Commentary
Regulation, not embargo, allows Beijing to shape how other countries and firms adapt to its terms.
Alvin Camba
{
"authors": [],
"type": "testimony",
"centerAffiliationAll": "",
"centers": [
"Carnegie Endowment for International Peace"
],
"collections": [],
"englishNewsletterAll": "",
"nonEnglishNewsletterAll": "",
"primaryCenter": "Carnegie Endowment for International Peace",
"programAffiliation": "",
"programs": [],
"projects": [],
"regions": [
"North America",
"South America",
"Middle East",
"North Africa",
"Southern, Eastern, and Western Africa",
"Western Europe"
],
"topics": [
"Economy",
"Trade"
]
}
REQUIRED IMAGE
Testimony
EU Trade Commissioner Peter Mandelson on Doha
EU Trade Commissioner Peter Mandelson recommends Carnegie's new study, Winners and Losers: Impact of the Doha Round on Developing Countries.
Published on Mar 21, 2006
EU Trade Commissioner Peter Mandelson has told the European Parliament that a successful Doha Agreement remains possible if all parties to the negotiations accept the need to come together in an ambitious final move that reflects the needs of all players. He argued that "the time of incremental steps, small moves and small concessions, is over."
In a speech to the International Trade Committee of the European Parliament in Brussels on March 21, Commissioner Mandelson also spoke about a new Carnegie report, Winners and Losers: Impact of the Doha Round on Developing Countries:
"I want to draw your attention to a study published this month by the Carnegie Endowment entitled 'Winners and Losers: Impact of the Doha round on Developing Countries.' This excellent study is essentially a warning. It cautions against seeing simple liberalisation in the Doha Round as a panacea for development.
"The Carnegie research reminds us that the bulk of the benefits of agricultural liberalization are limited to developed countries and a core group of highly competitive farm exporters - especially Brazil, Argentina and South Africa, and that exemptions from tariff cuts, policy space to support agricultural development and small scale farming, and the impact of preference erosion in poorer developing countries when faced with steep farm tariff reductions in the developed world should be taken into account. For all these reasons, the Carnegie research suggests that the key gains for developing countries in the DDA lie not in agriculture but in trade in industrial goods, especially in labor-intensive industries like shoes and textiles. These are arguments that the EU has long accepted and that others – including some in the NGO community - would do well to absorb."
EconomyTradeNorth AmericaSouth AmericaMiddle EastNorth AfricaSouthern, Eastern, and Western AfricaWestern Europe
Carnegie does not take institutional positions on public policy issues; the views represented herein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of Carnegie, its staff, or its trustees.
More Work from Carnegie China
- Today’s Rare Earths Conflict Echoes the 1973 Oil Crisis — But It’s Not the Same
- How China’s Growth Model Determines Its Climate PerformanceCommentary
Rather than climate ambitions, compatibility with investment and exports is why China supports both green and high-emission technologies.
Mathias Larsen
- What’s New about Involution?Commentary
“Involution” is a new word for an old problem, and without a very different set of policies to rein it in, it is a problem that is likely to persist.
Michael Pettis
- The Chinese Investment Riddle: What Cities RevealCommentary
While China's investment story seems contradictory from the outside, the real answers to Beijing's high-quality growth ambitions are hiding in plain sight across the nation's cities.
Yuhan Zhang
- Using China’s Central Government Balance Sheet to “Clean up” Local Government Debt Is a Bad IdeaCommentary
China's stimulus addiction cannot go on forever. Beijing still has policy space to clean up the country's massive debt issue, but time is running short.
Michael Pettis
