DOCSLIB.ORG

Protectionism Versus Free Trade: Implementing the Gatt Antidumping Agreement in the United States

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Protectionism Versus Free Trade: Implementing the Gatt Antidumping Agreement in the United States PROTECTIONISM VERSUS FREE TRADE: IMPLEMENTING THE GATT ANTIDUMPING AGREEMENT IN THE UNITED STATES MARIE LOUISE HURABIELL* 1. INTRODUCTION The trade policy of the United States government reflects an attempt to reconcile the inherently incompatible goals of free trade and protectionism. One central objective is the promotion of free trade based on "the unchallenged proposition that every country is better off in a world of free trade than in a world in which all countries practice highly protectionist policies .... "' Thus, a global economy promoting free trade enhances competition within indus- tries which, in turn, yields greater efficiency and better products, particularly in domestic companies. At odds with free trade, however, is protectionism, which "protects one group - some special interest - at the expense of the general public."3 Outwardly, the U.S. government has adopted a posture extolling the virtues of * J.D. Candidate, 1996, University of Pennsylvania Law School; B.A., 1992, Georgetown University. This Comment is dedicated to my mom and dad, John and Judi Hurabiell, and to my grandparents, Ebbie and Alsie. I am deeply indebted to each of you for the tremendous love and support that you have unfailingly provided throughout my life. Love and thanks to my siblings Michele, Heather, and Johnny, and my friends Wendy Simpson, Allison Gregal, Tara Farnsworth, and Lisa Winsheimer for their constant love and belief in me. Thanks to Mark Mindich for his feedback on the concept of dumping and for always making me smile. Special thanks to Tara Brennan and Eric McCarthy for their help in editing this piece. ' Anne 0. Krueger, Free Trade Is the Best Policy, in AN AMERICAN TRADE STRATEGY: OPTIONS FOR THE 1990S 68, 68 (Robert Z. Lawrence & Charles L. Schultze eds., 1990) [hereinafter AN AMERICAN TRADE STRATEGY]. 2 See id. s Robert W. McGee, An Economic Analysis of Protectionism in the United States with Implications for International Trade in Europe, 26 GEO. WASH. J. INVL L. & ECON. 539, 539 (1993). (567) Published by Penn Law: Legal Scholarship Repository, 2014 568 U. Pa. J. Int'l Bus. L. [Vol. 16:3 free trade. U.S. political leaders' apparent acknowledge- ment of the benefits of free trade, juxtaposed with the consistent failure of protectionist trade policies, has lead to a contradictory outcome - these leaders have not complete- ly embraced free trade and continue to advocate protection- ism.4 For example, the United States regularly invokes antidumping measures. These protectionist policies are incompatible with a system of free trade, and, more specifically, they are incompatible with the General Agree- ment on Tariffs and Trade5 ("General Agreement" or "GATT") to which the United States is a signatory. Can the Uruguay Round Agreements of the GATT overcome linger- ing conflicts between U.S. protectionism and the goals of free trade? This Comment reviews this question specifically in the context of antidumping laws. Section 2 of this Comment reviews the General Agree- ment, its history, goals, and treatment of antidumping laws. Section 3 documents the history of antidumping laws in the United States and analyzes their effect on both the national economy and on the United States' position in international trade. Section 4 addresses the Uruguay Round itself, some of the changes in international antidumping practices resulting from this round of agreements, as well as possible ramifications for the United States. Section 5 details Congress' response to the Uruguay Round.6 Section 6 compares specific provisions of the implementing legislation with provisions of the General Agreement and analyzes the vulnerabilities of the resulting U.S. policies to foreign challenge. Finally, Section 7 predicts the world commun- ity's reaction to the changes in U.S. antidumping laws. 4 See id. 5 General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade, opened for signatureOct. 30, 1947, 61 Stat. A3, T.I.A.S. No. 1700, 55 U.N.T.S. 187, reprinted in IV Basic Instrument and Selected Documents 3 (1969) [hereinafter General Agreement]. 6 It was clear from the outset that if the United States ratified the General Agreement, U.S. antidumping laws would require substantial alterations in order to align with the GATT. As there could be no tampering with the GATT itself, members of Congress focused their energies on the implementing legislation. https://scholarship.law.upenn.edu/jil/vol16/iss3/5 1995] GATT ANTIDUMPING AGREEMENT 569 2. THE GENERAL AGREEMENT ON TARIFFS AND TRADE Established in 1948, the GATT emerged from Atlantic Charter discussions between the United States and Brit- ain.7 Ultimately, twenty-three trading nations jointly entered into the first and "only multilateral instrument"8 which sets out "agreed rules for international trade." After the drafters abandoned related plans to charter an International Trade Organization ("ITO"),9 the General Agreement then took on a dual role ° both as an agree- ment and as an organization." Since then, the GATT, has not been a stagnant expression of international agree- 12 - ment. 7 See ROBERT JEROME, WORLD TRADE AT THE CROSSROADS: THE URUGUAY ROUND, GATT, AND BEYOND 4 (1992). 8 GATT INFORMATION AND MEDIA RELATIONS DIVISION, GENERAL AGREEMENT ON TARIFFS AND TRADE: WHAT IT Is, WHAT IT DOES 1 (1989) [hereinafter GATT INFORMATION LEAFLET]. ' See id. The ITO was designed to be the "organizational base" of the GATT and would have handled administrative functions related to the General Agreement. JOHN H. JACKSON, WORLD TRADE AND THE LAW OF GATT § 1.7 (1969) [hereinafter JACKSON, WORLD TRADE]. 10 See GATT INFORMATION LEAFLET, supra note 8, at 1-2. " See id. at 1. See JOHN H. JACKSON & WILLIAM J. DAVEY, LEGAL PROBLEMS OF INTERNATIONAL ECONOMIC RELATIONS 324 (2d ed. 1986). A total of eight rounds of multilateral trade negotiations have taken place under the GATT. These are: Participating Location Year(s) Countries 1. Geneva, Switz. 1947 23 2. Annecy, France 1948 33 3. Torquay, England 1950 34 4. Geneva, Switz. 1956 22 5. "Dillon Round" - 1960-61 45 Geneva, Switz. 6. "Kennedy Round" - 1964-67 48 Geneva, Switz. 7. "Tokyo Round" - 1973-79 99 Geneva, Switz. 8. "Uruguay Round" - 1986-94 124 Punta del Este, Uruguay See id. at 324-25; Communication from the Chairman, Multilateral Trade Negotiations, The Uruguay Round, 11 April 1994, reprinted in MESSAGE FROM THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES TRANSMITTING THE URUGUAY ROUND TRADE AGREEMENTS, TEXTS OF AGREEMENTS Published by Penn Law: Legal Scholarship Repository, 2014 570 U. Pa. J. Int'l Bus. L. [Vol. 16:3 Subsequent rounds of negotiation have reworked the GATT."3 The Uruguay Round, the eighth round of these multilateral trade negotiations, began in September 1986.4 These negotiations were undertaken in order to further trade liberalization15 and were finally concluded in December 1993, after more than seven years of negotia- tions. 6 The Uruguay Round was signed in Marrakesh, Morocco, by more than 100 countries (including the United States) in April 1994." 2.1. Goals of the GATT The General Agreement aims both to substantially reduce "tariffs and other barriers to trade" and to eliminate8 "discriminatory treatment in international commerce." Although the language of the GATT is complex, agreement among the signatories is predicated upon simple princi- ples.'9 These principles include: (1) "trade without dis- crimination," as stated in the "most-favored-nation" clause;2° (2) "protection through tariffs;"2' (3) creating "a stable basis for trade;"22 (4) "promoting fair competi- IMPLEMENTING BILL, STATEMENT OF ADMINISTRATIVE ACTION AND REQUIRED SUPPORTING STATEMENTS, H.R. Doc. No. 316, 103d Cong., 2d Sess. 1453, 2039 (1994) [hereinafter MESSAGE FROM THE PRESIDENT]. 13 See GATT INFORMATION LEAFLET, supra note 8, at 2-3. Parties to the General Agreement have conducted a series of multilateral negotiations to continue the reduction of trade barriers. Id. '4 See JEROME, supra note 7, at v. 15 See GAT1T INFORMATION LEAFLET, supra note 8, at 3. "6 House, Senate Conferees Complete Work on GAT Bill, Predict PassageNext Month, 63 Banking Rep. (BNA) No. 11, 431, 432 (Sept. 26, 1994). 17 See id. 18 General Agreement, supra note 5, preamble; see also JACKSON & DAVEY, supra note 12, at 8 (noting that "[tihe principal goal of [the] GATT was to establish agreed upon limitations on tariffs and to control the use of certain non-tariff barriers to trade"); Roger P. Alford, Note, Why a Private Right of Action Against Dumping Would Violate GATT, 66 N.Y.U. L. REV. 696, 696 (1991) ("To achieve these objectives, [the] GATT is directed at 'the substantial reduction of tariffs and other barriers to trade and to the elimination of discriminatory treatment in international commerce."'). 19 See GATT INFORMATION LEAFLET, supra note 8, at 3. 20 Id. 21 Id. 22 Id. at 4. https://scholarship.law.upenn.edu/jil/vol16/iss3/5 1995] GATT ANTIDUMPING AGREEMENT tion;"2 s (5) "quantitative restrictions on imports;"24 (6) "the 'waiver' and possible emergency action;" (7) "regional trading arrangements;" 26 and (8) "settling trade dis- putes."2 ' Due to the GATT's relative success in effectuat- ing these goals, it is recognized as the "most28 important agreement regulating trade among nations." 2.2. Antidumping and the GATT "Dumping"29 does not violate the objectives of the GATT.3 ° The General Agreement defines dumping as introducing a product "into the commerce of another country at less than its normal value.""1 In other words, 23 Id. 24 Id. 2 Id. at 5. 26 Id. at 6. 27 Id. ' Alford, supra note 18, at 696 (quoting Roger P. Alford, When is China Paraguay?An Examination of the Application of the Antidump- ing and CountervailingDuty Laws of the United States to China and Other 2Vonmarket Economy' Nations, 61 S. CAL. L. REV. 79, 83 n.23 (1987) (quoting JOHN H. JACKSON, The General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade, in 1 A LAWYER'S GUIDE TO INTERNATIONAL BusINEss TRANSACTIONS 41 (Walter S.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Structural Change in the World Economy and Forms of Protectionism
    A Service of Leibniz-Informationszentrum econstor Wirtschaft Leibniz Information Centre Make Your Publications Visible. zbw for Economics Altvater, Elmar Article — Digitized Version Structural change in the world economy and forms of protectionism Intereconomics Suggested Citation: Altvater, Elmar (1988) : Structural change in the world economy and forms of protectionism, Intereconomics, ISSN 0020-5346, Verlag Weltarchiv, Hamburg, Vol. 23, Iss. 6, pp. 286-296, http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF02925126 This Version is available at: http://hdl.handle.net/10419/140159 Standard-Nutzungsbedingungen: Terms of use: Die Dokumente auf EconStor dürfen zu eigenen wissenschaftlichen Documents in EconStor may be saved and copied for your Zwecken und zum Privatgebrauch gespeichert und kopiert werden. personal and scholarly purposes. Sie dürfen die Dokumente nicht für öffentliche oder kommerzielle You are not to copy documents for public or commercial Zwecke vervielfältigen, öffentlich ausstellen, öffentlich zugänglich purposes, to exhibit the documents publicly, to make them machen, vertreiben oder anderweitig nutzen. publicly available on the internet, or to distribute or otherwise use the documents in public. Sofern die Verfasser die Dokumente unter Open-Content-Lizenzen (insbesondere CC-Lizenzen) zur Verfügung gestellt haben sollten, If the documents have been made available under an Open gelten abweichend von diesen Nutzungsbedingungen die in der dort Content Licence (especially Creative Commons Licences), you genannten Lizenz gewährten Nutzungsrechte. may exercise further usage rights as specified in the indicated licence. www.econstor.eu PROTECTIONISM Elmar Altvater* Structural Change in the World Economy and Forms of Protectionism Warnings about the dangers of protectionism are being heard from a// sides at present. However, rehearsing the advantages of free trade and the drawbacks of protectionism is to/itt/e avai/ if it fai/s to take account of the/imitations that the internationa/ context imposes on nationa/ economic po/icy.
    [Show full text]
  • The Trade and Investment Effects of Preferential Trading Arrangements
    This PDF is a selection from a published volume from the National Bureau of Economic Research Volume Title: International Trade in East Asia, NBER-East Asia Seminar on Economics, Volume 14 Volume Author/Editor: Takatoshi Ito and Andrew K. Rose, editors Volume Publisher: University of Chicago Press Volume ISBN: 0-226-37896-9 Volume URL: http://www.nber.org/books/ito_05-1 Conference Date: September 5-7, 2003 Publication Date: August 2005 Title: The Trade and Investment Effects of Preferential Trading Arrangements Author: Philippa Dee, Jyothi Gali URL: http://www.nber.org/chapters/c0193 5 The Trade and Investment Effects of Preferential Trading Arrangements Philippa Dee and Jyothi Gali The number of preferential trading arrangements (PTAs) has grown dra- matically over the last decade or so. By the end of March 2002, there were 250 agreements in force that had been notified to the World Trade Organi- zation (WTO), compared with 40 in 1990 (WTO 2002). The coverage of preferential trading arrangements has also tended to expand over time. The preferential liberalization of tariffs and other mea- sures governing merchandise trade remains important in many agreements. But they increasingly cover a range of other issues—services, investment, competition policy, government procurement, e-commerce, labor, and en- vironmental standards. This paper examines, both theoretically and empirically, the effects of the trade and nontrade provisions of PTAs on the trade and foreign direct investment (FDI) flows of member and nonmember countries. 5.1 Theoretical Review The first wave of PTAs in the 1950s to 1970s were generally limited in scope, with preferential liberalization of merchandise trade playing a cen- tral role (the European Union [EU] was an important early exception).
    [Show full text]
  • Global Market Structures and the High Price of Protectionism
    Global market structures and the high price of protectionism Overview panel remarks by Agustín Carstens General Manager, Bank for International Settlements Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City’s 42nd Economic Policy Symposium Jackson Hole, Wyoming, 25 August 2018 It’s an honour to be here today for the closing panel of this event. Thanks to the organisers for such an impressively wide range of topics and papers. One dimension that deserves emphasis in the discussion is the impact of economic openness on market structures. Low barriers to trade and investment let prices reflect availability and steer resources towards more productive industries and firms. This generates widespread economic benefits. International competition is a powerful force in disciplining prices and keeping firms nimble. If we worry about oligopolies and the margins of dominant firms, then we should think twice about undermining the discipline of openness. In my remarks, I will look more closely at trade and protectionism. On the way, we will see how real globalisation and the financial variety are joined at the hip. Recent measures to reverse globalisation and to retreat into protectionism alarm me, as they no doubt alarm many of you. After decades of setting rules to liberalise trade, we are seeing moves to rip up that rulebook. After decades of striving to open markets, we are seeing attempts to close them. After decades of increasing international cooperation, we are seeing increasing international confrontation. This is reflected in the United Kingdom’s vote for Brexit, nationalist movements in Europe, the shift in US trade policy and the current tariff tit-for-tat.
    [Show full text]
  • Protectionism and Gender Inequality in Developing Countries∗
    Protectionism and Gender Inequality in Developing Countries∗ Erhan Nicolas Guido Bob Artucy Depetris Chauvinz Portox Rijkers{ The World Bank HES-SO Dept. of Economics The World Bank DECTI Geneva UNLP DECTI June 2019 Abstract How do tariffs impact gender inequality? Using harmonized household survey and tariff data from 54 low- and middle income countries, this paper shows that protectionism has an anti-female bias. On average, tariffs repress the real incomes of female headed households by 0.6 percentage points relative to that of male headed ones. Female headed households bear the brunt of tariffs because they derive a smaller share of their income from and spend a larger share of their budget on agricultural products, which are usually subject to high tariffs in developing countries. Consistent with this explanation, the anti-female bias is stronger in countries where female-headed households are underrepresented in agricultural production, more reliant on remittances, and spending a comparatively larger share of their budgets on food than male-headed ones. ∗We thank M. Olarreaga, M. Porto, and N. Rocha for comments and N. Gomez Parra for excellent research assistance. This research was supported by the World Bank's Research Support Budget, the ILO-World Bank Research Program on Job Creation and Shared Prosperity, and the Knowledge for Change Program. The findings, interpretations, and conclusions expressed in this paper are entirely those of the authors. They do not necessarily represent the views of the International Bank of Reconstruction and Development/World Bank and its affiliated organizations, or those of the Executive Directors of the World Bank or the countries they represent.
    [Show full text]
  • The Dynamic Gravity Dataset: Technical Documentation Update
    The Dynamic Gravity Dataset: Technical Documentation Update Note Version 2.00 Abstract This document provides an update to the technical documentation for the Dynamic Gravity dataset, describing changes from Version 1.00 to Version 2.00. For full descrip- tion of the contents and construction of the dataset, see full technical documentation for Version 1.00 on the dataset page at https://www.usitc.gov/data/gravity/dgd.htm. This documentation is the result of ongoing professional research of USITC Staff and is solely meant to represent the opinions and professional research of individual authors. It is not meant to represent in any way the views of the U.S. International Trade Commission or any of its individual Commissioners. It is circulated to promote the active exchange of ideas between USITC Staff and recognized experts outside the USITC, professional development of Office Staff and increase data transparency by encouraging outside professional critique of staff research. Please address all correspondence to [email protected]. 1 1 Introduction The Dynamic Gravity dataset contains a collection of variables describing aspects of countries and territories as well as the ways in which they relate to one-another. Each record in the dataset is defined by a pair of countries or territories and a year. The records themselves are composed of three basic types of variables: identifiers, unilateral character- istics, and bilateral characteristics. The updated dataset spans the years 1948{2019 and reflects the dynamic nature of the globe by following the ways in which countries have changed during that period. The resulting dataset covers 285 countries and territories, some of which exist in the dataset for only a subset of covered years.1 1.1 Contents of the Documentation The updated note begins with a description of main changes to the dataset from Version 1.00 to Version 2.00 in section 1.2 and a table of variables available in Version 1.00 and Version 2.00 of the dataset in section 1.3.
    [Show full text]
  • 10Chapter Trade Policy in Developing Countries
    M10_KRUG3040_08_SE_C10.qxd 1/10/08 7:26 PM Page 250 10Chapter Trade Policy in Developing Countries o far we have analyzed the instruments of trade policy and its objectives without specifying the context—that is, without saying much about the Scountry undertaking these policies. Each country has its own distinctive history and issues, but in discussing economic policy one difference between countries becomes obvious: their income levels. As Table 10-1 suggests, nations differ greatly in their per-capita incomes. At one end of the spectrum are the developed or advanced nations, a club whose members include Western Europe, several countries largely settled by Europeans (including the United States), and Japan; these countries have per-capita incomes that in many cases exceed $30,000 per year. Most of the world’s population, however, live in nations that are substantially poorer. The income range among these developing countries1 is itself very wide. Some of these countries, such as Singapore, are in fact on the verge of being “graduated” to advanced country status, both in terms of official statistics and in the way they think about themselves. Others, such as Bangladesh, remain desperately poor. Nonetheless, for virtually all developing countries the attempt to close the income gap with more advanced nations has been a central concern of economic policy. Why are some countries so much poorer than others? Why have some coun- tries that were poor a generation ago succeeded in making dramatic progress, while others have not? These are deeply disputed questions, and to try to answer them—or even to describe at length the answers that economists have proposed over the years—would take us outside the scope of this book.
    [Show full text]
  • FTA Tariff Tool New Online Tool Highlights Tariff Benefits of Free Trade Agreements for American Businesses
    U.S. Department of Commerce International Trade Administration FTA Tariff Tool New Online Tool Highlights Tariff Benefits of Free Trade Agreements for American Businesses http://www.export.gov/FTA/FTATariffTool/ • Are you an exporter seeking a market where the United States The FTA Tariff Tool: has an existing competitive advantage? • Are you spending time looking through pages of legal texts • consolidates and distills tariff to figure out the tariff under a trade agreement for your schedules down to a simple products? search function • Would you like to perform instant and at-a-glance searches • allows users to see how for trade and tariff trends in one easily accessed location particular sectors are treated online? under the agreements or recent trends in exports to the trade The Free Trade Agreement (FTA) Tariff Tool will ease your exporting agreement partner markets process and could help you increase your exports to U.S. trade agreement partner markets. It will streamline your industrial and • helps reduce costs and consumer product tariff searches by making information on tariff uncertainty for U.S. businesses benefits companies receive under U.S. trade agreements more accessible. The FTA Tariff Tool consolidates and condenses trade, tariff and sectoral information into a user-friendly public interface. The tool is provided free of charge by the U.S. Department of Commerce. Businesses are able to see the current and future tariffs applied to their products, as well as the date on which those products become duty free. By combining sector and product groups, trade data, and the tariff elimination schedules, users can also analyze how various sectors are treated across multiple trade agreements.
    [Show full text]
  • Handbook on Preferential Market Access for Asean Least Developed Countries
    UNITED NATIONS CONFERENCE ON TRADE AND DEVELOPMENT HANDBOOK ON PREFERENTIAL MARKET ACCESS FOR ASEAN LEAST DEVELOPED COUNTRIES Part III: ASEAN-FTA Agreements Layout and Printing at United Nations, Geneva – 2017833 (E) – March 2021 – 730 – UNCTAD/ALDC/2019/5 “Mazzarello - geometrie del dare, nuovo futuro” is the work of Maurizio Cancelli. Its architectural perspective emphasizes the interactions of governments, societies and economies from around the globe under the United Nations Framework. This collaboration highlights the earth, its resources and potentials, and fosters a recognition of local communities and their right to exist in their places of origin, with their own distinction and diversity. Maurizio Cancelli started his artistic research on the right to live in one’s place of birth more than thirty years ago. His work is inspired by the mountainous terrain surrounding the village of Cancelli in the heart of Umbria, Italy. UNITED NATIONS CONFERENCE ON TRADE AND DEVELOPMENT HANDBOOK ON PREFERENTIAL MARKET ACCESS FOR ASEAN LEAST DEVELOPED COUNTRIES Part III: ASEAN-FTA Agreements Geneva, 2021 © 2021, United Nations This work is available through open access, by complying with the Creative Commons licence created for intergovernmental organizations, at http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/igo/. The findings, interpretations and conclusions expressed herein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the United Nations or its officials or Member States. The designations employed and the presentation of material on any map in this work do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part 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.
    [Show full text]
  • 9 Protectionism, Rent and the Dynamics of Agricultural Degradation RICHARD BODY
    9 Protectionism, Rent and the Dynamics of Agricultural Degradation RICHARD BODY HENRY GEORGE never used the word ecology, for which he is not to be blamed for the word was yet to be uttered in his lifetime. Were he with us today, I suspect the word would often be on his lips. He would tell us, I believe, that the ecological argurient for free trade was no less strong than either the moral or economic one. That is my theme. Let me see if I can persuade you of its truth. The protectionist barriers to industrial trade, whether in the form of tariffs or otherwise, are a shadow of what they were and, though they are inherently pernicious, I put them outside the argument. It is agricultural protectionism that is rampant and doing vast and incal- culable damage to the economies of every country in the world, with Hong Kong, devoid of any farmers, the one exception. This is the protectionism that is ecologically damaging. There is a parallel between the economic and ecological cost of agricultural protection; as one rises, so does the other. In Scotland there are many rugged mountains, though they call them hills, and nothing is grown upon them. They are the habitat of the wild red deer that gain some sustenance on the lower ground below the barren rocks. Of all these bleak points, Ben Nevis may be the bleakest, where snow settles most of the year and the cold winds blow in all seasons. Yet even on Ben Nevis, the people of Scotland could grow thousands of bananas, and even export them to Jamaica and Ecuador or any other corner of the world where there is a surplus of cheap bananas that cannot be sold.
    [Show full text]
  • Dumping, Protectionism and Free Trade
    DUMPING, PROTECTIONISM AND FREE TRADE Ron Sheppard Catherine Atkins Views expressed in Agribusiness and Economics Research Unit Discussion Papers are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Director, other members of staff, or members of the Management Committee Discussion Paper No.140 September 1994 Agribusiness & Economics Research Unit PO Box 84 Lincoln University CANTERBURY Telephone No: (64) (3) 325 2811 Fax No: (64) (3) 325 3847 ISSN 1170-7607 ISBN 0-909042-01-2 AGRIBUSINESS & ECONOMICS RESEARCH UNIT The Agribusiness and Economics Research Unit (AERU) operates The major research areas supported by the AERU include trade from Lincoln University providing research expertise for a wide policy, marketing (both institutional and consumer), accounting, range of organisations concerned with production, processing, finance, management, agricultural economics and rural sociol­ distribution, finance and marketing. ogy. In addition to the research activities, the AERU supports conferences and seminars on topical issues and AERU staff are The AERU operates as a semi-commercial research agency involved in a wide range of professional and University related Research contracts are carried out for clients on a commercial extension activities. basis and University research is supported by the AERU through sponsorship of postgraduate research programmes. Research Founded as the Agricultural Economics Research Unit in 1962 clients include Government Departments, both within New from an annual grant provided by the Department of Scientific and Zealand and from other countries, international agencies, New Industrial Research (DSIR), the AERU has grown to become an Zealand companies and organisations, individuals and farmers. Independent, major source of business and economic research Research results are presented through private client reports, expertise.
    [Show full text]
  • Free Trade Agreement with Serbia
    FREE TRADE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE EURASIAN ECONOMIC UNION AND ITS MEMBER STATES, OF THE ONE PART, AND THE REPUBLIC OF SERBIA, OF THE OTHER PART The Eurasian Economic Union (hereinafter referred to as “the EAEU”) and the Republic of Armenia, the Republic of Belarus, the Republic of Kazakhstan, the Kyrgyz Republic, the Russian Federation (hereinafter referred to as “the EAEU Member States”), of the one part, and the Republic of Serbia (hereinafter referred to as “Serbia”), of the other part: BUILDING UPON free trade relations previously established between the Republic of Serbia, the Republic of Belarus, the Republic of Kazakhstan and the Russian Federation; SEEKING to promote and deepen mutual trade and economic cooperation between the EAEU Member States and Serbia in the areas of mutual interest; CONFIRMING their commitment to the principles of market economy, as the basis for trade and economic relations, and their intention to participate actively and to encourage expansion of mutually beneficial trade and economic relations between the EAEU Member States and Serbia; CREATING the necessary conditions for the free movement of goods and capital in accordance with the Law of the EAEU, laws and regulations of the EAEU Member States and Serbia, as well as the rules of the World Trade Organization (hereinafter referred to as “the WTO”); EXPRESSING their readiness and full support to the successful accession to the WTO and recognizing that the WTO membership of the EAEU and the Republic of Belarus and of Serbia will create favourable conditions
    [Show full text]
  • Itc) for the Meeting of the Ministers of Foreign Affairs of Lldcs
    STATEMENT OF THE INTERNATIONAL TRADE CENTRE (ITC) FOR THE MEETING OF THE MINISTERS OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS OF LLDCS PARTNERING FOR ACCELERATED IMPLEMENTATION OF THE VIENNA PROGRAMME OF ACTION FOR LLDCS AND ACHIEVING SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT IN LLDCS IN THE ERA OF COVID-19 TUESDAY, 23 SEPT 2020 DOROTHY TEMBO ACTING EXECUTIVE DORECTOR Your Excellency Minister Tileuberdi, Chair of the Group of LLDCs, Ministers of Foreign Affairs, Excellencies, During this period of continued uncertainty, it is important to recall the most essential ingredients of resilience: partnership, technical collaboration, and the stability of the multilateral system. The Vienna Programme of Action for LLDCs (VPoA) remains a central actionable component of helping LLDCs to meet the SDGs and building back better for the ‘new normal’. As the joint agency of the United Nations and the World Trade Organization, the International Trade Centre is fully committed to supporting the implementation of the VPoA through enhancing trade in LLDCs and their transit countries. Our approach is focused on assisting micro, small and medium-sized enterprises (MSMEs) to connect to global markets, and for that we work closely with private sector institutions. ITC contributes to two of the six priority areas of the VPoA: 1) International trade and trade facilitation, and 2) Regional integration and cooperation. Since 2014, ITC has implemented more than 40 projects for almost all LLDCs including our global projects such as of public goods on data and intelligence. Still, in this period of COVID-19, we have seen demand for trade related assistance increasing as LLDCs and their MSMEs seek help in coping with the pandemic.
    [Show full text]