rules, they will use the multilateral system of settling disputes instead of taking action unilaterally. [48] The operation of the WTO dispute settlement process involves the DSB panels, the Appellate Body, the WTO Secretariat, arbitrators, independent experts and several specialized institutions.[49] Bodies involved in the dispute settlement process, World Trade Organization.

Accession and membership

The process of becoming a WTO member is unique to each applicant country, and the terms of accession are dependent upon the country's stage of economic development and current trade regime.[50] The process takes about five years, on average, but it can last more if the country is less than fully committed to the process or if political issues interfere. [51] As is typical of WTO procedures, an offer of accession is only given once consensus is reached among interested parties.[52]

Accession process

Status of WTO negotiations: members (including dual-representation with the European Union) Draft Working Party Report or Factual Summary adopted Goods and/or Services offers submitted Memorandum on Foreign Trade Regime (FTR) submitted observer, negotiations to start later or no Memorandum on FTR submitted frozen procedures or no negotiations in the last 3 years no official interaction with the WTO

A country wishing to accede to the WTO submits an application to the General Council, and has to describe all aspects of its trade and economic policies that have a bearing on WTO agreements.[53]The application is submitted to the WTO in a memorandum which is examined by a working party open to all interested WTO Members. [52]

After all necessary background information has been acquired, the working party focuses on issues of discrepancy between the WTO rules and the applicant's international and domestic trade policies and laws. The working party determines the terms and conditions of entry into the WTO for the applicant nation, and may consider transitional periods to allow countries some leeway in complying with the WTO rules.[50] The final phase of accession involves bilateral negotiations between the applicant nation and other working party members regarding the concessions and commitments on tariff levels and market access for goods and services. The new member's commitments are to apply equally to all WTO members under normal non-discrimination rules, even though they are negotiated bilaterally.[53] When the bilateral talks conclude, the working party sends to the general council or ministerial conference an accession package, which includes a summary of all the working party meetings, the Protocol of Accession (a draft membership treaty), and lists ("schedules") of the member-tobe's commitments. Once the general council or ministerial conference approves of the terms of accession, the applicant's parliament must ratify the Protocol of Accession before it can become a member.[54]

Members and observers

The WTO has 153 members and 31 observers.[55] In addition to states, the European Union is also a member. WTO members do not have to be full sovereign nation-members. Instead, they must be a customs territory with full autonomy in the conduct of their external commercial relations. Thus Hong Kong (as "Hong Kong, China" since 1997) became a GATT contracting party, and the Republic of China (Taiwan) acceded to the WTO in 2002 as "Separate Customs Territory of Taiwan, Penghu, Kinmen and Matsu" (Chinese Taipei) despite its disputed status.[56] The WTO Secretariat omits the official titles (such as Counselor, First Secretary, Second Secretary and Third Secretary) of the members of Chinese Taipei's Permanent Mission to the WTO, except for the titles of the Permanent Representative and the Deputy Permanent Representative.[57] Russia is the biggest economy outside WTO and after the completion of Russia's accession, Iran would be the biggest economy outside the WTO.[58] With the exception of the Holy See, observers must start accession negotiations within five years of becoming observers. Some international intergovernmental organizations are also granted observer status to WTO bodies.[59] 14 states and 2 territories so far have no official interaction with the WTO.

Agreements

The WTO oversees about 60 different agreements which have the status of international legal texts. Member countries must sign and ratify all WTO agreements on accession. [60] A discussion of some of the most important agreements follows. The Agreement on Agriculture came into effect with the establishment of the WTO at the beginning of 1995. The AoA has three central concepts, or "pillars": domestic support,market access and export subsidies. The General Agreement on Trade in Services was created to extend the multilateral trading system toservice sector, in the same way the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) provides such a system for merchandise trade. The Agreement entered into force in January 1995. The Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights sets down minimum standards for many forms of intellectual property (IP) regulation. It was negotiated at the end of the Uruguay Round of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) in 1994. The Agreement on the Application of Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures also known as the SPS Agreement was negotiated during theUruguay Round of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade, and entered into force with the establishment of the WTO at the beginning of 1995. Under the SPS agreement, the WTO sets constraints on members' policies relating to food safety (bacterial contaminants, pesticides, inspection and labelling) as well as animal and plant health (imported pests and diseases). The Agreement on Technical Barriers to Trade is an international treaty of the World Trade Organization. It was negotiated during the Uruguay Round of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade, and entered into force with the establishment of the WTO at the end of 1994. The object ensures that technical negotiations and standards, as well as testing and certification procedures, do not create unnecessary obstacles to trade".[61] The Agreement on Customs Valuation, formally known as the Agreement on Implementation of Article VII of GATT, prescribes methods of customs valuation that Members are to follow. Chiefly, it adopts the "transaction value" approach. The data show a definite statistical link between freer trade and economic growth. Economic theory points to strong reasons for the link. All countries, including the poorest, have assets human, industrial, natural, financial which they can employ to produce goods and services for their domestic markets or to compete overseas. Economics tells us that we can benefit when these goods and services are traded. Simply put, the principle of comparative advantage says that countries prosper first by taking advantage of their assets in order to concentrate on what they can produce best, and then by trading these products for products that other countries produce best. In other words, liberal trade policies policies that allow the unrestricted flow of goods and services sharpen competition, motivate innovation and breed success. They multiply the rewards that result from producing the best products, with the best design, at the best price. But success in trade is not static. The ability to compete well in particular products can shift from company to company when the market changes or new technologies make cheaper and better products possible. Producers are

encouraged to adapt gradually and in a relatively painless way. They can focus on new products, find a new niche in their current area or expand into new areas. Experience shows that competitiveness can also shift between whole countries. A country that may have enjoyed an advantage because of lower labour costs or because it had good supplies of some natural resources, could also become uncompetitive in some goods or services as its economy develops. However, with the stimulus of an open economy, the country can move on to become competitive in some other goods or services. This is normally a gradual process. Nevertheless, the temptation to ward off the challenge of competitive imports is always present. And richer governments are more likely to yield to the siren call of protectionism, for short term political gain through subsidies, complicated red tape, and hiding behind legitimate policy objectives such as environmental preservation or consumer protection as an excuse to protect producers. Protection ultimately leads to bloated, inefficient producers supplying consumers with outdated, unattractive products. In the end, factories close and jobs are lost despite the protection and subsidies. If other governments around the world pursue the same policies, markets contract and world economic activity is reduced. One of the objectives that governments bring to WTO negotiations is to prevent such a self-defeating and destructive drift into protectionism.

Comparative advantage
World trade and production have accelerated
Both trade and GDP fell in the late 1920s, before bottoming out in 1932. After World War II, both have risen exponentially, most of the time with trade outpacing GDP. (1950 = 100. Trade and GDP: log scale)

This is arguably the single most powerful insight into economics. Suppose country A is better than country B at making automobiles, and country B is better than country A at making bread. It is obvious (the academics would say trivial) that both would benefit if A specialized in automobiles, B specialized in bread and they traded their products. That is a case of absolute advantage. But what if a country is bad at making everything? Will trade drive all producers out of business? The answer, according to Ricardo, is no. The reason is the principle of comparative advantage. It says, countries A and B still stand to benefit from trading with each other even if A is better than B at making everything. If A is much more superior at making automobiles and only slightly superior at making bread, then A should still invest resources in what it does best producing automobiles and export the product to B. B should still invest in what it does best making bread and export that product to A, even if it is not as efficient as A. Both would still benefit from the trade. A country does not have to be best at anything to gain from trade. That is comparative advantage. The theory dates back to classical economist David Ricardo. It is one of the most widely accepted among economists. It is also one of the most misunderstood among non-economists because it is confused with absolute advantage. It is often claimed, for example, that some countries have no comparative advantage in anything. That is virtually impossible.

The GATT years: from Havana to Marrakesh

he WTOs creation on 1 January 1995 marked the biggest reform of international trade since after the Second World War. It also brought to reality in an updated form the failed attempt in 1948 to create an International Trade Organization.
Much of the history of those 47 years was written in Geneva. But it also traces a journey that spanned the continents, from that hesitant start in 1948 in Havana (Cuba), via Annecy (France), Torquay (UK), Tokyo (Japan), Punta del Este (Uruguay), Montreal (Canada), Brussels (Belgium) and finally to Marrakesh (Morocco) in 1994. During that period, the trading system came under GATT, salvaged from the aborted attempt to create the ITO. GATT helped establish a strong and prosperous multilateral trading system that became more and more liberal through rounds of trade negotiations. But by the 1980s the system needed a thorough overhaul. This led to the Uruguay Round, and ultimately to the WTO.

GATT: provisional for almost half a century back to top

From 1948 to 1994, the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) provided the rules for much of world trade and presided over periods that saw some of the highest growth rates in international commerce. It seemed wellestablished, but throughout those 47 years, it was a provisional agreement and organization. The original intention was to create a third institution to handle the trade side of international economic cooperation, joining the two Bretton Woods institutions, the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund. Over 50 countries participated in negotiations to create an International Trade Organization (ITO) as a specialized agency of the United Nations. The draft ITO Charter was ambitious. It extended beyond world trade disciplines, to include rules on employment, commodity agreements, restrictive business practices, international investment, and services. The aim was to create the ITO at a UN Conference on Trade and Employment in Havana, Cuba in 1947. Meanwhile, 15 countries had begun talks in December 1945 to reduce and bind customs tariffs. With the Second World War only recently ended, they wanted to give an early boost to trade liberalization, and to begin to correct the legacy of protectionist measures which remained in place from the early 1930s. This first round of negotiations resulted in a package of trade rules and 45,000 tariff concessions affecting $10 billion of trade, about one fifth of the worlds total. The group had expanded to 23 by the time the deal was signed on 30 October 1947. The tariff concessions came into effect by 30 June 1948 through a Protocol of Provisional Application. And so the new General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade was born, with 23 founding members (officially contracting parties). GATT trade rounds

Year 1947 1949 1951 1956 1960-1961

Place/name Geneva Annecy Torquay Geneva Geneva Dillon Round

Subjects covered Tariffs Tariffs Tariffs Tariffs Tariffs

Countries 23 13 38 26 26

1964-1967

Geneva Kennedy Round

Tariffs and anti-dumping measures

62

1973-1979

Geneva Tokyo Round

Tariffs, non-tariff measures, framework agreements Tariffs, non-tariff measures, rules, services, intellectual property, dispute settlement, textiles, agriculture, creation of WTO, etc

102

1986-1994

Geneva Uruguay Round

123

The 23 were also part of the larger group negotiating the ITO Charter. One of the provisions of GATT says that they should accept some of the trade rules of the draft. This, they believed, should be done swiftly and provisionally in order to protect the value of the tariff concessions they had negotiated. They spelt out how they envisaged the relationship between GATT and the ITO Charter, but they also allowed for the possibility that the ITO might not be created. They were right. The Havana conference began on 21 November 1947, less than a month after GATT was signed. The ITO Charter was finally agreed in Havana in March 1948, but ratification in some national legislatures proved impossible. The most serious opposition was in the US Congress, even though the US government had been one of the driving forces. In 1950, the United States government announced that it would not seek Congressional ratification of the Havana Charter, and the ITO was effectively dead. So, the GATT became the only multilateral instrument governing international trade from 1948 until the WTO was established in 1995. For almost half a century, the GATTs basic legal principles remained much as they were in 1948. There were additions in the form of a section on development added in the 1960s and plurilateral agreements (i.e. with voluntary membership) in the 1970s, and efforts to reduce tariffs further continued. Much of this was achieved through a series of multilateral negotiations known as trade rounds the biggest leaps forward in international trade liberalization have come through these rounds which were held under GATTs auspices. In the early years, the GATT trade rounds concentrated on further reducing tariffs. Then, the Kennedy Round in the mid-sixties brought about a GATT Anti-Dumping Agreement and a section on development. The Tokyo Round during the seventies was the first major attempt to tackle trade barriers that do not take the form of tariffs, and to improve the system. The eighth, the Uruguay Round of 1986-94, was the last and most extensive of all. It led to the WTO and a new set of agreements.

The Tokyo Round: a first try to reform the systemback to top

The Tokyo Round lasted from 1973 to 1979, with 102 countries participating. It continued GATTs efforts to progressively reduce tariffs. The results included an average one-third cut in customs duties in the worlds nine major industrial markets, bringing the average tariff on industrial products down to 4.7%. The tariff reductions, phased in over a period of eight years, involved an element of harmonization the higher the tariff, the larger the cut, proportionally. In other issues, the Tokyo Round had mixed results. It failed to come to grips with the fundamental problems affecting farm trade and also stopped short of providing a modified agreement on safeguards (emergency import measures). Nevertheless, a series of agreements on non-tariff barriers did emerge from the negotiations, in some cases interpreting existing GATT rules, in others breaking entirely new ground. In most cases, only a relatively small number of (mainly industrialized) GATT members subscribed to these agreements and arrangements. Because they were not accepted by the full GATT membership, they were often informally called codes. They were not multilateral, but they were a beginning. Several codes were eventually amended in the Uruguay Round and turned into multilateral commitments accepted by all WTO members. Only four remained plurilateral those on government procurement, bovine meat, civil aircraft and dairy products. In 1997 WTO members agreed to terminate the bovine meat and dairy agreements, leaving only two.

Did GATT succeed

GATT was provisional with a limited field of action, but its success over 47 years in promoting and securing the liberalization of much of world trade is incontestable. Continual reductions in tariffs alone helped spur very high rates of world trade growth during the 1950s and 1960s around 8% a year on average. And the momentum of trade liberalization helped ensure that trade growth consistently out-paced production growth throughout the GATT era, a measure of countries increasing ability to trade with each other and to reap the benefits of trade. The rush of new members during the Uruguay Round demonstrated that the multilateral trading system was recognized as an anchor for development and an instrument of economic and trade reform.

But all was not well. As time passed new problems arose. The Tokyo Round in the 1970s was an attempt to tackle some of these but its achievements were limited. This was a sign of difficult times to come. GATTs success in reducing tariffs to such a low level, combined with a series of economic recessions in the 1970s and early 1980s, drove governments to devise other forms of protection for sectors facing increased foreign competition. High rates of unemployment and constant factory closures led governments in Western Europe and North America to seek bilateral market-sharing arrangements with competitors and to embark on a subsidies race to maintain their holds on agricultural trade. Both these changes undermined GATTs credibility and effectiveness. The problem was not just a deteriorating trade policy environment. By the early 1980s the General Agreement was clearly no longer as relevant to the realities of world trade as it had been in the 1940s. For a start, world trade had become far more complex and important than 40 years before: the globalization of the world economy was underway, trade in services not covered by GATT rules was of major interest to more and more countries, and international investment had expanded. The expansion of services trade was also closely tied to further increases in world merchandise trade. In other respects, GATT had been found wanting. For instance, in agriculture, loopholes in the multilateral system were heavily exploited, and efforts at liberalizing agricultural trade met with little success. In the textiles and clothing sector, an exception to GATTs normal disciplines was negotiated in the 1960s and early 1970s, leading to the Multifibre Arrangement. Even GATTs institutional structure and its dispute settlement system were causing concern. These and other factors convinced GATT members that a new effort to reinforce and extend the multilateral system should be attempted. That effort resulted in the Uruguay Round, the Marrakesh Declaration, and the creation of the WTO.

10 benefits of the WTO trading system

1. The system helps to keep the peace

Sales people are usually reluctant to fight their customers

Peace is partly an outcome of two of the most fundamental principles of the trading system:helping trade to flow smoothly, and providing countries with a constructive and fair outlet for dealing with disputes over trade issues. It is also an outcome of the international confidence and cooperation that the system creates and reinforces. History is littered with examples of trade disputes turning into war. One of the most vivid is the trade war of the 1930s when countries competed to raise trade barriers in order to protect domestic producers and retaliate against each others barriers. This worsened the Great Depression and eventually played a part in the outbreak of World War 2. Two developments immediately after the Second World War helped to avoid a repeat of the pre-war trade tensions. In Europe, international cooperation developed in coal, and in iron and steel. Globally, the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) was created. Both have proved successful, so much so that they are now considerably expanded one has become the European Union, the other the World Trade Organization (WTO).

How does this work?

Crudely put, sales people are usually reluctant to fight their customers. In other words, if trade flows smoothly and both sides enjoy a healthy commercial relationship, political conflict is less likely.

Whats more, smoothly-flowing trade also helps people all over the world become better off. People who are more prosperous and contented are also less likely to fight. But that is not all. The GATT/WTO system is an important confidence-builder. The trade wars in the 1930s are proof of how protectionism can easily plunge countries into a situation where no one wins and everyone loses. The short-sighted protectionist view is that defending particular sectors against imports is beneficial. But that view ignores how other countries are going to respond. The longer term reality is that one protectionist step by one country can easily lead to retaliation from other countries, a loss of confidence in freer trade, and a slide into serious economic trouble for all including the sectors that were originally protected. Everyone loses. Confidence is the key to avoiding that kind of no-win scenario. When governments are confident that others will not raise their trade barriers, they will not be tempted to do the same. They will also be in a much better frame of mind to cooperate with each other. The WTO trading system plays a vital role in creating and reinforcing that confidence. Particularly important are negotiations that lead to agreement by consensus, and a focus on abiding by the rules.

2. The system allows disputes to be handled constructively As trade expands in volume, in the number of products traded, and in the numbers of countries and companies trading, there is a greater chance that disputes will arise. The WTO system helps resolve these disputes peacefully and constructively.

Countries in dispute always aim to conform with the agreements

There could be a down side to trade liberalization and expansion. More trade means more possibilities for disputes to arise. Left to themselves, those disputes could lead to serious conflict. But in reality, a lot of international trade tension is reduced because countries can turn to organizations, in particular the WTO, to settle their trade disputes. Before World War 2 that option was not available. After the war, the worlds community of trading nations negotiated trade rules which are now entrusted to the WTO. Those rules include an obligation for members to bring their disputes to the WTO and not to act unilaterally. When they bring disputes to the WTO, the WTOs procedure focuses their attention on the rules. Once a ruling has been made, countries concentrate on trying to comply with the rules, and perhaps later renegotiating the rules not on declaring war on each other. Around 300 disputes have been brought to the WTO since it was set up in 1995. Without a means of tackling these constructively and harmoniously, some could have led to more serious political conflict. The fact that the disputes are based on WTO agreements means that there is a clear basis for judging who is right or wrong. Once the judgement has been made, the agreements provide the focus for any further actions that need to be taken. The increasing number of disputes brought to GATT and its successor, the WTO, does not reflect increasing tension in the world. Rather, it reflects the closer economic ties throughout the world, the GATT/WTOs expanding membership and the fact that countries have faith in the system to solve their differences.

Sometimes the exchanges between the countries in conflict can be acrimonious, but they always aim to conform with the agreements and commitments that they themselves negotiated.

3. A system based on rules rather than power makes life easier for all The WTO cannot claim to make all countries equal. But it does reduce some inequalities, giving smaller countries more voice, and at the same time freeing the major powers from the complexity of having to negotiate trade agreements with each of their numerous trading partners.
Smaller countries enjoy more bargaining power, and life is simpler for bigger countries

Decisions in the WTO are made by consensus. The WTO agreements were negotiated by all members, were approved by consensus and were ratified in all members parliaments. The agreements apply to everyone. Rich and poor countries alike have an equal right to challenge each other in the WTOs dispute settlement procedures. This makes life easier for all, in several different ways. Smaller countries can enjoy some increased bargaining power. Without a multilateral regime such as the WTOs system, the more powerful countries would be freer to impose their will unilaterally on their smaller trading partners. Smaller countries would have to deal with each of the major economic powers individually, and would be much less able to resist unwanted pressure. In addition, smaller countries can perform more effectively if they make use of the opportunities to form alliances and to pool resources. Several are already doing this. There are matching benefits for larger countries. The major economic powers can use the single forum of the WTO to negotiate with all or most of their trading partners at the same time. This makes life much simpler for the bigger trading countries. The alternative would be continuous and complicated bilateral negotiations with dozens of countries simultaneously. And each country could end up with different conditions for trading with each of its trading partners, making life extremely complicated for its importers and exporters. The principle of non-discrimination built into the WTO agreements avoids that complexity. The fact that there is a single set of rules applying to all members greatly simplifies the entire trade regime. And these agreed rules give governments a clearer view of which trade policies are acceptable.

4. Freer trade cuts the cost of living We are all consumers. The prices we pay for our food and clothing, our necessities and luxuries, and everything else in between, are affected by trade policies.

According to one calculation, consumers and governments in rich countries pay $350 billion per year supporting agriculture enough to fly their 41 million dairy cows first class around the world one and a half times

Protectionism is expensive: it raises prices. The WTOs global system lowers trade barriers through negotiation and applies the principle of non-discrimination. The result is reduced costs of production (because imports used in production are cheaper) and reduced prices of finished goods and services, and ultimately a lower cost of living. There are plenty of studies showing just what the impacts of protectionism and of freer trade are. These are just a few figures: Food is cheaper When you protect your agriculture, the cost of your food goes up by an estimated $1,500 per year for a family of four in the European Union (1997); by the equivalent of a 51% tax on food in Japan (1995); by $3 billion per year added to US consumers grocery bills just to support sugar in one year (1988). Negotiating agricultural trade reform is a complex undertaking. Governments are still debating the roles agricultural policies play in a range of issues from food security to environmental protection. But WTO members are now reducing the subsidies and the trade barriers that are the worst offenders. And in 2000, new talks started on continuing the reform in agriculture. These have now been incorporated into a broader work programme, the Doha Development Agenda, launched at the fourth WTO Ministerial Conference in Doha, Qatar, in November 2001.

Clothes are cheaper Import restrictions and high customs duties combined to raise US textiles and clothing prices by 58% in the late 1980s. UK consumers pay an estimated 500 million more per year for their clothing because of these restrictions. For Canadians the bill is around C$780 million. For Australians it would be A$300 annually per average family if Australian customs duties had not been reduced in the late 1980s and early 1990s. The textiles and clothing trade is going through a major reform under the WTO that will be completed in 2005. The programme includes eliminating restrictions on quantities of imports.

If customs duties were also to be eliminated, economists calculate the result could be a gain to the world of around $23 billion, including $12.3 billion for the US, $0.8 billion for Canada, $2.2 billion for the EU and around $8 billion for developing countries. The same goes for other goods When the US limited Japanese car imports in the early 1980s, car prices rose by 41% between 1981 and 1984 nearly double the average for all consumer products. The objective was to save American jobs, but the higher prices were an important reason why one million fewer new cars were sold, leading to more job losses. If Australia had kept its tariffs at 1998 levels, Australian customers would pay on average A$2,900 more per car today. In 1995, aluminium users in the EU paid an extra $472 million due to tariff barriers. One of the objectives of the Doha Development Agenda (DDA) is another round of cuts in tariffs on industrial products, i.e. manufactured and mining products. Some economists, Robert Stern, Alan Deardorff and Drusilla Brown, predict that cutting these by one third would raise developing countries income by around $52 billion. and services Liberalization in telephone services is making phone calls cheaper in the 1990s by 4% per year in developing countries and 2% per year in industrial countries, taking inflation into account. In China, competition from a second mobile phone company was at least part of the reason for a 30% cut in the price of a call. In Ghana the cut was 50%. The group of economists led by Robert Stern estimates that lowering services barriers by one third under the Doha Development Agenda would raise developing countries incomes by around $60 billion. And so it goes on. The system now entrusted to the WTO has been in place for over 50 years. In that time there have been eight major rounds of trade negotiations. Trade barriers around the world are lower than they have ever been in modern trading history. They continue to fall, and we are all benefiting.

5. It gives consumers more choice, and a broader range of

qualities to choose from
Think of all the things we can now have because we can import them: fruits and vegetables out of season, foods, clothing and other products that used to be considered exotic, cut flowers from any part of the world, all sorts of household goods, books, music, movies, and so on.

Life with ... ... and without imports

Think also of the things people in other countries can have because they buy exports from us and elsewhere. Look around and consider all the things that would disappear if all our imports were taken away from us. Imports allow us more choice both more goods and services to choose from, and a wider range of qualities. Even the quality of locally-produced goods can improve because of the competition from imports. The wider choice isnt simply a question of consumers buying foreign finished products. Imports are used as materials, components and equipment for local production. This expands the range of final products and services that are made by domestic producers, and it increases the range of technologies they can use. When mobile telephone equipment became available, services sprang up even in the countries that did not make the equipment, for example. Sometimes, the success of an imported product or service on the domestic market can also encourage new local producers to compete, increasing the choice of brands available to consumers as well as increasing the range of goods and services produced locally. If trade allows us to import more, it also allows others to buy more of our exports. It increases our incomes, providing us with the means of enjoying the increased choice.

6. Trade raises incomes

Lowering trade barriers allows trade to increase, which adds to incomes national incomes and personal incomes. But some adjustment is necessary.

The fact that there is additional income means that resources are available for governments to redistribute

The WTOs own estimates for the impact of the 1994 Uruguay Round trade deal were between $109 billion and $510 billion added to world income (depending on the assumptions of the calculations and allowing for margins of error). More recent research has produced similar figures. Economists estimate that cutting trade barriers in agriculture, manufacturing and services by one third would boost the world economy by $613 billion equivalent to adding an economy the size of Canada to the world economy. In Europe, the EU Commission calculates that over 198993 EU incomes increased by 1.11.5% more than they would have done without the Single Market. So trade clearly boosts incomes. Trade also poses challenges as domestic producers face competition from imports. But the fact that there is additional income means that resources are available for governments to redistribute the benefits from those who gain the most for example to help companies and workers adapt by becoming more productive and competitive in what they were already doing, or by switching to new activities.

7. Trade stimulates economic growth, and that can be good news for employment Trade clearly has the potential to create jobs. In practice there is often factual evidence that lower trade barriers have been good for employment. But the picture is complicated by a number of factors. Nevertheless, the alternative protectionism is not the way to tackle employment problems.

Careful policy-making harnesses the job-creation powers of freer trade

This is a difficult subject to tackle in simple terms. There is strong evidence that trade boosts economic growth, and that economic growth means more jobs. It is also true that some jobs are lost even when trade is expanding. But a reliable analysis of this poses at least two problems. First, there are other factors at play. For example, technological advance has also had a strong impact on employment and productivity, benefiting some jobs, hurting others. Second, while trade clearly boosts national income (and prosperity), this is not always translated into new employment for workers who lost their jobs as a result of competition from imports. The picture is not the same all over the world. The average length of time a worker takes to find a new job can be much longer in one country than for a similar worker in another country experiencing similar conditions. In other words, some countries are better at making the adjustment than others. This is partly because some countries have more effective adjustment policies. Those without effective policies are missing an opportunity. There are many instances where the facts show that the opportunity has been grasped where freer trade has been healthy for employment. The EU Commission calculates that the creation of its Single Market means that there

are somewhere in the range of 300,000900,000 more jobs than there would be without the Single Market. Often, job prospects are better in companies involved in trade. In the United States, 12 million people owe their jobs to exports; 1.3 million of those jobs were created between 1994 and 1998. And those jobs tend to be better-paid with better security. In Mexico, the best jobs are those related to export activities: sectors which export 60 per cent or more of their production, pay wages 39% higher than the rest of the economy and maquiladora (in-bond assembly) plants pay 3.5 times the Mexican minimum wage. The facts also show how protectionism hurts employment. The example of the US car industry has already been mentioned: trade barriers designed to protect US jobs by restricting imports from Japan ended up making cars more expensive in the US, so fewer cars were sold and jobs were lost. In other words, an attempt to tackle a problem in the short term by restricting trade turned into a bigger problem in the longer term. Even when a country has difficulty making adjustments, the alternative of protectionism would simply make matters worse.

8. The basic principles make the system economically more efficient, and they cut costs Many of the benefits of the trading system are more difficult to summarize in numbers, but they are still important. They are the result of essential principles at the heart of the system, and they make life simpler for the enterprises directly involved in trade and for the producers of goods and services.

Discrimination complicates trade

Trade allows a division of labour between countries. It allows resources to be used more appropriately and effectively for production. But the WTOs trading system offers more than that. It helps to increase efficiency and to cut costs even more because of important principles enshrined in the system. Imagine a situation where each country sets different rules and different customs duty rates for imports coming from different trading partners. Imagine that a company in one country wants to import raw materials or components copper for wiring or printed circuit boards for electrical goods, for example for its own production. It would not be enough for this company to look at the prices offered by suppliers around the world. The company would also have to make separate calculations about the different duty rates it would be charged on the imports (which would depend on where the imports came from), and it would have to study each of the regulations that apply to products from each country. Buying some copper or circuit boards would become very complicated. That, in simple terms, is one of the problems of discrimination. Imagine now that the government announces it will charge the same duty rates on imports from all countries, and it will use the same regulations for all products, no matter where they come from, whether imported or locally produced. Life for the company would be much simpler. Sourcing components would become more efficient and would cost less. Non-discrimination is just one of the key principles of the WTOs trading system. Others include: transparency (clear information about policies, rules and regulations); increased certainty about trading conditions (commitments to lower trade barriers and to increase other countries access to ones markets are legally binding); simplification and standardization of customs procedure, removal of red tape, centralized databases of information, and other measures designed to simplify trade that come under the heading tradefacilitation. Together, they make trading simpler, cutting companies costs and increasing confidence in the future. That in turn also means more jobs and better goods and services for consumers.

Discrimination complicates trade

Trade allows a division of labour between countries. It allows resources to be used more appropriately and effectively for production. But the WTOs trading system offers more than that. It helps to increase efficiency and to cut costs even more because of important principles enshrined in the system. Imagine a situation where each country sets different rules and different customs duty rates for imports coming from different trading partners. Imagine that a company in one country wants to import raw materials or components copper for wiring or printed circuit boards for electrical goods, for example for its own production. It would not be enough for this company to look at the prices offered by suppliers around the world. The company would also have to make separate calculations about the different duty rates it would be charged on the imports (which would depend on where the imports came from), and it would have to study each of the regulations that apply to products from each country. Buying some copper or circuit boards would become very complicated. That, in simple terms, is one of the problems of discrimination. Imagine now that the government announces it will charge the same duty rates on imports from all countries, and it will use the same regulations for all products, no matter where they come from, whether imported or locally produced. Life for the company would be much simpler. Sourcing components would become more efficient and would cost less. Non-discrimination is just one of the key principles of the WTOs trading system. Others include: transparency (clear information about policies, rules and regulations); increased certainty about trading conditions (commitments to lower trade barriers and to increase other countries access to ones markets are legally binding); simplification and standardization of customs procedure, removal of red tape, centralized databases of information, and other measures designed to simplify trade that come under the heading tradefacilitation. Together, they make trading simpler, cutting companies costs and increasing confidence in the future. That in turn also means more jobs and better goods and services for consumers.

9. The system shields governments from narrow interests

The GATT-WTO system which evolved in the second half of the 20th Century helps governments take a more balanced view of trade policy. Governments are better-placed to defend themselves against lobbying from narrow interest groups by focusing on trade-offs that are made in the interests of everyone in the economy.

Governments are better placed to ward off powerful lobbies

One of the lessons of the protectionism that dominated the early decades of the 20th Century was the damage that can be caused if narrow sectoral interests gain an unbalanced share of political influence. The result was increasingly restrictive policy which turned into a trade war that no one won and everyone lost. Superficially, restricting imports looks like an effective way of supporting an economic sector. But it biases the economy against other sectors which shouldnt be penalized if you protect your clothing industry, everyone else has to pay for more expensive clothes, which puts pressure on wages in all sectors, for example. Protectionism can also escalate as other countries retaliate by raising their own trade barriers. Thats exactly what happened in the 1920s and 30s with disastrous effects. Even the sectors demanding protection ended up losing. Governments need to be armed against pressure from narrow interest groups, and the WTO system can help. The GATT-WTO system covers a wide range of sectors. So, if during a GATT-WTO trade negotiation one pressure group lobbies its government to be considered as a special case in need of protection, the government can reject the protectionist pressure by arguing that it needs a broad-ranging agreement that will benefit all sectors of the economy. Governments do just that, regularly.

10. The system encourages good government

Under WTO rules, once a commitment has been made to liberalize a sector of trade, it is difficult to reverse. The rules also discourage a range of unwise policies. For businesses, that means greater certainty and clarity about trading conditions. For governments it can often mean good discipline.

The rules reduce opportunities for corruption

The rules include commitments not to backslide into unwise policies. Protectionism in general is unwise because of the damage it causes domestically and internationally, as we have already seen. Particular types of trade barriers cause additional damage because they provide opportunities for corruption and other forms of bad government. One kind of trade barrier that the WTOs rules try to tackle is the quota, for example restricting imports or exports to no more than a specific amount each year. Because quotas limit supply, they artificially raise prices, creating abnormally large profits (economists talk about quota rent). That profit can be used to influence policies because more money is available for lobbying. It can also provide opportunities for corruption, for example in the allocation of quotas among traders. There are plenty of cases where that has happened around the world. In other words, quotas are a particularly bad way of restricting trade. Governments have agreed through the WTOs rules that their use should be discouraged.

Nevertheless, quotas of various types remain in use in most countries, and governments argue strongly that they are needed. But they are controlled by WTO agreements and there are commitments to reduce or eliminate many of them, particularly in textiles. Many other areas of the WTOs agreements can also help reduce corruption and bad government. Transparency (such as making available to the public all information on trade regulations), other aspects of trade facilitation, clearer criteria for regulations dealing with the safety and standards of products, and nondiscrimination also help by reducing the scope for arbitrary decision-making and cheating. Quite often, governments use the WTO as a welcome external constraint on their policies: we cant do this because it would violate the WTO agreements.

Bibl iograp hy
Acheson, K. and Maule, C. (2001) Much Ado about Culture; North American Trade Disputes, University of Michigan Press. Acs, Z. J., Audretsch, D. and Feldman, M.P. (1994) R&D Spillovers and Recipient Firm Size, Review of Economics and Statistics 100, 1: 336-367. Adams, R. H. (2000) Self-Targeted Subsidies: The Distributional Impact Of the Egyptian Food Subsidy System, mimeo, Washington, DC: World Bank. Agosin, M. (2002) Export performance in Chile: lessons for Africa, in Helleiner, G.K. (ed) Non traditional export promotion in Africa Experience and Issues, Helsinki: UNU/WIDER and London: Palgrave. Ahmed, A. U., Rashid, S., Sharma, M. and Zohir, S. (2004) Food Aid Distribution in Bangladesh: Leakage and Operational Performance, Food Consumption and Nutrition Division (FCND) Discussion Paper No. 173, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPR I), Washington, D.C.: IFPR I. Available online http://www.ifpri. org/divs/fcnd/dp/papers/fcndp173.pdf. Accessed 02/03/2006. Aitken, B., Hanson, G. and Harrison, A. (1997) Spillovers, Foreign Investment and Export Behaviour, Journal of International Economics 4 (1-2): 103-132. Alesina, A. and Angeletos, G. (2005) Fairness and Redistribution, American Economic Review 95, 4: 960-980. Alston, J. M., Smith, V. H., Acquaye, A. and Hosseini, S. (1999) Least-cost cheap-food policies: some implications of international food aid, Agricultural Economics 20: 191-201.