Fourth Report to Congress on the Operation of the Caribbean Basin Economic Recovery Act

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Fourth Report to Congress on the Operation of the Caribbean Basin Economic Recovery Act Antigua and Barbuda Aruba Bahamas Barbados Belize British Virgin Islands Costa Rica Dominica Dominican Republic El Salvador Grenada Guatemala Guyana Haiti Honduras Jamaica Montserrat Netherlands Antilles Nicaragua Panama St. Kitts and Nevis Saint Lucia Saint Vincent and the Grenadines Trinidad and Tobago Antigua and Barbuda Aruba Bahamas Barbados Belize British Virgin Islands Costa Rica Dominica Dominican Republic El Salvador Grenada Guatemala Guyana Haiti Honduras Jamaica Montserrat Netherlands Antilles Nicaragua Panama St. Kitts and Nevis Saint Lucia Saint Vincent and the Grenadines Trinidad and Tobago Antigua and Barbuda Aruba Bahamas Barbados Belize British Virgin Islands Costa Rica Dominica Dominican Republic El Salvador Grenada Guatemala Guyana Haiti Honduras Jamaica Montserrat Netherlands Antilles Nicaragua Panama St. Kitts and Nevis Saint Lucia Saint Vincent and the Grenadines Trinidad and Tobago Antigua and Barbuda Aruba Bahamas Barbados Belize British Virgin Islands Costa Rica Dominica Dominican Republic El Salvador Grenada Guatemala Guyana Haiti Honduras Jamaica Montserrat Netherlands Antilles Nicaragua Panama St. Kitts and Nevis Saint Lucia Saint Vincent and the GrenadinesFourth Trinidad Report and Tobago Antiguato Congress and Barbuda Aruba onBahamas the Barbados Belize British VirginOperation Islands Costa Rica Dominica of the Dominican Caribbean Republic El Salvador Basin Grenada Guatemala Guyana Haiti Honduras Jamaica Montserrat Netherlands Antilles Nicaragua Panama St. Kitts and Nevis Saint Lucia Saint EconomicVincent and the Grenadines Recovery Trinidad and TobagoAct Antigua and Barbuda Aruba Bahamas Barbados Belize British Virgin Islands Costa Rica Dominica Dominican Republic El DECEMBER 31, 2001 Salvador Grenada Guatemala Guyana Haiti Honduras Jamaica Montserrat Netherlands Antilles Nicaragua PanamaPrepared St. byKitts the and Office Nevis ofSaint the Lucia United Saint States Vincent Trade and theRepresentative Grenadines Trinidad and Tobago Antigua and Barbuda Aruba Bahamas Barbados Belize British Virgin Islands Costa Rica Dominica Dominican Republic El Salvador Grenada Guatemala Guyana Haiti Honduras Jamaica Montserrat Netherlands Antilles Nicaragua Panama St. Kitts and Nevis Saint Lucia Saint Vincent and the Grenadines Trinidad and Tobago Antigua and Barbuda Aruba Bahamas Barbados Belize British Virgin Islands Costa Rica Dominica Dominican Republic El Salvador Grenada Guatemala Guyana Haiti Honduras Jamaica Montserrat Netherlands Antilles Nicaragua Panama St. Kitts and Nevis Saint Lucia Saint Vincent and the Grenadines Trinidad and Tobago Antigua and Barbuda Aruba Bahamas Barbados Belize British Virgin Islands Costa Rica Dominica Dominican Republic El Salvador Grenada Guatemala Guyana Haiti Honduras Jamaica Montserrat Netherlands Antilles Nicaragua Panama St. Kitts and Nevis Saint Lucia Saint Vincent and the Grenadines Trinidad and Tobago Antigua and Barbuda Aruba Bahamas Barbados Belize British Virgin Islands Costa Rica Dominica Dominican Republic El Salvador Grenada Guatemala Guyana Haiti Honduras Jamaica Montserrat Netherlands Antilles Nicaragua Panama St. Kitts and Nevis Saint Lucia Saint Vincent and the Grenadines Trinidad and Tobago Antigua and Barbuda Aruba Bahamas Barbados Belize Table of Contents Executive Summary ...........................................................1 Introduction ..................................................................3 Chapter 1 – Description of the Caribbean Basin Initiative .............................4 Key Product Eligibility Provisions .............................................4 Beneficiary Countries ......................................................5 Safeguard Provisions ......................................................6 Anti-Transshipment Provisions ...............................................6 Rum ...................................................................7 Tax Provisions ...........................................................7 Reports ................................................................8 Meetings of Caribbean Basin Trade Ministers and USTR ...........................8 Other Provisions .........................................................9 Chapter 2 – Trade Under the CBI Programs .......................................10 Chapter 3 – Eligibility Criteria and Advancement of Trade Policy Goals ................14 CBERA “Exclusionary” Criteria .............................................14 CBERA “Discretionary” Factors ............................................15 CBTPA Eligibility Criteria ..................................................16 Country Reports: Compliance with Eligibility Criteria ..............................18 The Bahamas .....................................................18 Barbados ........................................................20 Belize ...........................................................22 Costa Rica .......................................................24 Dominican Republic ................................................27 Eastern Caribbean States ............................................30 El Salvador ......................................................32 Guatemala .......................................................35 Guyana .........................................................38 Haiti ............................................................40 Honduras ........................................................42 Jamaica .........................................................45 Nicaragua .......................................................48 Panama .........................................................51 Trinidad and Tobago ...............................................54 Chapter 4 – Summary of Public Comments ........................................56 Annex: U.S. Imports from CBERA Countries, Total and Under Selected Import Programs EXECUTIVE SUMMARY • The trade preferences known collectively as the Caribbean Basin Initiative (CBI) continue to generate important benefits for countries in the Caribbean and Central America, as well as for the United States economy. Expansion of CBI benefits through enactment of the Caribbean Basin Trade Partnership Act (CBTPA) in 2000 represented an important affirmation of the United States’ ongoing commitment to economic development in the Caribbean Basin, by providing an open U.S. market for CBI goods. • In conjunction with economic reform and trade liberalization by beneficiary countries, the trade benefits of the Caribbean Basin Economic Recovery Act (CBERA) and the CBTPA have helped countries in the region diversify exports and support income growth. At the inception of the CBI in 1984, traditional and primary products such as coffee, bananas, and mineral fuels accounted for a solid majority of U.S. imports from the region. In 2000, manufactured products such as apparel and electrical and non-electrical machinery amounted to over half of CBI exports to the United States. • The total value of CBI exports to the United States in 2000, at $22.2 billion, was 2.5 times greater than in 1984. The CBI’s share of total U.S. imports was 1.8 percent in 2000, down slightly from the 1.9 percent share seen in each of the three preceding years. • U.S. exporters have also benefitted from the general trade expansion fostered by the CBI programs. Total U.S. exports to the CBI region, totaling $20.7 billion in 2000, made the CBI the 9th largest market for U.S. exports, ahead of countries such as France, Singapore, and the Netherlands. Following a slight drop in 1999, U.S. exports to the CBI expanded by 8.9 percent in 2000. The region absorbs approximately 3 percent of global U.S. exports. • The overall impact of the CBI programs on the region’s trade patterns is undergoing a transition. On the one hand, the relative share of CBI exports that benefit from CBERA preferences has continued to decline in recent years, to 11.9 percent in 2000, compared to nearly 19 percent in 1998. On the other hand, early trends indicate that a significant amount of exports of apparel – the region’s number one export to the United States, and previously excluded from CBI preferences – will benefit from the newly enhanced duty-free provisions of the CBTPA. In the first 8 months of 2001, imports of $3.5 billion were entered under the new CBTPA provisions, representing 24.4 percent of total U.S. imports from the CBI region. • It appears that much of the use of the new CBTPA provisions is accounted for by a shift of eligible, but previously excluded, apparel into the new trade preference categories. The overall volume of U.S. apparel imports from the CBI region declined slightly during the first 8 months of 2001, with the value of imports essentially flat compared to a year earlier. 1 • While the CBTPA provisions are clearly being extensively used by CBI exporters and U.S. importers, implementation of the CBTPA has been characterized by unforeseen challenges, particularly with respect to the application of certain statutory provisions in the technical rules governing imports under the new preferences. The Administration will continue to work with Congress, the private sector, CBI beneficiary countries, and other interested parties to ensure a faithful and effective implementation of this important expansion of trade benefits. • The eligibility criteria reflected in the CBI statutes, including the revised factors outlined in the CBTPA, have continued to provide opportunities to advance important U.S. policy objectives. In mid-2000, the Administration
Recommended publications
  • Executive Office of the President Office of the United States Trade Representative Washington, D.C
    EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES TRADE REPRESENTATIVE WASHINGTON, D.C. 20508 ADDENDUM Rev. October 4, 2004 The following changes have taken effect since the March 1999 printing of the U.S. Generalized System of Preferences (GSP) Guidebook: CHANGES IN THE LIST OF GSP BENEFICIARIES BENEFICIARY ACTION EFFECTIVE REFERENCE ISSUE DATE Cambodia Add to ASEAN Jul 1, 1999 64 FR 36229-35 7-02-99 Congo (Brazzaville)Change Name Jul 1, 1999 64 FR 36229-35 Congo (Kinshasa) Change Name from Zaire J ul 1, 1999 64 FR 36229-35 Gabon Designate BDC Jul 1, 1999 64 FR 36229-35 Mauritania Reinstate (LDBDC) Sep 1, 1999 64 FR 36229-35 Mongolia Designate BDC Jul 1, 1999 64 FR 36229-35 Zaire Change Name to Congo (Kinshasa) “ 64 FR 36229-35 Belarus Suspend Sep 11, 2000 65 FR 42595-96 7-10-00 French Polynesia Graduate Jan 1, 2002 65 FR 42595-96 Malta Graduate Jan 1, 2002 65 FR 42595-96 New Caledonia Graduate Jan 1, 2002 65 FR 42595-96 Slovenia Graduate Jan 1, 2002 65 FR 42595-96 Nigeria Designate BDC Aug 27, 2000 65 FR 52903 8-30-00 AGOA beneficiariesDesignate AGOA BDCs Oct 2, 2000 65 FR 59321-27 10-04-00 Eritrea Designate BDC Oct 2, 2000 65 FR 59321-27 AGOA beneficiariesDesignate AGOA BDCs Dec 21, 2000 65 FR 80723-32 12-21-00 Symbol “D” in HTSUS Georgia Designate BDC Jul 1, 2001 66 FR 35365 7-05-01 Ukraine Suspend Aug 24, 2001 66 FR 42246-50 8-10-01 Afghanistan Designate BDC Jan 29, 2003 68 FR 1949-54 1-14-03 Afghanistan Designate LDBDC Feb 13, 2003 68 FR 1949-54 Chile Terminate-FTA Jan 1, 2004 Free Trade Agreement Algeria Designate BDC
    [Show full text]
  • 2020 ANNUAL REPORT 1 TABLE of Contents LETTER from the Ceo Letter from Victor Boutros, Our CEO
    ANNUAL 2020 REPORT HTI 2020 ANNUAL REPORT 1 TABLE of Contents LETTER From the Ceo Letter from Victor Boutros, our CEO ....................................................................1 Celebrating our Partners .....................................................................................2 Dear Friends, The Human Trafficking Institute Model ...............................................................3 “Our Sputtering Engine of Impact: Your Nonprofit Must Focus on Mere Country Partnerships and our Work ....................................................................4 Survival”–that was the sobering headline in a Forbes article from 2020 by leadership expert William Meehan III. Meehan joined a chorus of Thought Leadership in the United States ............................................................8 commentators, who warned that the COVID-19 pandemic is poised to become “an extinction-level event” for America’s non-profits. One survey Tackling COVID-19 ..............................................................................................10 found that 90% of U.S.-based nonprofits experienced a reduction in Interview with John Freeman, Director of Law Enforcement Operations ........... 12 revenue, and another found that 50% expected revenue drops of at least 20%. “In usual times nonprofits don’t die, they linger,” noted Meehan, Interview with Chris Lick, Law Enforcement Advisor, Belize ................................. 13 ominously adding, “[These] are very unusual times.” Financial Summary ....................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • The Sovereignty of the Crown Dependencies and the British Overseas Territories in the Brexit Era
    Island Studies Journal, 15(1), 2020, 151-168 The sovereignty of the Crown Dependencies and the British Overseas Territories in the Brexit era Maria Mut Bosque School of Law, Universitat Internacional de Catalunya, Spain MINECO DER 2017-86138, Ministry of Economic Affairs & Digital Transformation, Spain Institute of Commonwealth Studies, University of London, UK [email protected] (corresponding author) Abstract: This paper focuses on an analysis of the sovereignty of two territorial entities that have unique relations with the United Kingdom: the Crown Dependencies and the British Overseas Territories (BOTs). Each of these entities includes very different territories, with different legal statuses and varying forms of self-administration and constitutional linkages with the UK. However, they also share similarities and challenges that enable an analysis of these territories as a complete set. The incomplete sovereignty of the Crown Dependencies and BOTs has entailed that all these territories (except Gibraltar) have not been allowed to participate in the 2016 Brexit referendum or in the withdrawal negotiations with the EU. Moreover, it is reasonable to assume that Brexit is not an exceptional situation. In the future there will be more and more relevant international issues for these territories which will remain outside of their direct control, but will have a direct impact on them. Thus, if no adjustments are made to their statuses, these territories will have to keep trusting that the UK will be able to represent their interests at the same level as its own interests. Keywords: Brexit, British Overseas Territories (BOTs), constitutional status, Crown Dependencies, sovereignty https://doi.org/10.24043/isj.114 • Received June 2019, accepted March 2020 © 2020—Institute of Island Studies, University of Prince Edward Island, Canada.
    [Show full text]
  • Information on Goods and Services
    A-1 INFORMATION ON GOODS AND SERVICES GOODS (CENSUS BASIS) Quarterly Revisions to Chain-Weighted Dollar Series: For March, June, September, and December statistical month Data for goods on a Census basis are compiled from the releases, revisions are made to the real chained-dollar series documents collected by the U.S. Customs and Border Protection presented in Exhibits 10 and 11: the previous five months are and reflect the movement of goods between foreign countries revised to incorporate the Bureau of Labor Statistics’ revisions and the 50 states, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, the U.S. to price indexes, which are used to produce the real chained- Virgin Islands, and U.S. Foreign Trade Zones. They include dollar series and to align Census data with data published by the government and non-government shipments of goods and U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA) in the National exclude shipments between the United States and its territories Income and Product Accounts (NIPAs). and possessions; transactions with U.S. military, diplomatic, and consular installations abroad; U.S. goods returned to the United Annual Revisions: Each June, not seasonally adjusted goods States by its Armed Forces; personal and household effects of data are revised to redistribute monthly data that arrived too late travelers; and in-transit shipments. The General Imports value for inclusion in the month of transaction. In addition, revisions reflects the total arrival of merchandise from foreign countries are made to reflect corrections received subsequent to the that immediately enters consumption channels, warehouses, or monthly revisions. Seasonally adjusted data are also revised to Foreign Trade Zones.
    [Show full text]
  • Leahy Make Public List CY 2017
    Public Release of Foreign Security Forces Units Ineligible for Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 and Arms Export Control Act Assistance Pursuant to the State Leahy Law CY 2017 Section 620M of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 (also referred to as the “State Leahy law”) states, in pertinent part: (a) IN GENERAL. – No assistance shall be furnished under this Act or the Arms Export Control Act to any unit of the security forces of a foreign country if the Secretary of State has credible information that such unit has committed a gross violation of human rights. *** (d) The Secretary of State shall establish, and periodically update, procedures to— (7) make publicly available, to the maximum extent practicable, the identity of those units for which no assistance shall be furnished pursuant to subsection (a). Consistent with this provision, the list below identifies (in alphabetical order, by country) foreign government security forces units that were proposed for applicable assistance in calendar year 2017 but were denied such assistance pursuant to the State Leahy law based on credible information that the unit committed a gross violation of human rights. A unit’s absence from this list does not mean the unit received security assistance from the United States. A listed unit may receive assistance in the future if new, exculpatory information is discovered. In addition, depending on the steps taken by the foreign government to bring the responsible members of the unit to justice, assistance to a unit may resume if the Secretary of State determines and reports to Congress that the government is taking effective steps to bring the responsible members of the unit to justice, in accordance with the State Leahy law.
    [Show full text]
  • Back Ground of the Single Customs Territory
    The EAC Single Customs Territory KENNETH BAGAMUHUNDA DIRECTOR CUSTOMS EAC Over View of EAC Customs Union CU commenced in 2005 Implementation of the CU has been progressive Asymmetric approach in tariff elimination in the 1st 5 years Directorate of Customs at EAC Secretariat coordinates policy and monitors implementation. Customs Administration responsible for day to day operations. Policy and Legal Framework Common Policy framework premised on the CU Protocol Common Customs Instruments EAC Common External Tariff, EAC Customs Management Law, EAC Common Customs Procedures- aligned to International standards Single Customs Territory is the Consolidation level of the CU Purpose: Free circulation of goods with minimum internal customs border controls Enhance trade facilitation by eliminating trade barriers and reduce cost of doing business Promote intra trade and investment Implementation of the EAC SCT Commenced in January 2014 after adoption of the SCT Framework Based on the Destination Model – clearance processes done at destination Partner State Goods are cleared upon arrival at the 1st point of entry and Released from the first point of entry Covers all customs regimes of direct home-use, warehousing, transit, export, intra-EAC trade and temporary imports Customs Staff of Destination Countries are deployed at ports of 1st Entry. Technical Working Groups and Liaison offices in all Customs administrations SCT Process manual has been developed Success factors Minimal internal border control Use of a single bond across
    [Show full text]
  • SINGLE CUSTOMS TERRITORY Frequently Asked Questions
    URA SINGLE CUSTOMS TERRITORY Frequently Asked questions Vol. 1, Issue 1 FY 2015/16 2 SINGLE CUSTOMS TERRITORY What is Single Customs Territory? A Single Customs Territory is a stage in the full attainment of the Customs Union achievable through removal of trade restrictions including minimization of internal border controls on goods moving between partner states. Why SCT? It is about achieving free circulation of goods in the Customs Territory in or- der to reduce the cost of doing business. What are the features of SCT? . Goods are cleared at the first point of entry; . Customs declarations are made once at the destination country; . Taxes are paid at the point of destination when goods are still at the first point of entry; . Goods are moved under a single bond from the port to destination; . Goods are monitored through Electronic Cargo Tracking System (ECTS); . Interconnected Customs systems; . Minimized internal controls / checks at internal borders. When is SCT going to be implemented? The SCT commenced on 1st January 2014 as a pilot on the Northern Corridor. The pilot on the Central Corridor commenced in April 2014 and full roll- out for the whole of the EAC is planned for December 2015. What are the benefits from the SCT? . Reduces cost of doing business by eliminating duplication of processes; . Reduces administrative costs and regulatory requirements; . Facilitates the free movement of goods, labour, services and capital as envisaged under the Common market; . Promotes foreign, domestic and cross border investment; SINGLE CUSTOMS TERRITORY 3 . Enhances trade in locally produced goods particularly agricultural goods from areas of surplus to areas of deficit; .
    [Show full text]
  • JICC-Joint Intelligence Coordinating Center Agency Responsible for Supply Statistics in Belize Joint Intelligence Coordinating Center
    JICC-Joint Intelligence Coordinating Center Agency Responsible for Supply Statistics in Belize Joint Intelligence Coordinating Center The Joint Intelligence Coordinating Center/Interpol (JICC/INTERPOL) is the official statistical unit of the Belize Police Department. The main function of this unit is to compile, organize, and analyze data for the Department to assist the department with decision making in crime suppression this is done by the study of crimes, offences, traffic accident, use of illegal drugs, firearms, and the dismissal of court cases data throughout Belize. Currently the staff consists of seventeen members, being (1) ASP who is the Officer Commanding, (2) Sergeants, (5) Corporals, and (9) Constables. JICC is divided into several sections that are responsible for various statistics as mentioned above. Types of Data Collected The type of data that JICC collect include but are not limited to Crime data Road Traffic Accident Data Firearm and Ammunition Seized Found and Stolen Illegal Drugs Seized and Found Missing Person Wanted Person Indicators Used The indicators used by JICC depends on the data collected some examples are as follows: Crime: Type of Crime, Time, Place, Motivation, M.O. of accused, Formation, District, and Weapons Used. Traffic Accident: Type of Accident (Fatal, Serious, Minor), Time and Place, Number of Vehicle involved, Number of Casualties, Type of Road, Road Condition, Weather Condition, Cause of accident, Type of Vehicles. Drugs: Type of Drugs, Place and Time Seized, Amount, Formation, District, Operation (stop and search, House Search, Vehicle Search), Offence (Drug Possession, Drug Trafficking, Smoking) Firearm: Type of Firearm, Place and Time Seized, Amount, Formation, District, Operation (stop and search, House Search, Vehicle Search), Serial Number, Make and Model, and Caliber.
    [Show full text]
  • 18Th Annual Report Office of Ombudsman March 2019.Pdf
    THE OFFICE OF THE OMBUDSMAN’S EIGHTEENTH ANNUAL REPORT Table of Contents List of Acronyms ............................................................................................................... 2 Letter to the Speaker, the House of Representatives ................................................... 3 Letter to the President, the Senate .................................................................................. 4 Ombudsman’s Message ................................................................................................... 5 Executive Summary .......................................................................................................... 8 Complaints Investigation .............................................................................................. 11 Subject Matter .......................................................................................................................11 Authorities ............................................................................................................................18 Complainants .......................................................................................................................20 Investigation Status .............................................................................................................22 Collaboration, Meetings and Trainings ............................................................................23 Achievement of Other Key Programme Strategies and Objectives .............................29 General
    [Show full text]
  • Report on the Security Sector in Latin America and the Caribbean 363.1098 Report on the Security Sector in Latin America and the Caribbean
    Report on the Security Sector in Latin America and the Caribbean 363.1098 Report on the Security Sector in Latin America and the Caribbean. R425 / Coordinated by Lucia Dammert. Santiago, Chile: FLACSO, 2007. 204p. ISBN: 978-956-205-217-7 Security; Public Safety; Defence; Intelligence Services; Security Forces; Armed Services; Latin America Cover Design: Claudio Doñas Text editing: Paulina Matta Correction of proofs: Jaime Gabarró Layout: Sylvio Alarcón Translation: Katty Hutter Printing: ALFABETA ARTES GRÁFICAS Editorial coordination: Carolina Contreras All rights reserved. This publication cannot be reproduced, partially or completely, nor registered or sent through any kind of information recovery system by any means, including mechanical, photochemical, electronic, magnetic, electro-visual, photocopy, or by any other means, without prior written permission from the editors. First edition: August 2007 I.S.B.N.: 978-956-205-217-7 Intellectual property registration number 164281 © Facultad Latinoamericana de Ciencias Sociales, FLACSO-Chile, 2007 Av. Dag Hammarskjöld 3269, Vitacura, Santiago, Chile [email protected] www.flacso.cl FLACSO TEAM RESPONSIBLE FOR THE PREPARATION OF THE REPORT ON THE SECURITY SECTOR Lucia Dammert Director of the Security and Citizenship Program Researchers: David Álvarez Patricia Arias Felipe Ajenjo Sebastián Briones Javiera Díaz Claudia Fuentes Felipe Ruz Felipe Salazar Liza Zúñiga ADVISORY COUNCIL Alejandro Álvarez (UNDP SURF LAC) Priscila Antunes (Universidad Federal de Minas Gerais – Brazil) Felipe
    [Show full text]
  • Belize 2019 Crime & Safety Report
    Belize 2019 Crime & Safety Report This is an annual report produced in conjunction with the Regional Security Office at the U.S. Embassy in Belmopan, Belize. The current U.S. Department of State Travel Advisory at the date of this report’s publication assesses Belize at Level 2, indicating travelers should exercise increased caution due to crime. Overall Crime and Safety Situation The U.S. Embassy in Belmopan does not assume responsibility for the professional ability or integrity of the persons or firms appearing in this report. The American Citizen Services (ACS) Unit cannot recommend a particular individual or location and assumes no responsibility for the quality of service provided. Review OSAC’s Belize-specific webpage for proprietary analytic reports, consular messages, and contact information. Crime Threats There is considerable risk from crime in Belmopan. There is no indication that criminals actively target U.S. citizens in Belize. Tourists and expatriates residing in Belize are more susceptible to incidents of crime due to perceived wealth, particularly when not exhibiting robust personal security practices and situational awareness. Major crimes continue to shift from being concentrated in the high-population area of Belize City to districts in the north, west, and south of Belize, as reported in 2018. A number of violent crimes, including multiple murders, thefts, and home invasions affected long-time expatriates residing in rural communities in 2018. Confrontational crimes, such as armed robbery and theft, have increased in tourist areas and remote areas alike. Murder, sexual assault, and armed robberies occurred in areas frequented by tourists and expatriates in 2018.
    [Show full text]
  • Statistical Territories of the World for Use in International Merchandise Trade Statistics
    ST/ESA/STAT/SER.M/30/Rev.3 Department of Economic and Social Affairs ● Statistics Division Studies in Methods Series M, No. 30, Rev. 3 ____________________________________________________________ Statistical Territories of the World for use in International Merchandise Trade Statistics ____________________________________________________________ United Nations ● New York, 2000 NOTE The designations employed and the presentation of the material in this publication do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of the Secretariat of the United Nations concerning the legal status of any country, territory, city or area or of its authorities, or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries. Copyright © United Nations 2000 All rights reserved CONTENTS Paragraphs Page Introduction 1-14 1 List of questions 4 Explanation of concepts used in or related to the questionnaire 8-14 5 Statistical territories of the world 8 ANNEX Agencies and persons responsible for the completion of the statistical territories questionnaire 76 iii INTRODUCTION 1. The United Nations Statistical Commission at its twenty-ninth session (11-14 February 1997) decided that a revision of Customs Areas of the World should be one of the priorities in methodological work in the area of international trade statistics. 1 Following this decision of the Commission, the United Nations Statistics Division (UNSD) conducted a survey of countries to collect information regarding their statistical territories. 2. In cooperation with members of the Task Force on International Trade Statistics, 2 UNSD developed a special questionnaire which was sent to countries on 11 May 1999. By May 2000, 128 countries had responded. 3. This publication contains a list of the questions which were contained in the questionnaire; an explanation of concepts used or related to the questions; country responses 3 organized in alphabetical order; and an annex listing agencies and persons responsible for completion of the questionnaire.
    [Show full text]