Aide au commerce et intégration: nouvelles perspectives pour les pays en développement

The launch of the Aid for Trade (AfT) initiative in 2005 created high expectations as regards to its capacity to enhance developing countries’ trade integration. This dissertation is an attempt to provide new perspectives on trade integration and AfT effectiveness through five essays. Firstly, a new trade indicator is proposed that combines different dimensions, including concepts such as openness, diversification, variety, quality and performance. A lack of infrastructure is identified as an obstacle for increasing such integration, suggesting that assistance towards this sector is needed. Then, the causality between trade openness and growth is revisited taking into account, besides the usual trade ratio, the quality and the variety of exports. Evidence suggests that this relationship is not linear and that improving the quality and widening the variety of exports is crucial for developing countries; investments that can be provided through AfT. Accordingly, the effectiveness of such assistance as regards to trade performance is tested. Estimates indicate that it does enhance export performance, and that the impact transits via the infrastructure channel. Finally, looking for complementarities between AfT and preferential trade agreements using a gravity model, results indicate that aid effectiveness is improved when the recipient shares some level of economic integration with his partners.Le lancement de l’initiative Aide au Commerce (AaC) en 2005 suscita un fort intérêt quant-à sa capacité à améliorer l’insertion des pays en voie de développement (PVD) dans le commerce mondial. Au travers de cinq essais, cette dissertation vise à proposer de nouvelles perspectives en matière d’intégration aux échanges et d’efficacité de l’AaC. Un nouvel indicateur d’intégration est proposé, composé de plusieurs dimensions telles que l’ouverture, la diversification, la variété, la qualité et la performance. Le manque d’infrastructures est identifié comme un des principaux obstacles à l’insertion au commerce, justifiant une augmentation de l’aide envers ce secteur. Par la suite, le lien de causalité entre l’ouverture aux échanges et la croissance est revisité en intégrant, en plus du ratio d’ouverture, la qualité et la variété des exportations. Les résultats mettent en évidence une relation non-linéaire, soulignant l’intérêt de poursuivre des stratégies de diversification et d’augmentation de la qualité des exportations pour les PVD. L’efficacité de l’AaC est par la suite testée sur la performance à l’exportation. Les résultats indiquent que ce soutien est efficace et que l’impact transite au travers des infrastructures. Finalement, un lien de complémentarité entre l’AaC et les accords commerciaux préférentiels est mit en évidence au travers d’un modèle de gravité, indiquant que l’AaC est d’autant plus efficace que le pays receveur partage un certain degré d’intégration avec ses partenaires

Does Aid for Trade Enhance Export Performance? Investigating the Infrastructure Channel

There are few empirical studies assessing the effectiveness of aid for trade as regards trade performance. Furthermore, existing work does not test which are the channels through which aid for trade has an impact on trade performance. We address this question using a two-step empirical analysis. Relying on an export performance model, we first test whether institutions and infrastructure, our two potential channels of transmission, are significant determinants of export performance. Second, we test the impact of aid for trade sectoral flows on the previously detected determinants of export performance. We show, as part of the first step, that the infrastructure channel is a highly significant determinant of export performance, whereas the institutional channel turns out to have a limited positive impact on developing countries’ export performance. Furthermore, we show, from the second step, that aid for infrastructure, once instrumented, has a strong and positive impact on the infrastructure level. As a result, we find that a ten per cent increase in aid for infrastructure commitments per capita in developing countries leads to an average 2.34 per cent increase in the exports over GDP ratio. It is also equivalent to a 2.71 per cent reduction in tariff and nontariff barriers. These results highlight the high potential impact of aid for trade on developing countries’ export performance throughout the infrastructure channel

Does aid for trade enhance export performance? Investigating on the infrastructure channel

Today, there are few empirical studies assessing the effectiveness of aid for trade on trade pe rformance. Furthermore, existing works do not test channels by which this impact is transiting. We address this question using an empirical analysis constructed in two steps. Following a model of export performance, we first test if institutions and infrastructure, our two potential channels of transmission, are indeed determinants of export performance. Secondly, we test the impact of aid for trade sectoral flows on the determinants that were highlighted in the first part. We show that the infrastructure channel appears to be highly significant in the first step whereas the institutional one turns out to have limited impact on developing countries’ exports. Furthermore, in our second step, aid for infrastructure seems, once instrumented, to have a strong and positive impact on the infrastructure level. Our results indicate that a 10% increase in aid to infrastructure commitments per capita leads to an average increase of the exports over GDP ratio for a developing country of 2.34%. It is also equivalent to a 2.71% reduction of the tariff and non-tariff barriers. This highlights the very high economic impact of aid for trade throughout the channel of infrastructures

The Critical Mass Approach to Achieve a Deal on Green Goods and Services: What is on the Table? How Much to Expect?

At the Davos forum of January 2014, a group of 14 countries pledged to launch negotiations on liberalising trade in ‘green goods’ (also known as `environmental goods’(EGs)), focussing on the elimination of tariffs for an ‘APEC list’ of 54 products. The paper shows that the ‘Davos group’, with an average tariff of 1.8%, has little to offer as countries have avoided submitting products with tariffs peaks for tariff reductions. Even if the list were extended to the 411 products on the ‘WTO list’, taking into account tariff dispersion, their tariff structure on EGs would be equivalent to a uniform tariff of 3.4%, about half the uniform tariff-equivalent for non EGs products. Enlarging the number of participants to low-income countries might be possible as, on average, their imports would not increase by more than 8 percent. However, because of the strong complementarities between trade in Environmental Goods and trade in Environmental Services, these should also be brought to the negotiation table even though difficulties in reaching agreement on their scope are likely to be great

Does aid for trade enhance export performance? Investigating on the infrastructure channel

Today, there are few empirical studies assessing the effectiveness of aid for trade on trade pe rformance. Furthermore, existing works do not test channels by which this impact is transiting. We address this question using an empirical analysis constructed in two steps. Following a model of export performance, we first test if institutions and infrastructure, our two potential channels of transmission, are indeed determinants of export performance. Secondly, we test the impact of aid for trade sectoral flows on the determinants that were highlighted in the first part. We show that the infrastructure channel appears to be highly significant in the first step whereas the institutional one turns out to have limited impact on developing countries’ exports. Furthermore, in our second step, aid for infrastructure seems, once instrumented, to have a strong and positive impact on the infrastructure level. Our results indicate that a 10% increase in aid to infrastructure commitments per capita leads to an average increase of the exports over GDP ratio for a developing country of 2.34%. It is also equivalent to a 2.71% reduction of the tariff and non-tariff barriers. This highlights the very high economic impact of aid for trade throughout the channel of infrastructures

The Relaunching of Negotiations on Green Goods and Services: Any breakthrough in Sight?

The Bali a minima agreement last December has given new hopes that the WTO is not dead. The recent announcement that negotiations on the reductions of tariffs on environmental goods are to resume starting from a list of goods identified by APEC members in September 2012 gives hope that the triple win outcome of the Doha round for trade, for development and for the environment-might materialize, at least partly. Or does it? This brève argues that unless the field of negotiations is widened, the initiative will not help much

Barriers to Trade in Environmental Goods and Environmental Services: How Important Are They? How Much Progress at Reducing Them?

Barriers to trade in Environmental Goods (EGs) and Environmental Services (ESs) are documented for a large sample of countries and compared with barriers to trade in other goods and other services. Some progress at reduction in barriers has occurred at the national, regional and sectoral levels but not at the multilateral level, where countries have been unable to agree on an approach to reduce barriers to trade. For EGs, tariffs and NTBs are highest for low-income countries and low for high-income countries. First-order estimates of the import response to a 50% reduction in tariffs for low-income countries suggest an increase in imports of around 4%. For ESs, estimates draw on the comparison of an Environment Services Liberalization index calculated across modes and services sub-sectors. The limitations of this ordinal index coupled with the inadequacy of the UN CPC list where services are defined in an exclusionary manner so that they cannot appear on two lists, casts greater uncertainty as to the informational content of the commitment measures presented here which, at best, indicate bindings on market access and national treatment rather than actual policies. It would appear nonetheless that at least as great, and probably greater commitments took place in the environmental sectors (as defined by the CPC) both multilaterally and regionally than for ‘other’ services with the same pattern across income groups: greater commitments observed for HIC than for MICs and LICs although it is widely recognized that GATS commitments by HICs largely amounted to consolidated members’ unilateral services policies. North-South Regional Trade Agreements resulted mostly in commitments by the Southern partners indicating greater prospects for reducing barriers to trade in a regional than in a multilateral context

What to watch for in the negotiations for an Environmental Goods Agreement (EGA)

This July in Geneva, 14 countries launched negotiations to reach free trade in environmental goods (EGs) through an Environmental Good Agreement (EGA) under the umbrella of the World Trade Organization (WTO). For reasons given here, progress on these negotiations is a barometer to watch for those following climate negotiations

Barriers to Trade in Environmental Goods and Environmental Services: How Important Are They? How Much Progress at Reducing Them?

Barriers to trade in Environmental Goods (EGs) and Environmental Services (ESs) are documented for a large sample of countries and compared with barriers to trade in other goods and other services. Some progress at reduction in barriers has occurred at the national, regional and sectoral levels but not at the multilateral level, where countries have been unable to agree on an approach to reduce barriers to trade. For EGs, tariffs and NTBs are highest for low-income countries and low for high-income countries. First-order estimates of the import response to a 50% reduction in tariffs for low-income countries suggest an increase in imports of around 4%. For ESs, estimates draw on the comparison of an Environment Services Liberalization index calculated across modes and services sub-sectors. The limitations of this ordinal index coupled with the inadequacy of the UN CPC list where services are defined in an exclusionary manner so that they cannot appear on two lists, casts greater uncertainty as to the informational content of the commitment measures presented here which, at best, indicate bindings on market access and national treatment rather than actual policies. It would appear nonetheless that at least as great, and probably greater commitments took place in the environmental sectors (as defined by the CPC) both multilaterally and regionally than for ‘other’ services with the same pattern across income groups: greater commitments observed for HIC than for MICs and LICs although it is widely recognized that GATS commitments by HICs largely amounted to consolidated members’ unilateral services policies. North-South Regional Trade Agreements resulted mostly in commitments by the Southern partners indicating greater prospects for reducing barriers to trade in a regional than in a multilateral context