Article
Viji Rangaswami, Lionel Johnson
{
"authors": [
"Viji Rangaswami"
],
"type": "other",
"centerAffiliationAll": "",
"centers": [
"Carnegie Endowment for International Peace"
],
"collections": [],
"englishNewsletterAll": "",
"nonEnglishNewsletterAll": "",
"primaryCenter": "Carnegie Endowment for International Peace",
"programAffiliation": "",
"programs": [],
"projects": [],
"regions": [
"North America",
"United States"
],
"topics": [
"Economy",
"Trade"
]
}
REQUIRED IMAGE
Other
Preserve GSP, A Memo to the U.S. Trade Representative
The real reason more countries do not benefit from the U.S. Generalized System of Preferences is that the program excludes the very products most developing countries can competitively produce, which primarily benefits developed countries and non-GSP countries at the expense of countries with large poor populations.
Published on Sep 7, 2006
Source: Comments Submitted to the US Trade Representative
In the wake of the collapse of the current WTO negotiations, the United States announced it would review whether to continue to provide trade preferences for a number of developing countries, including India, Brazil, and South Africa. The ostensible reason for the review is to ensure that advanced developing countries do not monopolize the market access opportunities under the U.S. Generalized System of Preferences. Carnegie Associate Viji Rangaswami co-authored comments to the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative arguing that the real reason more countries do not benefit from GSP is that the program excludes the very products most developing countries can competitively produce, and that revocation of eligibility for the targeted countries primarily benefits developed countries and non-GSP countries at the expense of countries with large poor populations.
About the Author
Viji Rangaswami
Former Associate
- Farm Policies Block Progress for the Poor
- Nickel and Diming the Poor: U.S. Implementation of the LDC InitiativeOther
Viji Rangaswami
Recent Work
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
- Trump and Xi Are Angling for Three Years of StabilityCommentary
But their "principal to principal" model will only be as effective as the political strength of each leader back home.
Damien Ma
- China Sells Stability Amid American VolatilityCommentary
U.S. unpredictability has allowed China to capitalize on its positioning as the “responsible great power”. Paradoxically, the more China wins the perception game, the more likely expectations will rise for Beijing to deliver not just words but to demonstrate with its deeds.
Chong Ja Ian
- The Xi Doctrine Zeros in on “High-Quality Development” for China’s Economic FutureCommentary
In the latest Five-Year Plan, the Chinese president cements the shift to an innovation-driven economy over a consumption-driven one.
Damien Ma
- When It Comes to Superpower Geopolitics, Malaysia Is Staunchly NonpartisanCommentary
For Malaysia, the conjunction that works is “and” not “or” when it comes to the United States and China.
Elina Noor
- Today’s Rare Earths Conflict Echoes the 1973 Oil Crisis — But It’s Not the SameCommentary
Regulation, not embargo, allows Beijing to shape how other countries and firms adapt to its terms.
Alvin Camba
