The Rise of Services Trade: Regional Initiatives and Challenges for the WTO

Dee, Philippa; Sidorenko, Alexandra

doi:10.1142/9789814508759_0008

Cited by 4 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…While these authors point out one of the key limits of reciprocity in dealing with the political economy resistance to reform, various authors have pointed out the limits of reciprocity in dealing with the economic externalities associated with reform. The arguments by Antràs and Staiger (2007) and Dee and Sidorenko (2006) have already been summarized above. In a similar vein, Hoekman and Mattoo (2011) note that when reforms reduce deadweight costs, the benefits of reform are fully internalized and the pressure for reform will be unilateral.…”

Section: Why Has Reform Been Unilateral Outside the Eu?mentioning

confidence: 84%

“…It is not clear that this terms-of-trade argument extends beyond tariff reforms. Dee and Sidorenko (2006) point out that empirically, the terms of trade effects of unilateral behind-the-border reforms are likely to be minimal or even positive, so trade agreements may not be necessary to ensure efficient outcomes. In the context of cross-border trade in services (rather than goods), Francois and Hoekman (2010) argue that the WTO, with its principles of reciprocity and non-discrimination, may not be sufficient.…”

Section: Economic Argumentsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Promoting Domestic Reforms Through Regionalism

Dee

2011

SSRN Journal

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Standard-Nutzungsbedingungen:Die Dokumente auf EconStor dürfen zu eigenen wissenschaftlichen Zwecken und zum Privatgebrauch gespeichert und kopiert werden.Sie dürfen die Dokumente nicht für öffentliche oder kommerzielle Zwecke vervielfältigen, öffentlich ausstellen, öffentlich zugänglich machen, vertreiben oder anderweitig nutzen.Sofern die Verfasser die Dokumente unter Open-Content-Lizenzen (insbesondere CC-Lizenzen) zur Verfügung gestellt haben sollten, gelten abweichend von diesen Nutzungsbedingungen die in der dort genannten Lizenz gewährten Nutzungsrechte. Terms of use: Documents in Asian Development Bank InstituteThe Working Paper series is a continuation of the formerly named Discussion Paper series; the numbering of the papers continued without interruption or change. ADBI's working papers reflect initial ideas on a topic and are posted online for discussion. ADBI encourages readers to post their comments on the main page for each working paper (given in the citation below). Some working papers may develop into other forms of publication. The views expressed in this paper are the views of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views or policies of ADBI, the Asian Development Bank (ADB), its Board of Directors, or the governments they represent. ADBI does not guarantee the accuracy of the data included in this paper and accepts no responsibility for any consequences of their use. Terminology used may not necessarily be consistent with ADB official terms.Asian Development Bank Institute Kasumigaseki Building 8F 3-2-5 Kasumigaseki, Chiyoda-ku Tokyo 100-6008, JapanTel:+81-3-3593-5500 Fax:+81-3-3593-5571 URL:www.adbi.org E-mail: info@adbi.org AbstractThere is a strong presumption among economists that domestic reforms are promoted by regionalism. Yet strong empirical evidence for this proposition is lacking. This paper examines both the theoretical arguments and empirical evidence on this issue, drawing on the relevant economic, political, and legal literature. The authors argue that in general, the case for reciprocity in domestic reforms is weak. In the one case where a regional agreement appears to have promoted domestic reform-the European Union (EU)-the enforcement mechanisms used by the European Court of Justice played a significant role. But those mechanisms are not unique. Instead, the authors argue that the EU's success was because domestic constituents were empowered to take action against uncompetitive regulation. Thus the EU promoted economic reform in sensitive, behind-the-border areas because it overcame the problem of loss of sovereignty by internalizing the political battle to domestic interests, and yet still provided a non-political frame of reference for the debate.

show abstract

Section: Why Has Reform Been Unilateral Outside the Eu?mentioning

confidence: 84%

Section: Economic Argumentsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Promoting Domestic Reforms Through Regionalism

Dee

2011

SSRN Journal

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Even if a country does not happen to have comparative advantage in certain services, liberalization may have a positive effect in terms of encouraging further fragmentation of production activities, fostering exports of merchandise and/or other services. If mode 3 is the main mode of supply, the prices affected by liberalization are internal prices, so that the associated terms of trade effects can be neutral or even positive (Dee and Sidorenko, 2006).…”

Section: Differences Between Goods and Services Liberalizationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Audiovisual goods and services inpreferential trade agreements

Chase¹

2015

Trade Cooperation

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Since the mid 1980s a substantial amount of research has been undertaken on trade in services. Much of this is inspired by the WTO or regional trade agreements, especially the EU, but an increasing number of papers focus on the impacts of services sector liberalization. This paper surveys the literature, focusing on contributions that investigate the determinants of international trade and investment in services, the potential gains from greater trade (and liberalization) and efforts to cooperate to achieve such liberalization through trade agreements. There is increasing evidence that services liberalization is a major potential source of welfare gain, and that the performance of service sectors, and thus services policies, may be an important determinant of trade volumes, the distributional effects of trade, and economy-wide growth. Relatively little research has been done on the political economy of services trade and investment policies and the implications for the design of international cooperation -whether trade agreements or development assistance. This is an important lacuna given the extensive efforts that are invested by governments in the pursuit of such cooperation, both bilateral and multilateral.

show abstract

“…Even if a country does not happen to have comparative advantage in certain services, liberalization may have a positive effect by encouraging further fragmentation of production activities, fostering exports of merchandise and/or other services. If mode 3 is the main mode of supply, the prices affected by liberalization are internal prices, so that the associated terms of trade effects can be neutral or even positive (as a result of improving international competitiveness) (Dee and Sidorenko, 2006).…”

Section: Setting Future Research Prioritiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

CGE Modeling of Market Access in Services

Christen¹,

François²,

Hoekman³

2012

Policy Research Working Papers

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Standard-Nutzungsbedingungen:Die Dokumente auf EconStor dürfen zu eigenen wissenschaftlichen Zwecken und zum Privatgebrauch gespeichert und kopiert werden.Sie dürfen die Dokumente nicht für öffentliche oder kommerzielle Zwecke vervielfältigen, öffentlich ausstellen, öffentlich zugänglich machen, vertreiben oder anderweitig nutzen.Sofern die Verfasser die Dokumente unter Open-Content-Lizenzen (insbesondere CC-Lizenzen) zur Verfügung gestellt haben sollten, gelten abweichend von diesen Nutzungsbedingungen die in der dort genannten Lizenz gewährten Nutzungsrechte. Terms of use: Documents in Bernard Hoekman World Bank, and CEPRJune 2012 * We are grateful to Peter Dixon for tremendous patience, and to both him and David Tarr for very constructive and helpful comments on earlier versions of this paper. All views expressed are strictly personal and should not be attributed to the World Bank. This is a "working draft" version of a handbook chapter. AbstractThis paper examines how the applied multi-sector computable general equilibrium (CGE) literature has moved into quantification of the impacts of greater market access for services. This includes discussion of multisector linkages to the service sector, as well both measuring barriers to trade and investment (generally with a mix of firm surveys, price comparisons, and econometrics), and how changes in these barriers, however measured, have been implemented in the CGE literature. Three challenges are highlighted. The first is identification of how trade in services takes place and how market access is therefore affected by policy. The second is to find data sufficiently robust for modeling purposes. The third, linked to the data problem, is to quantify the barriers to be examined. Significant progress has been made in modeling foreign direct investment and linking this to productivity, which turns out to be important. The paper also provides an example of modeling productivity linkages to openness and domestic regulation, with an applied CGE model of Italy. This illustrates cross-sector linkages and the integration of economic data and policy measures to define service sector experiments. Priorities for future research include better modeling of market structure, the linkages between sectors and the complementarities between different modes of supplying services.

show abstract

The Rise of Services Trade: Regional Initiatives and Challenges for the WTO

Cited by 4 publications

References 0 publications

Promoting Domestic Reforms Through Regionalism

Promoting Domestic Reforms Through Regionalism

Audiovisual goods and services inpreferential trade agreements

CGE Modeling of Market Access in Services

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About