|
Costs of WTO
'Development Round' Could Outweigh Benefits for Developing Countries
Statement
from Mark Weisbrot, Co-Director, Center for Economic and Policy Research
For
Immediate Release: December
15, 2005
Contact: Lynn Erskine 202-293-5380 x115 (in Washington, DC)
Mark Weisbrot 202-746-7264 (in Washington, DC)
Dan Beeton 852-9047-0644 (in Hong Kong)
Washington, DC -- "The World Trade
Organization (WTO) negotiations in Hong Kong are being billed as a 'development
round,' emphasizing the potential benefits that new trade agreements might bring
to developing countries. But these claims exaggerate the potential gains and
ignore many areas in which developing countries are being asked to make costly
concessions.
The Center for Economic and Policy Research has
noted that the World Bank projects very limited gains for developing countries,
even for a very successful Doha round. Now, current negotiations indicate that
the concessions being asked from developing countries could outweigh these small
potential benefits of an agreement. In three sectors in particular, developing
countries have much at stake:
Agriculture -- While some WTO-proponents
claim that the current negotiations are crucial for development, recent World
Bank projections suggest very limited gains of only $86 billion, or 0.8 percent
of GDP from complete trade liberalization -- with only $54 billion from
agriculture. And only $18 - $119 billion for the entire world from the Doha round (a barely
measurable 0.04 to 0.28 percent of world GDP).1 Furthermore,
the elimination of rich country subsidies, while benefiting some big
agro-exporting countries and cotton farmers in Africa, would be a net loss for
developing countries as a whole, according to the World Bank's estimates.2
Services -- The U.S. and EU are seeking to
significantly expand the services agreement under the WTO. A controversial
'Annex C' would allow greater access to service markets around the world,
forcing countries to give foreign companies the same preferences as domestic
providers. One provision of this would place lower-paid workers in greater
competition with foreign workers. Meanwhile, highly paid professionals in rich
countries would continue to be protected from international competition, despite
the fact that competition would yield the largest efficiency gains in these
professions.3
Intellectual Property -- Intellectual
property protection under the WTO creates very large economic distortions that
are extremely costly for developing countries. These are exactly the same types
of inefficiencies that the WTO seeks to reduce by lowering trade barriers, only
many times larger. The TRIPS agreement may end up costing developing countries
more than they would gain from the removal of remaining trade barriers in the
rich countries. Developing countries must be cautious in dealing with the
continuing implementation of the TRIPS agreement. In particular, the December 11
amendment to the TRIPS agreement regarding medicines will make it more difficult
and expensive for developing countries to have access to life-saving medicines,
as compared with the situation before TRIPS."
NOTES
[1] Table 1.3 (page 12) and Table 1.5 (page 14)
in Anderson, Kym and Will Martin (2005). "Agricultural
Trade Reform and the Doha Development Round," World Bank.
[2] Anderson and Martin, Table 2.8 (page
52).
[3] Dean Baker (2003). "Professional
Protectionists: The Gains From Free Trade in Highly Paid Professional Services,"
CEPR.
|