Suchergebnisse

The WTO stifles the possibility of developing countries to utilize trade as a means to economic growth and development. Requirements to implement WTO rules are at odds with development ideals- and countries simply try to implement these rules in such way that can give them more opportunities, profits and contribution to the attainment of development goals. One important trend in recent years in the field of trade policy is the proliferation of preferential trade agreements (PTAs). Normally, PTAs provide for greater levels of liberalization among the parties than what the countries may have committed to at the WTO in terms of tariffs or services liberalization. The new generation of PTAs tend to contain disciplines which go beyond relevant WTO disciplines, or regulate issues in respect of which there are no WTO disciplines. One example is the agreement that the European Union has signed with South-East European countries. This agreement deviate from the purely trade-focused purpose but it includes other broader intentions. But still many developing countries are addressing the fact that they are not benefiting from the WTO system and they are claiming that the cost of adjustment to its rules is higher than the advantage of being part of the WTO. One of the main problems addressed by developing countries is the reciprocity of the market access concession. The WTO should face this problem and try to find suitable solutions with minor costs for the members. DOI:10.5901/ajis.2015.v4n3s1p436

Ravenhill, John: Preferential trade agreements and the future of Australian trade policy. - S. 121-128. Ravenhill, John: The move to preferential trade on the Western Pacific Rim. Some initial conclusions. - S. 129-150. Dee, Philippa: The economic effects of PTAs. - S. 151-163. Mulgan, Aurelia George: Japan's FTA politics and the problem of agricultural trade liberalisation. - S. 164-178. Yang Jiang: Australia-China FTA. China's domestic politics and the roots of different national approaches to FTAs. - S. 179-195. Faunce, Thomas and Kathy Sats: Bilateral trade agreements as drivers of national and transnational benefit from health technology policy. Implications of recent US deals for Australian negotiations with China and India. - S. 196-213. Wesley, Michael: The strategic effects of preferential trade agreements. - S. 214-228. Capling, Ann: Australia's trade policy dilemmas. - S. 229-244

The growth of digital trade is dependant upon greater interconnectivity across borders. Several countries strive to achieve such interconnectivity and integration in digital trade through international trade agreements. Digital trade integration is a complex, multidimensional process that integrates regulatory structures/policy designs, digital technologies and business processes along the entire global/regional digital value chain. This paper sets out five foundational elements of digital trade integration: reducing digital trade barriers; digital trade facilitation; digital trade regulatory frameworks and digital trust policies; digital development and inclusion; and institutional coordination. It then examines the extent to which Preferential Trade Agreements (PTAs) can or do contribute to digital integration. Some recent PTAs contain ambitious provisions to reduce regulatory barriers in digital trade and facilitate cross-border data flows. However, most PTAs fail to holistically support the five pillars of digital trade integration, and are particularly deficient in supporting digital development and inclusion, incorporating adequate digital trade facilitation measures, and facilitating meaningful international regulatory cooperation. This paper provides various policy recommendations to address such deficiencies. This paper also contains a case study of digital trade integration in the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN). It argues that the ASEAN framework currently functions as a weak form of digital trade integration, focusing mainly on political goodwill and high-level cooperation. Although the ASEAN Members are committed to enhancing regulatory cooperation and strengthening their institutions on electronic commerce, the development asymmetry coupled with the conflicting policy preferences of ASEAN Members remains a key obstacle.

The multilateral trade agreements in the Annexes to the Agreement Establishing the World Trade Organization provide a comprehensive structure for international trade. Why would trading partners in different countries feel the need to go outside this framework in order to set up preferential trade arrangements? This book considers the structure of the World Trade Organization's agreements and the types of preferential trade arrangements, and deliberates the value of the latter in the light of the operation of the former. Preferential Trade Agreements and International Law offers a comprehensive examination of preferential trade agreements and considers the features of specific regional and bilateral trade agreements without drawing upon systematic features and trends. It shows the latest state of knowledge on the topic and will be of value to researchers, academics, policymakers, and students interested in international trade and economic law.

The nature of FTAs is to offer free trade only to members, not to non-members. Thus, FTAs are two-faced: they ensure free trade for members and (relative) protection against non-members. First-year students of international economics would be asked to shift to a different field if they could not grasp this elementary and elemental distinction, and yet today's politicians imagine themselves to be statesmen endorsing free trade when they embrace these inherently discriminatory PTAs. As PTAs proliferate, the main problem that arises is the accompanying proliferation of discrimination in market access and a whole maze of trade duties and barriers that vary among PTAs. I have called this outcome the "spaghetti bowl" phenomenon. (I must confess that I once used this analogy in an after-dinner speech when the chairman was an Italian who did not quite share my difficulty in handling spaghetti and seemed genuinely puzzled!) Mr. David de Pury, a distinguished representative of the globalized private sector and the chief executive officer of ABB, Switzerland, is among the renowned executives who have expressed themselves in public for a precisely on this point and on the advantage, even the necessity, of having uniform nondiscriminatory rules and barriers. I endorse this objective, which only multilateral WTO-sanctioned treaties make possible. In view of its importance, let me say a little more on this question.

Preferential trade agreements are those agreements that give preference to the certain states, nations, or countries within which the agreement is made with respect to the preference in the trade. This concept was initiated by keeping in mind the benefits associated with it, but the concept led to more of the conspiracy rather than equality. The word preference within itself depicts the biasness over the others. The global governance of trade helps everyone to be equally stabilized and not left with unequal treatments. There should be an ideal route for the trade and equitability shall be established amongst all by giving equal opportunities to all the nations and states. There have been immense issues relating to the politics, trade biasness and trade discrimination in European Union and United States of America Preferential Trade Agreements. The concept of preference shall be limited such that it should not hamper other's chance to even compete in the paths of trade. This research mainly focuses on the path of preferential trade with its benefits, drawbacks and how can one limit its scope to maintain justice amongst all.

The subject of this article is the technical barriers to trade (TBT) provisions in preferential trade agreements (PTAs). More precisely, it inquires into TBT provisions in PTAs that go beyond the scope of the rules enshrined in the World Trade Organization's (WTO) TBT Agreement. To this end, it aims to answer three questions. First, what kind of new TBT rules do modern PTAs contain? Second, what explains their existence, given that PTAs usually already incorporate or resemble WTO rules on domestic regulatory measures, such as Article III of the GATT 1994 or the TBT Agreement, which address technical barriers to a certain extent? And, finally, are such rules consistent with the requirements set forth by WTO law? For purposes of illustration, the recently concluded free trade agreement (FTA) between the European Union (EU) and Korea is used as a case study.