trade blocs african experience
TRANSCRIPT
Trade BlocsAfrican Experience
Jan Willem GunningVrije Universiteit Amsterdam
ERF, Amman, Jordan, March 19, 2017
The African experience
• regionalism adopted in 1958: continent of small economies, many landlocked • enshrined in OAU charter 1963• rationale in the 1960s and 1970s: industrialization requires integration• Abuja 1991: Pan-African Economic Community by 2025• numerous initiatives, often partly implemented, with overlapping membership• intra-bloc trade remained very low
poor implementationvery high transport cost low trade potential: similar comparative advantage
Oyejide, Elbadawi and Collier (eds.) AERC study (1997) Lyakurwa et al. (1997), Jebuni (1997), Hartzenberg (2011)Collier and Gunning (1995)
2
Economic Partnership Agreements (EPAs): linking regional blocs with the EU
• original idea: using EU as external agency of restraint for reforming governments
• controversy: little additional access to EU market, EU wanted access to African markets (but allowed long adjustment periods)
• slow process: stepping stone with Ghana signed a few months ago
Collier and Gunning (1995)
3
Beware: trade blocs may reduce your welfare
• traditional economic welfare analysis (constant marginal cost, Viner): bloc
may cause a welfare loss (trade diversion)• with increasing marginal cost within the bloc that becomes certain • East African Community (EAC): Tanzania imports from both Kenya (IMC)
and rest of the world (CMC, marginal supplier)loss in Tanzania: lower tariff revenue, consumer surplus unchanged gain in Kenya: higher producer surplusaggregate loss for the bloc.
Panagariya (2000) Gunning (2002)
4
Fiscal and distributional problems• loss of tariff revenue • unequal division of the spoils: perceived or real• collapse of the EAC in 1977
Kenya seen as gaining disproportionately • with increasing marginal cost (2 bloc members, A and B):
productions costs high in A, intermediate in B, low in ROW if A (welfare loss) poorer the bloc creates divergence if A richer the bloc creates convergence
Panagariya (2000)
5
Divergence in a trade bloc
• South-South bloc: costs fall and incomes rise from A to B to ROW (more capital intensive); bloc benefits B (richer bloc member) at the expense of A; divergence
• North-North bloc: costs fall and incomes rise from ROW to A to B (bloc members have high capital intensity relative to ROW); bloc benefits A (poorer bloc member) at the expense of B; convergence
• trade diversion caused by regional bloc benefits the member most like the ROW in terms of income (capital intensity): the poorest member in a North-North bloc, the richest member in a South-South bloc
• hence convergence in the EU (Ireland benefits), but divergence in the EAC (Kenya benefits)
World Bank (2000)
6
Commitment and restraint
• divergence (real or perceived) undermines political commitment• EPAs (EU-Africa blocs) have this problem• regional bloc fails as agency of restraint (lock-in device) if loss of
membership not an effective deterrent (Brexit?)
Fine and Yeo (1997)
7
Scale effects and product differentiation
• in Krugman’s (Dixit-Stiglitz) model smaller country produces fewer goods in autarky
• with trade no firm needs to close (“2 + 2 = 4”) and the smaller country gains most: Benin gains more from trading with Nigeria than vice versa
Krugman (1980) African Development Bank (2000)
8
Conclusion
• Regional blocs require strong commitment EU: preventing war
• blocs require strong states: fiscal and distributional effect
9
10