More Trade, Less Poverty
By SUSAN SCHWAB
Wall Street Journal
GENEVA -- The atmosphere is charged with political pressure and historical
significance as trade ministers and negotiators representing World Trade
Organization members gather this week. With time running out for a successful
conclusion of the Doha Development Round, speculation has intensified about what
the U.S. and other WTO members will be willing to do to achieve success. I
reaffirm here that the U.S. is committed to an ambitious and comprehensive
outcome by the end of the year. As President Bush declared last week at the
U.S.-EU summit, the Doha Round is too important to fail.
We regard it as our generation's opportunity to attack the scourge of poverty
by opening trade flows between all nations in agricultural goods, industrial
products and services. Half-measures that would leave millions in poverty --
people who might otherwise have been helped -- and that would dampen potential
economic opportunities for people in all countries, should not be
acceptable.
Economists have determined over and over again that the more ambitious the
opening of trade flows, the greater the results. The data also make it clear
that the most effective way for developed countries to assist developing
countries through trade is to lower agricultural tariffs.
Earlier this month, the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development
issued a study that looked at the impact of 50% cuts in tariffs, agricultural
export subsidies, and domestic support programs of OECD countries. The study
concluded that this degree of trade liberalization in agricultural goods alone
would account for 59% of the total potential global economic gains from expanded
trade in all types of goods.
But more importantly, the OECD study, like a comparable World Bank study,
concluded that market access -- meaning tariff cuts -- accounted for the lion's
share, or nearly 79%, of the potential benefits of agricultural trade
liberalization. These and other studies have buttressed U.S. determination to
keep WTO members focused on making meaningful improvements in agricultural
market access. Simply stated, that is where the gains are for developing
countries.
Of course, expanded market access is not solely the burden of developed
countries. Developing countries, particularly the more advanced developing
countries, must also muster the political will to bring down barriers. This
applies across all sectors as well. As important as agriculture is to the Doha
Round negotiations, we must remember that 75% of annual global trade is in
manufactured goods.
The record on how trade can spur development is compelling. The World Bank
has estimated that, in the 1990s, per capita real income grew three times faster
for developing countries that significantly lowered trade barriers (5%) than for
other developing countries that lowered barriers less (1.4%). Just as important,
the income gains were enjoyed by people at all income levels.
The World Bank also estimates that eliminating trade barriers in goods alone
(not including trade in the rapidly growing services sector), could boost
incomes in developing countries by at least $142 billion a year. That figure
exceeds the combined total of $80 billion in foreign economic assistance by G-7
countries last year and a current G-7 proposal for $42 billion for developing
country debt relief. Right now, around 70% of the duties on goods that
developing countries pay go to other developing countries. The only way for the
development potential so clearly evidenced by the World Bank studies to be
realized is for these tariffs to come down to promote further South-South
trade.
The United States put forward an offer last fall to make meaningful cuts in
trade-distorting domestic agricultural supports if other countries would
reciprocate with deep cuts in tariffs and trade-distorting domestic support. So
far, our trading partners have not matched our ambition -- but it is not too
late.
Multilateral trade rounds over the last 60 years have led us to this week.
The need for meaningful trade liberalization has never been greater and the
potential benefits of expanded trade have never been more compelling.
Ms. Schwab is U.S. trade representative.
###
|