IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/worlde/v28y2005i3p375-405.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Tariff Preferences, WTO Negotiations and the LDCs: The Case of the ‘Everything But Arms’ Initiative

Author

Listed:
  • Wusheng Yu
  • Trine Vig Jensen

Abstract

By assessing the impact of the recently adopted ‘Everything But Arms’ (EBA) initiative of the EU on the Least Developed Countries (LDCs) and by showing how further multilateral trade liberalisations erode the EBA preferences and impact the LDCs, this paper attempts to uncover the LDCs’ difficult positions in the WTO trade negotiations. Due to its limited product coverage and previous preferences granted by the EU, welfare impacts of the EBA on the LDCs are shown to be small and the bulk of these gains are associated with the ‘sensitive’ products that are subject to gradual liberalisations. Moreover, these small gains are likely to disappear if the EU conducts trade policy reforms in fulfilling its WTO obligations, resulting in an actually worse‐off situation for the LDCs. Extending the analysis to a multilateral trade liberalisation scenario reinforces the above results that the LDCs may well lose due to preference erosion and higher world market prices. It concludes that other development assistance measures from developed countries should be made available to the LDCs to ease their dependency on trade preferences and to foster their supply capacities. The LDCs themselves should attempt to integrate the duty and quota‐free market access status contained in the EBA into a binding WTO agreement to secure a stable trading environment. But more importantly, in order to solve the difficulties at the root these countries should actively engage in reforming their own trade policies.

Suggested Citation

  • Wusheng Yu & Trine Vig Jensen, 2005. "Tariff Preferences, WTO Negotiations and the LDCs: The Case of the ‘Everything But Arms’ Initiative," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 28(3), pages 375-405, March.
  • Handle: RePEc:bla:worlde:v:28:y:2005:i:3:p:375-405
    DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-9701.2005.00682.x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9701.2005.00682.x
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/j.1467-9701.2005.00682.x?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. Brenton, Paul, 2003. "Integrating the least developed countries into the world trading system : the current impact of EU preferences under everything but arms," Policy Research Working Paper Series 3018, The World Bank.
    2. Malcolm, Gerard, 1998. "Adjusting Tax Rates in the GTAP Data Base," GTAP Technical Papers 315, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Department of Agricultural Economics, Purdue University.
    3. Elena Ianchovichina & Aaditya Mattoo & Marcelo Olarreaga, 2001. "Unrestricted Market Access for Sub‐Saharan Africa: How Much Is It Worth and Who Pays?," Journal of African Economies, Centre for the Study of African Economies, vol. 10(4), pages 410-432.
    4. Malcolm, Gerard, 1998. "Adjusting Tax Rates In The Gtap Data Base," Technical Papers 28721, Purdue University, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Global Trade Analysis Project.
    5. Arvind Panagariya, 2002. "EU Preferential Trade Arrangements and Developing Countries," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 25(10), pages 1415-1432, November.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. John Asafu‐Adjaye & Renuka Mahadevan, 2009. "Regional Trade Agreements versus Global Trade Liberalisation: Implications for a Small Island Developing State," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 32(3), pages 509-529, March.
    2. Yongzheng Yang, 2005. "Africa in the Doha Round: Dealing with Preference Erosion and Beyond," IMF Policy Discussion Papers 2005/008, International Monetary Fund.
    3. 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.
    4. Anania, Giovanni, 2010. "EU Economic Partnership Agreements and WTO negotiations. A quantitative assessment of trade preference granting and erosion in the banana market," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(2), pages 140-153, April.
    5. Strutt, Anna & Walmsley, Terrie, 2010. "Trade and Sectoral Impacts of the Global Financial Crisis: A Dynamic CGE Analysis," Conference papers 331920, Purdue University, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Global Trade Analysis Project.
    6. Kohnert, Dirk, 2008. "EU-African Economic Relations: Continuing Dominance, Traded for Aid?," GIGA Working Papers 82, GIGA German Institute of Global and Area Studies.

    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. Elbehri, Aziz & Hertel, Thomas, 2006. "A Comparative Analysis of the EU-Morocco FTA vs. Multilateral Liberalization," Journal of Economic Integration, Center for Economic Integration, Sejong University, vol. 21, pages 496-525.
    2. Ianchovichina, Elena, 2004. "Trade policy analysis in the presence of duty drawbacks," Journal of Policy Modeling, Elsevier, vol. 26(3), pages 353-371, April.
    3. Ianchovichina, Elena, 2003. "GTAP-DD: A Model for Analyzing Trade Reforms in the Presence of Duty Drawbacks," GTAP Technical Papers 1192, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Department of Agricultural Economics, Purdue University.
    4. 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.
    5. Ole Boysen & Kirsten Boysen-Urban & Alan Matthews, 2021. "Alternative EU CAP Tools for Stabilising Farm Incomes in the Era of Climate Change," Working Papers 202103, Geary Institute, University College Dublin.
    6. Narayanan, Badri G. & Hertel, Thomas W. & Horridge, J. Mark, 2010. "Disaggregated data and trade policy analysis: The value of linking partial and general equilibrium models," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 27(3), pages 755-766, May.
    7. Boulanger, Pierre & Philippidis, George, 2015. "The EU budget battle: Assessing the trade and welfare impacts of CAP budgetary reform," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 119-130.
    8. Laborde, David & Martin, Will & van der Mensbrugghe, Dominique, 2008. "Implications of the 2008 Doha Draft Agricultural and NAMA Market Access Modalities for Developing Countries," Conference papers 331719, Purdue University, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Global Trade Analysis Project.
    9. Balie, Jean & Strutt, Anna & Nelgen, Signe & Narayanan, 2018. "Infrastructure investments for improved market access in subSaharan Africa: A CGE analysis," African Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, African Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 13(2), June.
    10. De Miguel, Carlos J. & Durán Lima, José Elías & Schuschny, Andrés Ricardo, 2007. "Los acuerdos comerciales de Colombia, Ecuador y Perú con los Estados Unidos: efectos sobre el comercio, la producción y el bienestar," Revista CEPAL, Naciones Unidas Comisión Económica para América Latina y el Caribe (CEPAL), April.
    11. Nielsen, Chantal Pohl & Yu, Wusheng, 2002. "Integration of the International Rice Market: Implications for Trade Liberalization," Conference papers 330992, Purdue University, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Global Trade Analysis Project.
    12. Boysen-Urban, Kirsten & Boysen, Ole & Matthews, Alan & Brockmeier, Martina, 2018. "EU Common Agricultural Policy Post-2020: Exploring the Effects of Safety-Net Policy Instruments," 166th Seminar, August 30-31, 2018, Galway, West of Ireland 276200, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    13. Hertel, Thomas & Hummels, David & Ivanic, Maros & Keeney, Roman, 2007. "How confident can we be of CGE-based assessments of Free Trade Agreements?," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 24(4), pages 611-635, July.
    14. Horridge, Mark & Ferreira-Filho, Joaquim Bento de Souza, 2003. "Linking GTAP to National Models: Some Highlights and a Practical Approach," Conference papers 331115, Purdue University, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Global Trade Analysis Project.
    15. Terrie L. Walmsley & Thomas Hertel & David Hummels, 2014. "Developing a GTAP-based multi-region, input–output framework for supply chain analysis," Chapters, in: Benno Ferrarini & David Hummels (ed.), Asia and Global Production Networks, chapter 2, pages 16-80, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    16. Peter Walkenhorst & Tadashi Yasui, 2004. "Quantitative Assessment of the Benefits of Trade Facilitation," International Trade 0401008, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    17. Hans G. Jensen & Kym Anderson, 2017. "Grain Price Spikes and Beggar-thy-Neighbor Policy Responses: A Global Economywide Analysis," The World Bank Economic Review, World Bank, vol. 31(1), pages 158-175.
    18. Soo Yuen Chong & Jung Hur, 2007. "Overlapping Free Trade Agreements of Singapore-USA-Japan : A Computational Analysis," Trade Working Papers 21931, East Asian Bureau of Economic Research.
    19. Gehlhar, Mark & Wainio, John, 2004. "Feasibility of Reducing Agricultural Protection: Implications for Farm Households," Conference papers 331293, Purdue University, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Global Trade Analysis Project.
    20. Seyoum, Belay, 2006. "US trade preferences and export performance of developing countries: Evidence from the generalized system of preferences," International Business Review, Elsevier, vol. 15(1), pages 68-83, February.

    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:worlde:v:28:y:2005:i:3:p:375-405. 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: http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/journal.asp?ref=0378-5920 .

    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.