IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/devpol/v38y2020i5p613-629.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A comparative analysis of EU and US trade policies towards least developed countries and the African Growth and Opportunity Act beneficiaries

Author

Listed:
  • Elwyn Davies
  • Lars Nilsson

Abstract

Motivation The European Union (EU) and the US have specific trade preference programmes in place directed towards developing countries in general and, primarily in the case of the EU, towards least developed countries (LDCs) in particular. This article examines the relative merits of these programmes. Purpose The article compares the trade policies of the EU and the US with respect to LDCs and the countries eligible for the US African Growth and Opportunity Act (AGOA) and examines the relative success of the two donors’ trade policies vis‐à‐vis these two groups of beneficiaries in terms of increasing imports from them. Approach and methods Econometric evidence from a gravity model is used to compare the effects of EU and US preferential trade policy on imports from the beneficiary countries. First, regressions are carried out using total EU and US imports as dependent variables and, second, EU and US duty‐free imports are used. Findings The descriptive part of the article shows that (a) a larger share of EU imports benefits from duty‐free MFN tariffs; (b) the EU offers preferences on all imports from the LDCs (except arms and ammunition), while the US extends preferences to three quarters of all imports; (c) EU preferences are better utilized; and (d) the EU imports more goods duty free. The econometric analysis shows that EU trade policy towards the LDCs and the AGOA beneficiaries has generated approximately twice as much in imports as US policy, when imports of mineral fuels are excluded from the analysis. Policy implications EU trade policy is found to outperform US trade policy in terms of generating imports from the LDCs and the AGOA beneficiaries. Hence, if any trade policy ought to be copied by other countries, as suggested by some observers, it should be EU trade policy rather than US trade policy.

Suggested Citation

  • Elwyn Davies & Lars Nilsson, 2020. "A comparative analysis of EU and US trade policies towards least developed countries and the African Growth and Opportunity Act beneficiaries," Development Policy Review, Overseas Development Institute, vol. 38(5), pages 613-629, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:devpol:v:38:y:2020:i:5:p:613-629
    DOI: 10.1111/dpr.12434
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/dpr.12434
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/dpr.12434?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. Nilsson, Lars & Dotter, Caroline, 2012. "Small flows, compliance costs and trade preferences: The case of EU imports from African LDCs," Economics - The Open-Access, Open-Assessment E-Journal (2007-2020), Kiel Institute for the World Economy (IfW Kiel), vol. 6, pages 1-29.
    2. Paul Collier & Anthony J. Venables, 2007. "Rethinking Trade Preferences: How Africa Can Diversify its Exports," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 30(8), pages 1326-1345, August.
    3. Joseph Francois & Bernard Hoekman & Miriam Manchin, 2006. "Preference Erosion and Multilateral Trade Liberalization," The World Bank Economic Review, World Bank, vol. 20(2), pages 197-216.
    4. James E. Anderson & Eric van Wincoop, 2003. "Gravity with Gravitas: A Solution to the Border Puzzle," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 93(1), pages 170-192, March.
    5. Garth Frazer & Johannes Van Biesebroeck, 2010. "Trade Growth under the African Growth and Opportunity Act," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 92(1), pages 128-144, February.
    6. Lars Nilsson, 2011. "Small Trade Flows And Preference Utilisation: The Case Of The European Union," South African Journal of Economics, Economic Society of South Africa, vol. 79(4), pages 392-410, December.
    7. Jon D. Haveman & Howard J. Shatz, 2003. "Developed Country Trade Barriers and the Least Developed Countries: The Economic Results of Freeing Trade," WIDER Working Paper Series DP2003-46, World Institute for Development Economic Research (UNU-WIDER).
    8. Louise Curran & Khalid Nadvi, 2015. "Shifting trade preferences and value chain impacts in the Bangladesh textiles and garment industry," Cambridge Journal of Regions, Economy and Society, Cambridge Political Economy Society, vol. 8(3), pages 459-474.
    9. Dal Didia & Mihai Nica & Geungu Yu, 2015. "The gravity model, African Growth and Opportunity Act (AGOA) and US trade relations with sub-Saharan Africa," The Journal of International Trade & Economic Development, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 24(8), pages 1130-1151, December.
    10. Yves Bourdet & Joakim Gullstrand & Karin Olofsdotter (ed.), 2007. "The European Union and Developing Countries," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 3731.
    11. Gasiorek, Michael & Holmes, Peter & Rollo, Jim & Wang, Zhenkun & Gonzalez, Javier Lopez & Parra, Maximiliano Mendez & Maliszewska, Maryla & Paczynski, Wojtek & Cirera, Xavier & Willenbockel, Dirk & Fo, 2010. "Mid-term Evaluation of the EU’s Generalised System of Preferences," Conference papers 331999, Purdue University, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Global Trade Analysis Project.
    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. Cooke, Edgar F. A., 2012. "Is the impact of AGOA heterogeneous?," MPRA Paper 43277, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    2. Zenebe, Addisalem & Peterson, Wesley & Wamisho, Kassu, 2014. "The Impact of the African Growth and Opportunity Act (AGOA): An Empirical Analysis of Sub-Saharan African Agricultural Exports," 2014 Annual Meeting, July 27-29, 2014, Minneapolis, Minnesota 170590, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    3. Nathaniel P. S. Cook & Jason C. Jones, 2021. "The African Growth and Opportunity Act and growth in sub‐Saharan Africa: A local projection approach," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 44(1), pages 234-261, January.
    4. Emiliano Magrini & Pierluigi Montalbano & Silvia Nenci, 2013. "Are the EU trade preferences really effective? A Generalized Propensity Score evaluation of the Southern Mediterranean Countries' case in agriculture and fishery," Working Papers 2/13, Sapienza University of Rome, DISS.
    5. Gnangnon, Sèna Kimm & Iyer, Harish, 2021. "Effect of Aid for Trade and Foreign Direct Investment Inflows on the Utilization of Unilateral Trade Preferences offered by the QUAD countries," EconStor Preprints 238211, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics.
    6. Kuo‐I Chang & Kazunobu Hayakawa & Nuttawut Laksanapanyakul & Dionisius Narjoko & Ju Hyun Pyun & Francis Quimba, 2022. "Determinants of regional trade agreement utilisation: Evidence from multiple import countries in Asia," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 45(6), pages 1713-1736, June.
    7. Xavier Cirera & Francesca Foliano & Michael Gasiorek, 2016. "The impact of preferences on developing countries’ exports to the European Union: bilateral gravity modelling at the product level," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 50(1), pages 59-102, February.
    8. Nilsson, Lars & Dotter, Caroline, 2012. "Small flows, compliance costs and trade preferences: The case of EU imports from African LDCs," Economics - The Open-Access, Open-Assessment E-Journal (2007-2020), Kiel Institute for the World Economy (IfW Kiel), vol. 6, pages 1-29.
    9. Tobias Sytsma, 2021. "Rules of origin and trade preference utilization among least developed countries," Contemporary Economic Policy, Western Economic Association International, vol. 39(4), pages 701-718, October.
    10. Mullings, Robert & Mahabir, Aruneema, 2018. "Growth by Destination: The Role of Trade in Africa’s Recent Growth Episode," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 102(C), pages 243-261.
    11. Katerina Gradeva & Inmaculada Martínez-Zarzoso, 2016. "Are Trade Preferences more Effective than Aid in Supporting Exports? Evidence from the ‘Everything But Arms’ Preference Scheme," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 39(8), pages 1146-1171, August.
    12. Sylvanus Kwaku Afesorgbor & Kaleb Girma Abreha, 2015. "Preferential Market Access, Foreign Aid and Economic Development," Economics Working Papers 2015-04, Department of Economics and Business Economics, Aarhus University.
    13. Davies, E. & Nilsson, L., 2013. "A comparative analysis of EU and US trade preferences for the LDCs and AGOA beneficiaries," DG TRADE Chief Economist Notes 2013-1, Directorate General for Trade, European Commission.
    14. Souleymane Coulibaly, 2017. "Differentiated Impact of AGOA and EBA on West African Countries," World Bank Publications - Reports 35742, The World Bank Group.
    15. Adagblenya, Barbara Dzidzornu, 2017. "Assessing Ghana’s trade under the African Growth and Opportunity Act (AGOA)," MPRA Paper 84255, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    16. Gideon Ndubuisi & Solomon Owusu, 2021. "How important is GVC participation to export upgrading?," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 44(10), pages 2887-2908, October.
    17. Sytsma, Tobias, 2019. "Rules of Origin Liberalization with Multi-Product Firms: Theory and Evidence from Bangladeshi Apparel Exporters," MPRA Paper 95956, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    18. Kiyoyasu Tanaka, 2021. "The European Union's reform in rules of origin and international trade: Evidence from Cambodia," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 44(10), pages 3025-3050, October.
    19. Koji Kubo, 2014. "Myanmar's non-resource export potential after the lifting of economic sanctions: a gravity model analysis," Asia-Pacific Development Journal, United Nations Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific (ESCAP), vol. 21(1), pages 1-22, June.
    20. Anupa Sharma & Jason Grant & Kathryn Boys, 2021. "Truly Preferential Treatment? Reconsidering the Generalised System of (Trade) Preferences with Competing Suppliers," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 72(2), pages 500-524, June.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:devpol:v:38:y:2020:i:5:p:613-629. 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/odioruk.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.