Search

Begin New Search Topic Development Author Arne Melchior

1. A case study of Norway's beef trade from developing countries

Author:
Arne Melchior, Karl M. Rich, and Brian D. Perry
Publication Date:
02-2012
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Norwegian Institute of International Affairs
Abstract:
Norway has traditionally operated a rather closed, managed market for beef importsnder WTO-auspices, Norway operates a tariff-rate quota (TRQ) for beef that allows the entry of a small amount of product at a relatively low tariff rate, with higher rates of duty imposed on imports over the quota. There are several different TRQs of relevance to boneless beef. The main quota is the WTO quota, which allows for the annual import of 1,084 tons of frozen beef at an in-quota duty rate of NOK 33,60/kg for boneless cuts. Countries with ordinary GSP access receive a 30 percent discount on this duty, so that the in-quota GSP tariff is NOK 23,52/kg. The WTO quota is administered once per year by an auction system – table 6 provides a list of the prices and volumes for the 2011 WTO quota. For imports outside the WTO quota, the duty is 119,01 NOK/kg, with GSP countries paying 10 percent less at NOK 107,11/kg.
Topic:
Development, International Trade and Finance, and Markets
Political Geography:
Norway

2. Globalisation, Domestic Market Integration, and the Regional Disparities of India

Author:
Arne Melchior
Publication Date:
10-2010
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Norwegian Institute of International Affairs
Abstract:
Using a world trade model with India subdivided into states, the paper examines how regional disparities are affected by domestic inter-state trade as well as international trade. According to the analysis, international liberalisation promotes decentralisation and convergence, not divergence, so trade is not to blame for India's growing regional disparities. High economic growth within India makes domestic markets more important and the geographical effect of this is opposite to that of globalisation. This may counterbalance the geographical impact of international liberalisation and explain why recent changes in geographical clustering in India are limited. The empirical results are consistent with this. They also indicate that Indian services expansion is largely driven by increases in domestic demand due to growth, and that domestic market integration is essential for India's manufacturing sector. We argue that for larger nations, the domestic inter-regional trade is important and India should have a trade policy that addresses domestic as well as international market integration.
Topic:
Development, Globalization, and International Trade and Finance
Political Geography:
South Asia, India, and Asia

3. Aid for Trade and the Post-Washington Confusion

Author:
Arne Melchior
Publication Date:
01-2007
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Norwegian Institute of International Affairs
Abstract:
The paper examines the rationale for”aid for trade” (AfT), starting with a review of developments in the field and institutions involved. A statistical analysis attempts to trace for which countries there has not been a positive relationship between trade and development. The results indicate that for 40 countries, representing 2/3 of the world population, there has been a positive relationship between trade openness and growth. The relationship has however been negative for 15 countries representing 3% of the world population, and not so clear for the rest (around 100 countries, covering 30% of the world population). For the negative cases, the” problems with trade” are the same as the” problems with growth”, so AfT should be granted in conjunction with help for economic development in general. AfT related to supply-side limitations should be given not only to the LDCs (Least Developed Countries); other classifications in fact serve better in order to trace those with the greatest need for AfT.
Topic:
Development, Economics, Humanitarian Aid, and International Trade and Finance
Political Geography:
Washington

4. GSP in the "spaghetti bowl"; of trade preferences

Author:
Arne Melchior
Publication Date:
09-2005
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Norwegian Institute of International Affairs
Abstract:
The paper examines the relative position of GSP (tariff preferences for developing countries) compared to ordinary tariffs and free trade agreements in Norway, the EU and the USA. On average, ordinary GSP gives a tariff rebate of less than 50% in all countries. “Extended” GSP, given to the Least Developed Countries (LDCs) and others, implies zero tariffs in Norway and the EU, but only partial liberalisation in the USA. EU provides extended GSP for 119 countries, while the USA does so for 76 and Norway for 52. Considering the shares of trade rather than the number of countries, extended GSP covers 5% or less of total trade in all cases, and ordinary GSP is much more important. Compared to tariffs in free trade agreements, ordinary GSP is inferior in the USA and the EU, but not too far behind in Norway. This is due to recent cuts in MFN tariffs as well as improvements in the GSP system of Norway. For manufacturing, Norway has low tariffs and a generous GSP system. This is however not the case for agriculture.
Topic:
Development, International Trade and Finance, and Third World
Political Geography:
United States, Europe, and Norway

5. Trade policy differentiation between developing countries under GSP schemes

Author:
Arne Melchior
Publication Date:
09-2005
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Norwegian Institute of International Affairs
Abstract:
The paper reviews options with respect to differentiation between beneficiaries of GSP (tariff preferences for developing countries). It has for a long time been accepted that the Least Developed Countries (LDCs) may be treated better than other developing countries, but a recent WTO dispute indicates that discrimination beyond this is possible if it is based on objective criteria related to development. The paper discusses GSP differentiation in the light of this, and argues that the most generous preferences are given to a wider group of countries than the LDCs. A main reason is that LDCs constitute a small part of the developing world, and 4/5 of the world's poor live outside the LDCs. Preferences for the poorest should not become an obstacle for improved market access for the “second poorest”. The paper discusses possible reforms in Norway's GSP systems in this light. According to objective criteria, the special position of Botswana and Namibia in Norway's current GSP system could be questioned, since e.g. Botswana is now an upper middle income country.
Topic:
Development, International Cooperation, International Trade and Finance, and Third World
Political Geography:
Botswana

6. GSP in the 'spaghetti bowl' of trade preferences

Author:
Arne Melchior
Publication Date:
09-2005
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Norwegian Institute of International Affairs
Abstract:
The paper examines the relative position of GSP (tariff preferences for developing countries) compared to ordinary tariffs and free trade agreements in Norway, the EU and the USA. On average, ordinary GSP gives a tariff rebate of less than 50% in all countries. “Extended” GSP, given to the Least Developed Countries (LDCs) and others, implies zero tariffs in Norway and the EU, but only partial liberalisation in the USA. EU provides extended GSP for 119 countries, while the USA does so for 76 and Norway for 52. Considering the shares of trade rather than the number of countries, extended GSP covers 5% or less of total trade in all cases, and ordinary GSP is much more important. Compared to tariffs in free trade agreements, ordinary GSP is inferior in the USA and the EU, but not too far behind in Norway. This is due to recent cuts in MFN tariffs as well as improvements in the GSP system of Norway. For manufacturing, Norway has low tariffs and a generous GSP system. This is however not the case for agriculture.
Topic:
Development, Economics, and International Trade and Finance
Political Geography:
United States, Europe, and Norway