What Is Non Reciprocal Trade Agreement

    0
    66

    Although ART is found mainly in Africa, a handful of African countries are also members of a number of supra-regional free trade agreements (FTAs), such as EFTA, the EU, the Pan-Arab Free Trade Area (CEFTA) and the Protocol on Trade Negotiations (PTN). Critics of non-reciprocal preferential agreements have traditionally argued that developing countries should abandon their dependence on unilateral trade preferences in favour of reciprocal agreements, as these imply a stronger, credible and lasting commitment (see, for example, [3]; [4] and [5]). This approach is also supported by those who believe that the young industry argument, often used to justify unilateral concessions, is a misleading argument. These include non-reciprocal trade agreements such as the GSP, ACP countries, the recent EU Everything But Arms (EBA) initiative, the US African Growth and Opportunity Act (AGOA), Cotonou and CBI. However, trade agreements, mutual or non-reciprocal, are very different. For example, the free trade agreement between the United States and Morocco is very different from the CEFTA. As a result, the usual dummies 0 and 1 can not take into account such problems. A better way to approach this problem is to use a measure that assigns different values — other than 0 and 1 — to different types of trade agreements, which, of course, is beyond the scope of this study. This paper examines whether and to what extent non-receptive preferential trade agreements (NRTPT) have increased exports from developing countries to richer countries. Using recent developments in the econometric analysis of the gravity equation during the period 1960-2008, we find strong evidence that the NRTPA and the Generalized System of Preferences as a whole have had an economically significant impact on developing countries` exports. However, the estimation of catch-all dummies obscures the heterogeneous results for each program.

    [17] pointed out that the theory of the gravitational model implies that not only the costs of bilateral trade (resistance to bilateral trade), but also the costs of trade relative to the rest of the world (multilateral resistance to trade) are relevant for predicting bilateral trade flows. In addition, we control endogeneity through bilateral fixed effects. This topic has received a lot of attention in the empirical literature of the gravitational equation, as [6] has found that trade agreements are not exogenous. They showed that the ex-post estimation of the partial effects of free trade agreements (NEAs) was distorted, mainly due to the self-selection of country pairs in the agreements (due to the level of trade available), and found that this self-selection bias can be significantly reduced when certain effects are used or when differentiated data are used. In addition, other recent studies examine the impact of non-reciprocal trade agreements on bilateral trade, including controls on regional trade agreements. [8] Analysis of the GSP with annual data for 184 countries during the period 1953-2006 and consolidation that the GSP tends to promote exports in both directions in the short term but hinders them in the long term. In contrast, [9] and [10], with data for 177 countries during the period 1960-2008, provide an in-depth analysis of this issue, providing strong evidence that NRTP HAS A POSITIVE IMPACT ON EXPORTS FROM DEVELOPING COUNTRIES TO DEVELOPED COUNTRIES, BUT ALSO HAS A POSITIVE EFFECT IN THE OPPOSITE DIRECTION, THAT IS, FROM BENEFICIARY COUNTRIES TO BENEFICIARY COUNTRIES. [11] Examine the impact of different types of economic integration agreements (including unilateral preferential trade agreements) on trade flows and trade margins using data at five-year intervals from 1965 to 2000 and conclude that deeper integration agreements have a greater impact on aggregate trade flows, large margins and intense margins than flater agreements. .