The Cost of Rich (and Poor) Country Protection to Developing Countries
Preprint
- 1 September 2001
- preprint
- Published by Elsevier in SSRN Electronic Journal
Abstract
This study confirms that substantial barriers to market access will remain in both rich and poor countries following full implementation of the Uruguay Round agreement. The analysis finds that around 40 percent of the costs of these barriers to developing countries arise from barriers to market access in industrial countries, and 60 percent from barriers in developing countries themselves. The results suggest that there would be large gains to almost all regions from a round of negotiations that increased market access in North and South. In Africa, the potential static gains from multilateral reform appear to exceed those from preferential liberalization, without the well-known disadvantages of a preferential approach.Keywords
This publication has 40 references indexed in Scilit:
- Multilateral Liberalization of Services TradePublished by World Scientific Pub Co Pte Ltd ,2013
- Liberalizing tariff-rate quotas: quantifying the effects of enhancing market accessPublished by Cambridge University Press (CUP) ,2004
- Antidumping as Safeguard PolicyPublished by World Bank ,2001
- Multilateral Tariff Liberalisation and the Developing CountriesPublished by Organisation for Economic Co-Operation and Development (OECD) ,2001
- The effects of the United States granting MFN status to VietnamReview of World Economics, 2000
- Implementation of Uruguay Round Commitments: The Development ChallengePublished by World Bank ,1999
- Understanding the Determinants of Structural Change in World Food MarketsAmerican Journal of Agricultural Economics, 1998
- China in 2005: Implications for the Rest of the Wo r l dThe Journal of Economic Integration, 1997
- Asia–Pacific food markets and trade in 2005: a global, economy–wide perspectiveAustralian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, 1997
- Productivity Across Industries and Countries: Time Series Theory and EvidenceThe Review of Economics and Statistics, 1996