Trade in Brazil

Brazil reported a trade surplus equivalent to 807 Million USD in June of 2012. in times gone by, from 1991 until 2012, Brazil Balance of Trade averaged 1310.5900 Million USD reaching an all time high of 5659.4000 Million USD in July of 2006 and a record low of -1845.3000 Million USD in December of 1996. Brazil has an export-oriented economy. The main exports are transport equipment, iron ore, industrial raw materials, soybeans, footwear, coffee, autos, automotive parts, machinery. Brazil imports machinery, electrical and transport equipment, chemical products, automotive part and electronics. The primary trading partners of Brazil are The United States, European Union and Argentina. This page includes a graph with chronological data for Brazil Balance of Trade.

The balance of trade is the difference between the monetary value of exports and imports in an economy over a certain period of time. A positive balance of trade is known as a trade surplus and consists of exporting more than is imported; a unconstructive balance of trade is known as a trade deficit or, informally, a trade gap. The balance of trade forms part of the current account, which also includes other transactions such as income from the international investment position as well as worldwide aid. If the current account is in surplus, the country's net international asset position increases correspondingly. Equally, a deficit decreases the net international asset position. The Balance of Trade is identical to the difference between a country's amount produced and its domestic demand - the difference between what goods a country produces and how many goods it buys from abroad; this does not include money respent on foreign stocks, nor does it factor the concept of importing goods to produce for the domestic market.

The EU is Brazil's biggest trading partner, accounting for 22.5% of its total trade (2009). It is part of Mercosur and part of the EU's ongoing negotiations for a free trade conformity with that regional group. Brazil is the single biggest exporter of agricultural products to the EU, accounting for 12.4% of total EU imports (2009) and ranks as the EU's 10th trading partner. In goods, the EU runs an overall trade deficit with Brazil of over €4.1 billion (2009but has a surplus in commercial services trade of €2.4 billion (2009). The EU  is the biggest foreign investor in Brazil with nest egg in many sectors of the economy.

The Brazilian market is relatively highly protected with an applied customs averaging tariff of 12% and the EU consistently encourages Brazil to reduce tariff and non-tariff barriers, and to maintain a stable regulatory situation for European investors and traders. Brazil is a key interlocutor for the EU in the on-going WTO Doha Round of world trade talks.

The backbone of the EU's future bilateral trade relations with Brazil will be a wide-ranging EU-Mercosur Association Agreement which will also result in the creation of a vast free trade area. This agreement which is currently under compromise should provide a boost to regional trade integration among the countries of Mercosur and stimulate new opportunities for trade with the EU by removing tariff and non-tariff barriers to trade. The Mercosur-EU AA will cover, among other issues, trade in goods and services, investment, intellectual property rights (IPR) aspects including protection of environmental indications, government procurement, technical barriers to trade and sanitary and phytosanitary aspects.

Trade in Brazil

Until summer 2004 there was gradual but substantial progress in the negotiationwhich, however, stalled in September 2004. Since then, regular acquaintances have taken place both at ministerial and technical level in order to explore ways on how to re-engage the process.  The Madrid Summit, which brought together Heads of State and Governments from Latin America, the Caribbean and Europe, as well as imperative non-state actors, resulted in a decision to re-launch negotiations of the EU-Mercosur Free Trade Agreement - a process which is now under way.

Brazil was the United States' 8th largest goods export souk in 2011.

U.S. goods exports to Brazil in 2011 were $42.9 billion, up 21.2% ($7.5 billion) from 2010, and up 180% from 2000. U.S. exports to Brazil accounted for 2.9% of taken as a whole U.S. exports in 2011.

The top export categories (2-digit HS) in 2011 were: Machinery ($7.9 billion), Mineral Fuel ($6.3 billion), Aircraft ($5.4 billion), Electrical Machinery ($4.6 billion), and Plastic ($2.1 billion).

U.S. exports of agricultural products to Brazil totaled $800 million in 2011. Leading categories include: cotton ($323 million), dairy products ($40 million), wheat ($30 million), and sugars and sweeteners ($21 million).

U.S. exports of private commercial services* (i.e., excluding military and management) to Brazil were $19.9 billion in 2011 (preliminary data), 21% ($3.4 billion) more than 2010 and 219% greater than 2000 levels. Other private services (business, professional, and technical services, telecom services, and financial services), travel and royalties and license fees categories accounted for most of the U.S. services exports to Brazil.

Brazil was the United States' 17th largest supplier of goods imports in 2011.

U.S. goods imports from Brazil totaled $31.4 billion in 2011, a 30.9% increase ($7.4 billion) from 2010, and up 126% from 2000. U.S. imports from Brazil accounted for 1.4% of overall U.S. imports in 2011.

The five largest import categories in 2011 were: Mineral Fuel and Oil (crude) ($10.5 billion), Iron and Steel ($3.5 billion), Machinery ($2.3 billion), Spices, Tea, and Coffee (coffee) ($2.0 billion), and Wood Pulp ($1.0 billion).

U.S. imports of agricultural products from Brazil totaled $4.1 billion in 2011, the 4th largest supplier of Ag imports. Leading categories include: coffee (unroasted) ($1.9 billion), fruit and vegetable juices ($321 million), tobacco ($278 million), and raw beet and sugar cane ($270 million).

U.S. imports of private commercial services* (i.e., excluding military and government) were $6.9 billion in 2011 (preliminary data), 32% ($1.7 billion) more than 2010 and up 254% from 2000 level. The other private services (business, qualified, and technical services), travel services, and royalties and license fees categories led U.S. services imports from Brazil.

U.S. foreign direct investment (FDI) in Brazil (stock) was $66.0 billion in 2010 (latest data available), up 19.7% from 2009.

U.S. direct investment in Brazil is led by the manufacturing and finance/ indemnity sectors.

Brazil FDI in the United States (stock) was $1.1 billion in 2010 (latest data available).

Brazil’s reported direct investment in the U.S. is led by the comprehensive trade sector.

Sales of services in Brazil by majority U.S.-owned affiliates were $24.7 billion in 2009 (latest data available), while sales of services in the United States by majority Brazil-owned firms were $972 million.

 OPPOSITE Rio de Janeiro's best-known shopping mall, just before the tunnel that takes drivers to the beach resorts of Copacabana and Ipanema, stands a gleaming new showroom for JAC Motors, a state-owned Chinese car maker. The importance of the location is appropriate: imported Chinese cars have suddenly become a visible presence on Brazil's roads. This has alarmed Brazil's car industry and President Dilma Rousseff's government. Last month a 30-percentage-point tax increase on cars with less than 65% local content took effect, taking the tax on some imported models to a punitive 55%—on top of import tariffs.

The government's response is a mix of short-term protectionist measures combined with modest steps towards more constructive longer-term policy changes. The tax rise on cars was announced last September, as part of a new engineering policy. The aim was to bully carmakers without plants in Brazil to hurry up and build them. This seems to be working: JAC Motors, BMW, and Jaguar Land Rover, a unit of India's Tata Motors, have all announced plans to build factories in Brazil since the import tax was unveiled.

The industrial policy also features an experimental cut in the payroll tax for footwear, textile, furniture and software firms. But officials are at pains to point out that, rather than help specific industries, the main thrust of the new policy is to try to boost competitiveness more generally by promoting innovation, higher schooling and training.

The second emollient is that the real has depreciated by 17% against the dollar since its peak in late July. That is partly because investors fled emerging markets but also because of government intervention, in the form of taxes on short-term capital inflows. At the same time, the Central Bank has taken advantage of the economy's soft patch to cut its benchmark interest rate, from 12.5% in August to 11%. With inflation at 6.5%, the real interest rate is much lower than at any other time in the past decade.

But industry also wants to see fewer taxes, cheaper energy, less bureaucracy and better transport networks, says Paulo Skaf, FIESP's president. On these things the government is moving far more slowly, if at all. However narrowly targeted, protectionism will not only raise prices in Brazil but risks sending the wrong message to businesses. Across Latin America, trade with China is growing but partly at the expense of intra-regional trade in manufactures. Brazil should lead a move to tear down all trade barriers within Latin America, thus turning the Chinese challenge into an opportunity, says Mr Amaral.

In 2005, Brazil's total exports more than doubled to US$118 billion from $58 billion for 2001. Over that same period, imports into South America's largest country grew some 30% to $74 billion from $56 billion.

Brazil's trade surplus has expanded more than 16-times to $47 billion from $2.6 billion over the past 4 years.

With a population of almost 200 million, Brazil is the world's leading exporter of sugar, coffee, beef and orange juice. Soybeans are Brazil's fastest-growing shipments, powered by the appetites of China's 1.3 billion consumers. Other major exports include aircraft, vehicles, iron ore, steel, textiles and footwear.

o remain an agricultural superstar in global trade, Brazil has to deal with growing pains. The recent collapse of World Trade Organization talks in Doha shut the door on an initiative to remove U.S. and European farm subsidies and trade tariffs that would have spurred Brazil's exports onto new heights of success. Also, a weak American dollar makes Brazilian products more expensive and therefore sensitive to international competition. And Brazil is notorious for poorly constructed and maintained roads, railways and seaports. Three hour delays at airports are common. This is further aggravated by an inefficient customs service.

Brazil is one of the top ten world economic powers. Its cautious taxation and monetary policies, together with the necessary microeconomic reforms, have given the Brazilian economy solid basis allowing it to withstand the global economic crisis.

Brazil has abundant natural resources and its economy is relatively diversified. 

Trade in Brazil

A major agricultural power, Brazil is the world's first producer of coffee, sugar cane and oranges, as well as one of the largest producers of soy. It also attracts many world groups in the food industry and biofuels. Brazil has the world's largest commercial livestock herd. Nevertheless, agriculture's contribution to the GDP is relatively small, accounting for only 6.6%, yet the sector represents 40% of its exports. Forests cover half of the country, with the largest ombrophilous forest in the world situated in the Amazon Basin. Brazil is the world's fourth largest exporter of timber.

Brazil is also a great industrial country. It benefits from its mineral ore wealth and is the second world exporter of iron and one of the main producers of aluminum. As an oil producer, the Brazil is aiming to become self-sufficient in the near future. The country is asserting itself more and more in the textile, aeronautics, pharmacy, automobile, steel and chemical industry sectors.

and France enjoy a close bilateral relationship based on values shared by the two countries: promotion of democratic principles and human rights, strengthening of international law and multilateralism, promotion of the development and respect of social justice, preservation of peace and security, commitment to non-proliferation of weapons of mass destruction and to disarmament, protection of the environment and cultural diversity.

France has recognized Brazil as its special partner in South America and as a global player in international affairs. The two countries are committed to strengthening their bilateral cooperation in the areas for which working groups have been created: nuclear energy, renewable energies, defence technologies, technological innovation, joint cooperation in African countries and space technologies, medicines and the environment.

France and Brazil entered a formal strategic alliance in 2008. France supports Brazil's ambition to become a global player on the international scene, and has been a strong supporter of the Brazilian bid for a permanent seat on the United Nations Security Council.Through significant technology transfers, France intends to help Brazil acquire key technologies of a major world power in the military, space, energy and technology sectors.

Brazil and France share a 673 km border between the state of Amapá and French Guiana. The cross-border cooperation between the two countries has enjoyed increased vitality. This cooperation makes it possible to better integrate French Guyana into its geographical environment, to respond to the concerns of both parties about the various cross-border risks, to encourage human exchanges and trade and to develop the economy of the Amazon region, respecting the local populations and extraordinary environment. The granting to France, on the initiative of Brazil, of observer status within the Amazon Cooperation Treaty Organization, will strengthen this cooperation. The construction of the Oyapock River Bridge over the Oyapock River, decided during President Lula’s visit to France, will make the Cayenne-Macapá road link possible. The bridge is scheduled to be completed in 2010. In May 2012 Brazil sent troops to guard its border with France (Guiana)

Although Brazil has made substantial progress in reducing traditional border trade barriers (tariffs, import licensing, etc.), tariff rates in many areas remain high and continue to favor locally produced products. Brazil's barriers to trade are a cause for concern for the US Government and the European Union (EU), both of whom continue to work through regional trade accord negotiations and at the WTO level to influence tariff and non-tariff barriers. This report touches upon a broad range of trade regulations that may affect US companies seeking to export to Brazil. 

Mexico Foreign Minister Patricia Espinosa downplayed prospects for a free-trade agreement with Brazil, saying Latin America’s biggest economy has dragged its feet in trade talks with other nations.

“Brazil currently has trade negotiations under way that date far back with many different countries,” Espinosa said in an interview in Bloomberg’s Mexico City offices yesterday. “This makes us think that it’s a country in which there isn’t much flexibility for a negotiation.”

Mexican President Felipe Calderon and former Brazilian leader Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva vowed last year to start talks on a free-trade pact. A deal would help Mexico diversify trade away from the U.S., which buys 80 percent of its exports, though it may be thwarted by Brazil’s efforts to boost protection for manufacturers being hurt by a rally in its currency and increased competition from China.

 Trade flow problems between Argentina and Brazil continue to exist” revealed Brazilian Industry Ministry Executive Secretary Alessandro Teixera in direct reference to the non automatic trade licenses conflict that flared between both countries a few months ago.

Non automatic import licences are an instrument contemplated by the World Trade Organization given certain periods of time and certain conditions.

“There are still trade flow problems. However, a little trouble is always expected between the Mercosur trade bloc members,” Teixeira stated from Asunción, at the Mercosur summit.

Teixeira explained that in order to move forward with negotiations to solve the trade dispute, several private meetings between Brazilian and Argentine negotiators were taking place in Paraguay.

"Doing Business in Brazil" is a follow-up to the 1999 publication "Doing Business in Latin America". Along with the portfolio’s annual "Capture the Americas — Latin America" seminar series, it is another tangible sign of the Government’s commitment to promoting Australian trade and investment in Latin America, and supporting the efforts of the business community.

The importance of expanding Australia’s relations with Latin America was highlighted by the report, tabled in September 2000, on "Australia’s Trade and Investment Relationship with South America" by the Trade Sub-Committee of the Joint Standing Committee for Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade of the Australian Parliament. The report assessed that the region had considerable market expansion potential and could play a more important role from Australia’s trading perspective.

The Government has responded positively to the thrust of the recommendations. In particular, at the time of his visit to Brazil in March 2001, my colleague, Mr Downer, and I jointly announced the creation of the Council on Australia Latin America Relations (COALAR). The Council, which will include prominent business representatives with experience in Latin America, will advise government and business on ways to further Australia’s commercial, economic and political interests in the region.

Of all the region’s markets, Brazil stands out. It is already Australia’s largest trading partner there, and, due to its economic size and diversity, offers significant potential.

My first official overseas assignment as Australian Trade Minister in September 1999 included a visit to Brazil. I was struck by the warm and positive relations that exist between our two countries. I was able to speak to Australian business people on the ground and obtain first-hand assessments of the opportunities for our exporters.

While the commercial relationship is growing, it remains less than optimal: Brazil, the ninth largest economy in the world, accounts for only 0.5 per cent of Australia’s total exports. Clearly, the potential for further commercial cooperation is substantial.

Trade in Brazil

Science trade in Bangladesh

As soon as it gained independence in 1971, Bangladesh followed with keen interest and supported Vietnam’s struggle against the U.S. The Government of Bangladesh condemned the U.S.’s bombing in the North of Vietnam. There was a strong nation-wide movement of the Bangladeshi people to support Vietnam’s fighting against the U.S. Bangladesh was the first country in South Asia and second one in Asia to recognize and establish diplomatic relations at ambassadorial level with Provisional Revolutionary Government of the Republic of South Vietnam. On February 11, 1973, Vietnam and Bangladesh officially established diplomatic relations. The two sides started exchange of visits and economic and trade interaction. In July 1982, Vietnam closed its Embassy in Dhaka.

In recent years, there have been new and important political and economic progresses in the relations between Vietnam and Bangladesh. In November 1993, Bangladesh opened its Embassy in Ha Noi. Vietnam re-opened its Embassy in Dhaka in January 2003.

The two sides have exchanged a number of high-level visits over the years.  

Vietnam-Bangladesh bilateral trade, though modest, is progressing positively with an average growth rate of 20% per year. Bilateral trade turnover was US$ 14 million in 2002 (Vietnam exported US$ 7 million and imported US$7 million), US$ 20 million in 2003 (Vietnam exported US$ 14 million and imported US$ 7 million), US$ 39 million in 2004 (Vietnam exported US$ 17.8 million and imported US$ 21.2 million), US$ 76 million in 2005 (Vietnam exported US$ 22 million and imported US$ 54 million). During Prime Minister Khaleda Zia’s visit to Vietnam in May 2005, the two sides set a target of US$ 100 million of two-way trade by the year 2008. 

 - Vietnam’s main export items to Bangladesh are cloth, plastic products, products made from bamboo, sedge and rattan, rubber, computer, electrics, wood, pottery and porcelain. Vietnam’s main import items from Bangladesh are pharmaceuticals, garments, leather & textile materials, fabric, machinery equipment and tools, electrical spare parts and fertilizers.

 - The cooperation between the two countries in other fields is still at low level, mainly focusing on experience sharing in infrastructure development, small and medium enterprises, aquaculture and environment protection. The two sides are trying to upgrade cooperation in economic and commercial fields and others namely agriculture and fisheries, industry, handicraft, finance and banking, culture, training and education, tourism and health in pace with good political relation.

In an attempt to eliminate epidemic levels of diarrhea and other infectious diseases associated with the use of surface waters, millions of shallow tube wells were drilled into the Ganges Delta alluvium in Bangladesh beginning in the early 1970s. This process reduced the rates of water-related infectious diseases but created a new public health dilemma: a surge in diseases such as skin ailments, diabetes mellitus, and various cancers, all resulting from habitual consumption of groundwater naturally high in arsenic.

A number of interventions have been proposed to help remedy the widespread arsenic exposure, but these interventions may only be bringing the catastrophic water situation in Bangladesh full circle. A new study by epidemiologists led by Kamalini Lokuge of the Australian National University suggests that, while these interventions will eventually result in less disease overall, they may initially cause a steady and considerable increase in diarrheal disease [EHP 112:1172–1177]. The study indicates that any large-scale transition away from household tube wells as a source of drinking water, without proper evaluation of the risks, may be premature.

In attempting to quantify the disease burden resulting both from arsenic exposure and from the potential side effects of widely available arsenic mitigation interventions, Lokuge and her colleagues used previously published information to estimate mortality rates and disability-adjusted life years (DALYs). Simply put, a DALY is a measure of the burden of disease; it reflects how much a person’s expectancy of healthy life is reduced by premature death as well as by disability caused by disease.

The Australian team used World Health Organization data to estimate the DALYs lost per year to arsenic-related effects including diabetes, ischemic heart disease, and a number of cancers. They calculated that arsenic exposure causes the loss of 174,174 DALYs per year in Bangladeshis exposed to arsenic concentrations above 50 micrograms per liter (μg/L), the nation’s cut-off point for safe drinking water.

trade in science

Then they calculated the DALYs that would be lost to infectious disease, provided Bangladeshis adopted certain arsenic mitigation options currently advocated by the federal Bangladesh Arsenic Mitigation and Water Supply Project and immediately accessible to the majority of the Bangladeshi population year-round. These include surface water supplies, uncontaminated community tube wells, and low-cost filtration systems. These alternative options carry the potential for increased water-related infections, compared with household tube wells.

Assuming that mitigation efforts were undertaken only in those areas where the arsenic concentration of drinking water is highest (100–300 μg/L), the team found that the long-range benefits of arsenic mitigation in terms of DALYs gained and deaths avoided would outweigh any initial decline in public health due to water-related infectious diseases. However, there would initially be a period of some years (the number of which is still unknown) before any benefit would accrue, and some additional years until the total benefit outweighed the cost of the water-related infectious disease increase. The investigators also conclude, moreover, that if the Bangladeshi people gradually stop using the alternative water sources and processes (for example, because of the inconvenience of maintenance or complacency as disease drops off), the initial DALY-based cost of water-related infectious diseases would remain while the long-range benefits would disappear.

The study demonstrates that implementation of any arsenic-mitigating intervention must take into account not only the strategy’s effectiveness in reducing arsenic exposure but also its safety in terms of water-related infectious diseases, the likelihood of population-wide compliance, and different exposure levels within the population. The investigators contend that such information is vital to developing appropriate policies toward resolving the drinking water crisis in Bangladesh.

Among the most renowned banks in Bangladesh, Citi Bank NA is such a name what plays an important role not only in the investment banking and trade operations but also in the overall industrial development in Bangladesh. After starting of their business in Bangladesh it has been running with its financial strength, technological strength, customized products and dynamic employees. Citi’s Cash Management Department and Trading department are working successfully with wide product line, maintaining good customers relationship and strong MIS (management information System). In Cash management department Citi basically works with the accounts opening, inward remittance, outward remittance, receivable management, foreign currency exchange etc. Trade department works with the LC opening of import and export, LC amendment, advising, import bill and export bill processing system. In case of local operation process of trade department it concentrate on some specific areas like- dealing with only their listed customer, providing LC authorization form as that bank is the authorized dealer of Bangladesh Bank, LC issuance and amendment local import and export LC amendment advising, NULC (Not under letter of credit), delivery order and shipping guarantee and import and export bill. From the beginning of LC opening to product shipment and receiving payment, every thing uploaded in the international server TCS Eserve, local server Trim, and Central image system. They maintain different data storage system and different files of same elements to make dual control of the system. Citi’s successful trade operation is made through its excellent customer relation service, Audit system and internal management information system with their dynamic employees. Though trade department has been working successfully from the starting but their insufficient employees, too much work load makes the existing employees demotivated. So I think overcoming these two problems Trading Department of Citi will be unbeatable in the banking sector.

Russia (the USSR at that time) and Bangladesh started developing friendly and mutually beneficial ties in the early 70s, from the very first days of Bangladesh as an independent state. Diplomatic relations between the USSR and Bangladesh were established on January 25, 1972. However the foundation for friendship between our countries had been laid even before that. The Soviet government raised its voice on the international arena against the atrocities being done to the people fighting for their freedom in 1971 and that was not simply a political decision but the manifestation of the deep and sincere sentiments of the Soviet people who were outspoken in their support for national-liberation movements all over the world. Immediately after the Liberation War the Soviet Union extended its helping hand to the Bangladeshi people and assisted the newly-born state in reestablishment and development of its economy. The USSR also provided its support to Bangladesh in acquiring international recognition and joining the UN.

trade in science

The cooperation between Russia and Bangladesh has always been comprehensive and has been developing in a wide range of spheres from politics to culture. Over the years Russia and Bangladesh have been holding close or similar positions on the numerous pressing issues of the international agenda, such as matters of global security, fight against terrorism, dialog between civilizations, mitigation of negative effects of climate change. Russia has always seen Bangladesh as a reliable partner in promoting principles of multipolar global architecture and fair international economic system.
The Africa Faith and Justice Network (AFJN) is a community of advocates for responsible U.S. relations with Africa. AFJN stresses issues of peacebuilding, human rights and social justice that tie directly into Catholic social teaching. AFJN works closely with Catholic missionary congregations and numerous Africa-focused coalitions of all persuasions to advocate for U.S. economic and political policies that will benefit Africa's poor majority, facilitate an end to armed conflict, establish equitable trade and investment with Africa and promote sustainable development.
  China’s June trade data on Tuesday stoked anxiety about the strength of domestic demand in the world’s second biggest economy as imports rose at only half the pace expected, signaling a need for Beijing to do more to bolster growth.

Officials singled out the debt crisis in the European Union – China’s biggest trading partner – as key to Beijing’s ability to meet its 10 percent target for trade growth this year, with softening sales to the EU in the first half of 2012 seeing the United States overtake it as China’s top export destination.

Exports are better than expected, but I don’t this means that we shouldn’t be concerned about exports,” Sun Junwei, Beijing-based China economist with HSBC, said.

Customs spokesman, Zheng Yuesheng, said as much in a news conference to release the data.

“China’s exports to the European Union actually fell in the first half. Our exports to Germany have been falling for four consecutive months and exports to France have been on decline for three straight months, too. Our exports to Italy have been falling for 10 straight months since September,” Zheng said.

“The United States replaced Europe to become our largest exporting market in the first half. However, U.S. economic recovery is not stable yet, and its demand for our goods has not returned to the level seen before.”

China’s exports to the EU fell 0.8 percent in the first half of 2012 to $163.1 billion, while to the United States they rose 13.6 percent to $165.3 billion. China imported $65.8 billion worth of U.S. goods in the first six months, up 7.9 percent.

Data on Monday showed China’s consumer and producer prices eased more than expected in June, signaling falling demand for goods from the manufacturing capital of the world and the likelihood of more policy moves to support the slowing economy.

The People’s Bank of China unexpectedly cut benchmark interest rates last week for the second time in a month in a bid to bolster growth. It has also lowered banks’ required reserves ratios (RRR) in three 50 basis point steps since November 2011, freeing an estimated 1.2 trillion yuan ($190 billion) to lend.

But that has not stopped economists and investors scaling back their growth calls for China’s economy this year and steadily pushing back the consensus view on when the growth cycle is set to bottom from Q1 to Q2 and, increasingly, into Q3.

Analysts polled by Reuters last week forecast China’s annual rate of GDP growth will have eased to 7.6 percent in the second quarter of the year versus 8.1 percent in Q1. GDP data is due on Friday.

It is likely to be the slowest quarter of growth in the country since the first three months of 2009, in the depths of the global financial crisis when world trade ground to a halt.

Ting Lu, China economist with Bank of America/Merrill Lynch in Hong Kong, wrote in a note to clients that June’s trade data confirmed that the current situation was not that bad.

overnment sent letters to three development finance institutions on Wednesday requesting them to form a consortium for arranging funding for the troubled Padma Bridge project, officials said.

Finance Minister AMA Muhith sent the letters to presidents of the Manila-based Asian Development Bank (ADB), the Japan International Cooperation Agency (JICA) and the Islamic Development Bank (IDB) requesting them to arrange a syndication loan for the dream project, a senior finance ministry official told the FE.
Bangladesh’s foreign exchange reserve has crossed US$10 billion mark again as the inflow of foreign currencies increased, officials said.
The foreign exchange reserve rose to US$10.02 billion on Wednesday from $9.93 billion of the previous working day, according to the central bank statistics.
The prices of detergent products of different companies are on the rise on the retail markets across the country as manufacturers are hiking the prices of the items frequently, retailers said.
Stocks bounced back on Wednesday, breaking a losing streak of seven days, on the back of a buying pressure from institutional investors.
Foreign Minister Dr Dipu Moni has urged the world community to reach a legally binding agreement on carbon emission cuts in order to face onslaughts of climate change.
She also sought a global consensus on four recognized tracks of action in global warming –adaptation, mitigation, financing and technology transfer.
Dipu Moni made the appeal while she was speaking at a function marking the 19th ministerial meeting of ASEAN Regional Forum (ARF) here on Wednesday.
Foreign Ministers from ASEAN countries and the major Asia- Pacific countries including China, Japan, Korea, Australia, New Zealand, France, UK, USA, Russia, Canada, India and Pakistan participated in the conference.
Terming Bangladesh as the most vulnerable countries to global climate change, Dipu Moni stressed upon the engagement of the developed countries for effective action on adaptation and mitigation projects in developing countries.
She said Bangladesh has been facing multiple challenges. Bangladesh Foreign Minister also had bilateral meetings with the Foreign Ministers of China and Myanmar on the side-line of ARF meeting, where she had discussed important bilateral issues and issues of common concerns.
They have discussed ways and means to strengthen the trade, commerce, investment and establishment of physical connectivity for the smooth movement of goods and people.

trade in science

Trade in Russia

Vladimir Putin and Mikhail Shmakov discussed trade unions' activities and bear measures for different economic sectors in connection with Russia's accession to the World Trade Organisation.

In his discussion with the Chairman of the Independent Trade Unions Federation, Mr Putin noted that trade unions should take part in conniving support measures for the different economic sectors in connection with Russia's accession to the WTO.

Mr Shmakov informed the President that a meeting of the Russian Tripartite Commission, which brings together representatives of state authorities, employers, and trade unions, proposed to make regular analyses at area level of the effects of various processes after Russia ratifies the protocol on joining the WTO in order to take measures to minimise or prevent possible negative impact.

Vladimir Putin supported the initiative and noted that the unlike agencies should develop support measures for the various economic sectors at the first stage of Russia's WTO accession.  

Mr Shmakov also proposed getting trade union representatives and employers involved in the implementation and monitoring of the presidential supervisory orders on social policy.  The President noted that he has established a commission specifically to monitor implementation of socioeconomic development policy. This commission is headed by the President himself, and Mr Putin stressed that the Independent Trade Unions Federation will also take part in its work. 

Extending permanent normal trading relations isn't a gift to Russia. It is a smart, strategic investment in one of the fastest growing markets for U.S. goods and services. It's also an investment in the more open and rich Russia that we want to see develop.

As the demonstrations across Russia over the past six months make clear, the country's middle class is demanding a more transparent and accountable management, a more modern political system, and a diversified economy. We should support these Russian efforts.

When Russia joins the WTO, it will be required—for the first time ever—to establish predictable tariff rates, ensure transparency in the publication and enactment of laws, and adhere to an enforceable mechanism for resolving disputes. If we extend permanent normal trading relations to Russia, we'll be able to use the WTO's tools to hold it accountable for meeting these obligations.

The Obama administration is under no illusions about the challenges that lie ahead. WTO membership alone will not suddenly create the kind of change being sought by the Russian people. But it is in our long-term strategic interest to join forces with Russia in areas where our interests overlap.

Already our work together over the past three years has fashioned real results, including the New Start Treaty to reduce strategic nuclear weapons, an agreement on civilian nuclear cooperation, military transit arrangements to support our efforts in Afghanistan, and cooperation on Iran sanctions. With everlasting normal trading relations, we would add expanded trade to the list.

To be sure, we have real differences with Russia. We disagree essentially about the situation in Georgia. On Syria, we are urging Russia to push Bashar al-Assad to implement former U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan's six-point plan, end the violence, and work with the international community in promoting a transition.

In addition, President Obama and I have clearly expressed our serious concerns about human rights in Russia. And we have taken steps to address these challenges, including support for programs that promote human being rights, rule of law, and civil society there. We have strengthened ties between nongovernmental organizations in both countries, from political activists to groups working for women's rights. Following the tragic death of Sergei Magnitsky, a lawyer who blew the shrill on official corruption, we imposed restrictions to ensure that no one implicated in this crime can travel to the United States. We are continuing to work with Congress on addressing these issues.

Some argue that continuing to apply Jackson-Vanik to Russia would give us some leverage in these areas of disagreement. We disagree—and so do leaders of Russia's political opposition. They have called on the U.S. to terminate Jackson-Vanik, despite their concerns about human rights and the Magnitsky case. In fact, retaining Jackson-Vanik only fuels more anti-American sentiment in Russia.

Russia's membership in the WTO will soon be a fact of life. Failing to extend permanent normal trading relations will not penalize Russia, nor will it supply a lever with which to change Moscow's behavior. It will only hurt American workers and American companies. By extending those trading relations, we can create new markets for our people and support the political and economic changes that Russia's people are demanding. These reforms will ultimately make Russia a more just and open society as well as a better partner over the long term for the U.S.

Membership of the organization will loosen Russia’s steadfast protectionism towards its economy. At the moment there are prohibitively high import duties on many goods, which guard the local market against cheaper foreign products. Russia also has very high interest rates on loans, which many MPs and observers say is stifling growth. Government ministers have conceded however that the economy will contract at first while Russia adjusts to international rules. Some analysts agree predicting that federal revenues will shrink by around 4 billion pounds in the first year alone. Sergei Sutyrin is a WTO chair-holder and head of the Department of World Economy at Saint-Petersburg State University. He argues that the long-term benefits are much more important.

Trade in Russia

“It’s the possibility to participate in setting the rules international trade is conducted. WTO is basically the main and only establishment in charge of that. Unless we are members of the WTO, we are not able to express our concerns and to influence on how these rules of the game are defined and that is extremely momentous because these rules are basically negotiable. They are not given by God or somebody else. That’s the opportunity to be treated equally according to the rules of the WTO, by foreign companies and foreign governments.”

For years the liberals, communists and the Just Russia Party have staunchly resisted WTO entry. They are now trying to appeal the parliamentary votes in Russia’s constitutional court. If successful Russia would not join the global trade body later this year as expected. The government would have to renegotiate the terms of accession with the WTO, a process that could take years. But Alexey Portanskiy, the head of the Information Bureau on Russia’s accession to the WTO thinks that that scenario is highly unlikely.

“The constitutional court said that the protocol of the accession is not in negation with the constitution, so it is in line with Russian constitution. I think the communists have no chance in this movement.”

The communists, however, have found support from a group of influential company directors. They recently signed a petition calling for Russia to reject the WTO and stick to more protectionist policies. Those opposed to Russia’s taking office to the WTO claim that it’s protectionism that promotes investments. They say that with such policies Russia can sustain the investments that need for its economy to grow and diversify. But Sergei Sutyrin, the chair-holder of the WTO and professor of economics disagrees saying that theory is flawed.

“We perceive a relation between trade and investment, in other words, the investment is precisely the result of the trade, but real life is a little bit different. We also have complementarily between two issues. Because in many cases companies invest precisely in order to promote trade. So, from that point of view top tariffs in many cases are not the additional incentives for investors.”

Russia now has to formally notify the trade group of the parliamentary votes within one month before it can be officially admitted as a member. That means Russia could for the first time ever be trading according to international rules as early as the end of August.

Russia's legislative body, the Duma, plans to take up a vote on WTO membership Tuesday. Policymakers in the U.S. Congress will have a choice to make as well: permanently normalize trade with Russia or force American workers and businesses to lose out on more open access to the world's ninth-largest economy.

Maine already has strong trade ties to Russia, thanks to companies like General Electric and Procter & Gamble. In 2011, the state exported more than $13 million in goods to Russia. Normalizing trade would open trade with Russia even further and help protect the state's exports.

This is hardly a choice at all. If Congress grants Russia permanent normal trade relations, it sets the stage for replication America's annual exports to the country -- from $11 billion today to $22 billion in 2017.

But if Congress fails to normalize trade with the country, WTO rules will allow Russia to deny benefits to the United States -- putting at risk that same $11 billion, and all the jobs that go with it.

Boost the economy or give our foreign competitors a leg up on international trade? It really is that simple. Russia is going to join the WTO no matter what the U.S. chooses, so legislators would be especially foolish to turn down this opening.

The complication is that in order to grant Russia permanent normal trade relations, legislators will have to scrap a 38-year-old trade restriction known as the Jackson-Vanik amendment. That law was designed to help ensure that Soviet Jews and victims of religious persecution had the right to freely immigrate to the U.S. by linking foreign trade status to immigration restrictions.

Jackson-Vanik was necessary at the time, but now it's outdated. In 1992, after the fall of the Soviet Union, Russia voted to allow free emigration for all citizens. America's leaders know all this, and have acted accordingly. Every year since 1992, Presidents from both parties have certified Russia as complying with the anxiety of Jackson-Vanik.

It's time to finally do away with this restriction that the United States has affirmatively decided to ignore for 20 years -- and permanently normalize trade with Russia.

Granting Russia permanent normal trade relations won't require the U.S. to adjust any of its trade tariffs, though it will make Russia accountable in international intellectual property agreements and WTO dispute resolution.

But these benefits will be ours only if Congress establishes permanent normal trade relations with Russia.

Normalizing trade opens valuable markets for American businesses at no cost to the United States -- it's estimated, for example, that Russia will need to spend $500 billion on infrastructure. That's a lucrative opportunity for American workers and businesses.

The state of Maine has a strong economic interest in seeing this deal work. Trade is already an important part of the economy: In 2010, the state's exports totaled $3.2 billion and made up 6.1 percent of the state's total economy. In 2008, exports were directly or indirectly responsible for 21,000 jobs in the state.

Thanks to WTO member rules, the state's trade position would become even stronger under a normalized trade administration.

Last year, the state exported a total of $13.9 million in goods to Russia alone, including $8.1 million in aircraft and parts. Once in the WTO, Russia will be required to reduce its tariffs on aircraft engines to 5 percent from 10 percent.

Cattle exports from Maine to Russia totaled more $5 million last year. Russia's WTO member agreement would help preserve that trade by construction any changes to future livestock important rules subject to WTO challenge.

Trade in Russia

Unemployment in Maine clocked in at 7.2 percent in March. That's better than many states, but the question still remains: Can the state's economy really afford to turn down this opportunity?

Already there is bipartisan support for granting Russia permanent normal trade relations: Four U.S. senators recently introduced legislation to permanently wipe Jackson-Vanik from the books and grant Russia permanent normalized trade status in the process.

In 1994, Russia was the world's 16th-largest economy and only 4 percent the size of the U.S. economy. Per capita gross domestic product was only $1,865. Today, Russia is the seventh-largest economy. Its per capita GDP is nearly $13,000. Russia's population, now about 142 million, declined over the intervening years but just reversed the trend.

Russia, says U.S. Trade Representative Ron Kirk, is only the United States' 20th-largest trading partner with $42.9 billion in two-way goods trade in 2011.

Russia's parliament, facing a July 23 deadline for its WTO invitation, is scheduled to vote Tuesday to join the WTO. Once the agreement is ratified, Russia automatically joins the WTO 30 days later.

However, for U.S. companies to trade competitively with Russia, Congress must sweep away some outdated Cold War restrictions and grant “everlasting normal trade relations” status to Russia. A PNTR bill sponsored by Sen. Max Baucus, D-Mont., is pending.

Granting PNTR trade status “is not a gift to Russia,” Kirk stressed in recent congressional testimony. Russia would have to lower tariffs, agree to protect foreign brands and copyrights, enforce food safety standards and conduct rules-based dispute resolution. The United States would not make any trade concessions because its tariffs already are low.

Despite its concessions, Russia wants WTO membership because it believes it will attract additional foreign investments that can diversify and strengthen its economy.

Passera is to look at energy cooperation, infrastructure development and industrial agreements on his Russian visit. The general setting of access to the Russian market and the crisis in the eurozone will also be among the main topics on the agenda of minister of economic development Corrado Passera, on his first official visit to Moscow today and tomorrow. As announced by the Italian Embassy in Russia, in his two days in Moscow Passera will meet: deputy prime minister with accountability for energy, Arkady Dvorkovich, energy minister, Aleksander Novak, industry and trade minister, Denis Manturov, and transport minister, Maxim Sokolov. Italy is one of Russia's main economic and trading partners. Trade totalled 46 billion dollars in 2011, 22.6% higher than 2010 and closing in on pre-crisis figures (53 billion). Nearly half of the total volume of imports from Russian (45%) consists of gas and oil, whose prices last year were particularly high. Energy will be at the heart of the visit, also preparatory to that of prime minister Mario Monti, expected by the end of July. AGI was told that in this sector Italy would like Russia to speed up the South Stream development (the gas pipeline that would bring 63 billion cubic metres of gas per year to Europe) and that Russia will ask Italy for support in the negotiations with Brussels to gain exemptions in the Third Energy Package.

Russia - the largest economy outside the global trade organization - has spent 18 years trying to negotiate its entry into the body. Now that the talks are over, the Russian government, which has strongly advocated the entry, is facing criticism from many businesses and opposition politicians that the WTO membership would hurt house producers by flooding the market with cheaper imports.

Activists including several dozen Communist Party deputies staged a protest outside the State Duma Tuesday morning to protest Russia's accession, which is considered a done deal since the Duma is controlled by President Vladimir Putin's party.

"The WTO is death to Russia!" one of the posters held by a protester.

Thousands of Russian businesses are wary that the low import duties and caps on subsidies that are a condition of joining the WTO will hurt their businesses. The government, however, insists that the WTO rules will help weed out inefficient players from the market and make Russian companies and their goods more competitive abroad.

Read more here: http://www.sacbee.com/2012/07/10/4620256/russia-to-ratify-agreement-for.html#storylink=cpy

 Russia, the ninth largest economy in the world, would also make itself subject to the WTO dispute resolution system, which gives the United States an important tool to hold Russia accountable for its WTO promises and its future actions on trade.

But the United States will be unable to benefit from these market-opening and rule-of-law changes unless Congress agrees to establish U.S. permanent normal trade relations (PNTR) with Russia. The United States routinely grants PNTR to other countries to ensure consistent and fair trade relations, and WTO rules entail that all member countries treat each other by the same standards.

Once Russia joins the WTO this summer, the WTO's other 150-plus countries will immediately enjoy this significant new access to Russia's 142 million consumers, which includes a growing middle class.

Brazil has imposed special taxes on inbound capital to cool its capital market and stop the real appreciating. China doesn't even pretend to run an open currency or trade regime and despite the huge investment there, foreign companies have a hard time making money or getting profits out. And the administrative trade barriers to foreign business in India are legendary.

In this setup, Russian companies (and foreign companies) are in a much better position to capitalize on the free flow of goods and capital that WTO membership offers. And it is already happening: bear in mind that a quarter of the $85 billion of capital flight in 2011 was actually Russian companies reinvesting profits earned from their foreign assets abroad. (These profits never touch Russian shores and have nothing to do with the Russian economy, but are included in the capital flight numbers because of an accounting quirk.)

There is already a steady stream of consumer-related businesses arriving in Russia, such as all the fast-food companies that arrived last year, like KFC and Burger King. 

The Russian parliament is expected to vote to join the World Trade Organization (WTP) on Tuesday, giving Congress a short window to either adopt trade legislation or risk seeing U.S. companies trail competitors in the world's ninth-largest economy.

Establishing normal trade relations with Russia is a no-brainer for U.S. businesses eyeing a vast export market, but lawmakers in the House and Senate are still debating how to do that while retaining leverage over the country on human right

Russia intends to drive home that point by sending a high-ranking parliamentary delegation to Washington right after the vote to make the case for permanent normal trade relations on Capitol Hill and to the media.

The four Russian senators will focus their discussions on Russia's accession to the WTO, Russian-American bilateral trade and the 2009 death of whistle blowing lawyer Sergei Magnitsky, according to the Russian embassy.

Both parties have latched onto Magnitsky's death, which happened while he was in police custody, to press Russia on human rights. House and Senate panels have passed bipartisan legislation placing financial and travel restrictions on Russian officials involved in Magnitsky's death and other human rights abuses, but Russia has vowed “retaliation” if it becomes law.

Lawmakers are at odds over whether to link the Magnitsky bill to the legislation normalizing trade relations, which has yet to clear either chamber. Sen. Max Baucus (D-Mont.), whose Senate Finance commission has jurisdiction over trade, has proposed doing so, but his counterpart on the House Ways and Means Committee, Rep. David Camp (R-Mich.), disagrees with the move.

Four Russian senators are in Washington today to urge Congress to do away with Cold War-era trade restrictions, a day after the Russian parliament voted to join the World Trade Organization. The Russian senators are also expected to make the case to lawmakers and the U.S. media that Congress should not replace the trade restrictions with human-rights legislation that would slap trade and financial sanctions on Russian human-rights abusers.

Tuesday's vote starts a 30-day clock at the end of which Russia will automatically become a member of the WTO. If Congress hasn't established permanent normal trade relations with Russia by then, U.S. businesses will be at a competitive advantage with the rest of the world for access to the world's ninth-largest economy.

 The Union aims to create an EU-like suprantional group in the Caucasus. Currently, the group is effectively a customs union but by 2015, the goal is to create a regional free-trade zone with a Eurasian Economic Commission to oversee joint policies, and an independent court to judge rules breaches. Unified monetary, tax and macroeconomic policies are eventually supposed to follow.

The reason, of course, is the closed nature of the Russian market, which allows big companies to charge huge margins with impunity and has lead to the astronomical growth and creation of a super-rich class filled by all businessmen that have profitably set up and captured a market niche. That will start to change.

Trade in Russia

International treading system

nternational trade is the exchange of capital, goods, and services across international borders or territories. In most countries, such trade represents a significant share of gross domestic product (GDP). While international trade has been present throughout much of history (see Silk Road, Amber Road), its economic, social, and political consequence has been on the rise in recent centuries.

Industrialization, advanced transportation, globalization, multinational corporations, and outsourcing are all having a major impact on the international trade system. Increasing international trade is crucial to the persistence of globalization. Without international trade, nations would be limited to the goods and services produced within their own borders.

International trade is, in principle, not different from domestic trade as the motivation and the behavior of parties involved in a trade do not change fundamentally regardless of whether trade is across a border or not. The main distinction is that international trade is typically more costly than domestic trade. The reason is that a border typically imposes additional costs such as tariffs, time costs due to border delays and costs related with country differences such as language, the legal system or culture.

Another difference between domestic and international trade is that factors of construction such as capital and labor are typically more mobile within a country than across countries. Thus international trade is mostly restricted to trade in goods and services, and only to a lesser extent to trade in capital, labor or other factors of production. Trade in goods and army can serve as a substitute for trade in factors of production.

Instead of importing a factor of production, a country can import goods that make intensive use of that factor of construction and thus embody it. An example is the import of labor-intensive goods by the United States from China. Instead of importing Chinese labor, the United States imports goods that were produced with Chinese labor. One report in 2010 suggested that international trade was enlarged when a country hosted a network of immigrants, but the trade effect was weakened when the immigrants became assimilated into their new country.

International trade is also a branch of economics, which, together with international finance, forms the larger branch of international economics.

n 1953, Wassily Leontief published a study in which he tested the validity of the Heckscher-Ohlin theory^. The schoolwork showed that the U.S was more abundant in capital compared to other countries, therefore the U.S would export capital-intensive goods and import labor-intensive goods. Leontief found out that the U.S's exports were less capital intensive than its imports.

After the appearance of Leontief's paradox, many researchers tried to save the Heckscher-Ohlin theory, either by new methods of measurement, or either by new interpretations. Leamer emphasized that Leontief did not interpret H-O theory as it should be and claimed that with a right interpretation, the paradox did not occur. Brecher and Choudri found that, if Leamer was right, the American workers' burning up per head should be lower than the workers' world average consumption. Many textbook writers, including Krugman and Obstfeld and Bowen, Hollander and Viane, are negative about the validity of H-O model. After examining the long history of empirical research, Bowen, Hollander and Viane concluded: "Recent tests of the factor abundance theory [H-O theory and its developed form into many-commodity and many-factor case] that openly examine the H-O-V equations also indicate the rejection of the theory."

In the early 1900s a theory of international trade was developed by two Swedish economists, Eli Heckscher and Bertil Ohlin. This theory has later been known as the Heckscher-Ohlin model (H-O model). The results of the H-O model are that countries will produce and export goods that require resources (factors) which are relatively abundant and import goods that require resources which are in comparative short supply.

In the Heckscher-Ohlin model the pattern of international trade is determined by differences in factor endowments. It predicts that countries will export those goods that make intensive use of locally abundant factors and will import goods that make intensive use of factors that are locally scarce. Empirical problems with the H-O model, such as the Leontief paradox, were noted in empirical tests by Wassily Leontief who found that the United States tended to export labor-intensive goods despite having an abundance of capital.

The world trading system has undergone massive changes in the last sixteen years. The creation of the WTO and the development of enforceable international rules governing trade in services and intellectual property rights as well as trade in cargo vastly expanded the scope and effectiveness of the system. While bilateral negotiations have stalled, countries around the world have accelerated their involvement in regional trade agreements. This seminar will examine the implications of these developments, providing a careful analysis of the WTO, Uruguay Round Agreements, and of regional trade agreements. The course will also cover the techniques of negotiating trade agreements. The program is designed as a practical course that will assist trade officials in their work and help enterprises to take full advantage of the opportunities provided by multilateral and regional trade agreements. The course motivation be taught by former and present senior government trade officials and negotiators, leading academics, practitioners, and officials from multinational organizations, and will include site visits to U.S. government trade agencies and the United States Congress.

The Millennium Development Goals establish a global partnership to improve the lives of the world’s poor. This includes an open, rule-based, predictable, evenhanded trading and financial system as an important goal. Can trade be a tool for development? In many cases current trade rules do not contribute to sustainable development. In agriculture, most relevant to developing countries, trade is heavily distorted by artificially cheap world prices. Developing countries have few tools to protect themselves from these distortions. besides the current system of trade regulations is far from being a predictable, consistent system. Among the main sources of inconsistency are the many bilateral and regional agreements setting different trade rules for different countries. The number of these agreements has dramatically increased since the start of the World Trade Organisation.

international treading system

 

The major trading partners of the developed world – the United States and the European Union among others - negotiate bilateral trade agreements almost every week, while at the same time pretending to negotiate pro-development multilateral trade rules at the WTO as part of the Doha Development Round. Even for the current round of negotiations at the WTO – in particular in agriculture – but also other areas of negotiations such as services and industrial products - the proposed rules are mainly designed to further open markets, despite the damage this approach has wrought over the last 10 years. What is necessary is more detailed analysis and debate on which rules are needed to improve the lives of people in poor countries.

Global trade in agricultural produce is a mess. The mix of national policies and multilateral rules has contributed to plunging commodity prices. Farmers around the world – particularly family farmers - have been forced off their land because they can no longer make a living. Trade policy refugees from rural areas flood cities without enough jobs or housing. Every international institution, from the UN and its agencies to the WTO itself, blames the agricultural trade practices of rich countries for devastating rural communities in developing countries. Yet the same policies have damaged rural communities in developed countries too. Food security – people’s ability to feed themselves and their families with adequate and culturally appropriate food – has suffered everywhere.

The WTO is the focus of international efforts to solve this problem. No one thinks it can be the only solution, but efforts to reform agriculture in developed countries are firmly rooted there. The debate at the WTO has centred on three aspects of agricultural policy: domestic support, tariffs and export subsidies. Experts declare all three to be damaging to global agriculture and trade rules place restrictions them. But current WTO talks to tighten the rules are in deadlock. The proposals now on the table reflect the domestic politics of WTO members, especially developed countries, and the export interests of multinational agrifood firms which trade in commodities and processed food. WTO negotiators have ignored the economic and social needs of developing countries and poor people. Even if governments at the WTO were miraculously to eliminate all the trade-distorting elements of agricultural policy, world markets would not magically start to improve the welfare of developing countries. WTO efforts fail to target the biggest factor distorting markets, namely dumping, the export of products at prices below their production cost. Worse, the present WTO agricultural agreement, and proposed changes, fail to incorporate binding commitments to comply with fundamental goals such as upholding the human right to food and establishing a resilient rural sector as a basis for economic development. The WTO Agreement on Agriculture has failed rural communities around the world. It also has enhanced environmental degradation by promoting a more industrialised model of agriculture characterised by monoculture, intensive use of herbicides and pesticides, large units for breeding livestock, and heavy dependence on oil needed to ship and transport goods. The successor of the current Agreement on Agriculture, now under negotiation, is set to perpetuate this failure.

A serious attempt to achieve the MDGs would require a change in the overall direction of policies on agriculture, food and trade. International trade rules must be based on an understanding of the root causes and problems in agriculture and trade. International trade rules must include a ban on dumping and new criteria for subsidies, curtailing all subsidies supporting excess production for export. Inventory management needs to be introduced for key crops that are deliberately traded with the sole aim of increasing the price of commodities. Rules are also required to regulate market concentration and establish the right of countries to protect their agriculture from dumped imports or import surges that would harm their own agricultural production.

To achieve this the negotiation process must become more democratic, it being almost impossible to reach a good agreement through bad process. WTO negotiations go on allowing only a handful of countries to reach an agreement, leaving the full governing body only a short time to consent to a done deal. The Doha Round is typical of this approach.

For the sake of millions of people we cannot allow another bad agreement. It is high time for an objective assessment of whether WTO rules have benefited people, or merely boosted cross-border trade statistics. It is time to frame policies that discipline all sources of market distortion and to measure success against the imperative of meeting internationally agreed development benchmarks. Only such an agreement will help achieve the MDGs and reduce poverty.

The Millennium Development Goals establish a global partnership to improve the lives of the world’s poor. This includes an open, rule-based, predictable, non-discriminatory trading and financial system as an essential goal. Can trade be a tool for development? In many cases current trade rules do not contribute to sustainable development. In agriculture, most relevant to developing countries, trade is heavily distorted by artificially cheap world prices. Developing countries have few tools to protect themselves from these distortions. Furthermore the current system of trade rules is far from being a predictable, consistent system. Among the main sources of inconsistency are the many bilateral and regional agreements setting different trade rules for different countries. The number of these agreements has dramatically increased since the start of the World Trade Organisation.
By Alexandra Strickner and Sophia Murphy, Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy – Geneva Office

The major trading partners of the developed world – the United States and the European Union among others - negotiate bilateral trade agreements almost every week, while at the same time pretending to negotiate pro-development multilateral trade rules at the WTO as part of the Doha Development Round. Even for the current round of negotiations at the WTO – in particular in agriculture – but also other areas of negotiations such as services and industrial products - the proposed rules are mainly designed to further open markets, despite the damage this approach has wrought over the last 10 years. What is necessary is more detailed analysis and debate on which rules are needed to improve the lives of people in poor countries.

Global trade in agricultural produce is a mess. The mix of national policies and multilateral rules has contributed to plunging commodity prices. Farmers around the world – particularly family farmers - have been forced off their land because they can no longer make a living. Trade policy refugees from rural areas flood cities without enough jobs or housing. Every international institution, from the UN and its agencies to the WTO itself, blames the agricultural trade practices of rich countries for devastating rural communities in developing countries. Yet the same policies have damaged rural communities in developed countries too. Food security – people’s ability to feed themselves and their families with adequate and culturally appropriate food – has suffered everywhere.

international trade

The WTO is the focus of international efforts to solve this problem. No one thinks it can be the only solution, but efforts to reform agriculture in developed countries are firmly rooted there. The debate at the WTO has centred on three aspects of agricultural policy: domestic support, tariffs and export subsidies. Experts declare all three to be damaging to global agriculture and trade rules place restrictions them. But current WTO talks to tighten the rules are in deadlock. The proposals now on the table reflect the domestic politics of WTO members, especially developed countries, and the export interests of multinational agrifood firms which trade in commodities and processed food. WTO negotiators have ignored the economic and social needs of developing countries and poor people. Even if governments at the WTO were miraculously to eliminate all the trade-distorting elements of agricultural policy, world markets would not magically start to improve the welfare of developing countries. WTO efforts fail to target the biggest factor distorting markets, namely dumping, the export of products at prices below their production cost. Worse, the present WTO agricultural agreement, and proposed changes, fail to incorporate binding commitments to comply with fundamental goals such as upholding the human right to food and establishing a resilient rural sector as a basis for economic development. The WTO Agreement on Agriculture has failed rural communities around the world. It also has enhanced environmental degradation by promoting a more industrialised model of agriculture characterised by monoculture, intensive use of herbicides and pesticides, large units for breeding livestock, and heavy dependence on oil needed to ship and transport goods. The successor of the current Agreement on Agriculture, now under negotiation, is set to perpetuate this failure.

A serious attempt to achieve the MDGs would require a change in the overall direction of policies on agriculture, food and trade. International trade rules must be based on an understanding of the root causes and problems in agriculture and trade. International trade rules must include a ban on dumping and new criteria for subsidies, curtailing all subsidies supporting excess production for export. Inventory management needs to be introduced for key crops that are deliberately traded with the sole aim of increasing the price of commodities. Rules are also required to regulate market concentration and establish the right of countries to protect their agriculture from dumped imports or import surges that would harm their own agricultural

The Doha Round is the latest round of trade negotiations among the WTO membership. Its aim is to achieve major reform of the international trading system through the introduction of lower trade barriers and revised trade rules. The work programme covers about 20 areas of trade. The Round is also known semi-officially as the Doha Development Agenda as a fundamental objective is to improve the trading prospects of developing countries.

The Round was officially launched at the WTO’s Fourth Ministerial Conference in Doha, Qatar, in November 2001. The Doha Ministerial Declaration provided the mandate for the negotiations, including on agriculture, services and an intellectual property topic, which began earlier.

In Doha, ministers also approved a decision on how to address the problems developing countries face in implementing the current WTO agreements.

production.This article addresses an important and complex subject relating to the link between international law and economic development. There is broad agreement that trade liberalization and participation in foreign markets play an important role in economic development. Countries in Sub-Saharan Africa (SSA) have generally pursued a liberalization route over the past two decades, but their economic performance has been deeply disappointing. In this article, we look at seven countries in the Horn of Africa and examine, from legal and institutional perspectives, the central question of why these countries have failed to translate their comparative advantage, particularly in the livestock sector, into meaningful trade-led economic growth. In order to answer this question, we have reviewed the relevant legal and policy instruments and the literature, visited five of the seven countries, and interviewed different players in the livestock value chain. Analysis of the evidence reveals that the main impediments to trade relate to rising sanitary import requirements in foreign markets and weak institutional capacity within the Horn. The limited technical and financial resources available to these countries also reduce their capacity to meet these standards. Meaningful institutional change requires substantial involvement of local actors and it takes place incrementally and over the long-term. International law can play a role in this process by promoting rule of law and tackling corruption, facilitating capacity building, and encouraging regional integration.

To achieve this the negotiation process must become more democratic, it being almost impossible to reach a good agreement through bad process. WTO negotiations go on allowing only a handful of countries to reach an agreement, leaving the full governing body only a short time to consent to a done deal. The Doha Round is typical of this approach.

For the sake of millions of people we cannot allow another bad agreement. It is high time for an objective assessment of whether WTO rules have benefited people, or merely boosted cross-border trade statistics. It is time to frame policies that discipline all sources of market distortion and to measure success against the imperative of meeting internationally agreed development benchmarks. Only such an agreement will help achieve the MDGs and reduce poverty.

The news of Warren Buffet making his biggest bets on the stock market in 2011 this year on August 8th when the S&P 500 Index suffered its most recent plunge also helped in lifting the market spirits worldwide. Warren Buffet, the CEO of Berkshire Hathaway Inc. and one of the famous living investors in the world exact words were, “I like buying on sale.”

Businessweek.com reported that Goldman Sachs Group Inc. said Google’s $12.5 billion purchase of Motorola Mobility may be positive for Asian Android-phone makers as it helps reduce litigation risk. The stocks worldwide are showing signs of recovery after the most recent stock market turmoil that happened on the downgrading of the US debt rating from AAA to AA+ some days back. This downgrading had raised concerns in the global markets about the weakness of US economic recovery.

This volatility in the stock market is confusing a lot of traders and investors around the world. Gold prices are reaching unprecedented heights as most of these nervous traders and investors are running towards the supposed safe haven of gold. Many analysts are of the view that the global economy is in serious trouble. But the most important question is should that change the way you trade or invest?

Chuck Hughes is a stock trader who has been trading for a number of years now. Chuck used to work as an airline pilot when he started stock and options trading in his spare time instead of playing golf. But he is not some ordinary stock trader. He won not one but seven live international trading championships with annual gains as high as 315% over the years. However, the most interesting thing is that he became seven-time international trading champion by remaining agnostic on a host of issues: Whether the stock market is going to go up or whether it is going to go down, whether gold is overpriced or under priced, whether the dollar is in trouble or is going to recover.  This allows Chuck to ignore 99% of what is being written about the markets by analysts and so-called experts. Instead, he focuses on the only thing that matters, and what matters is CASH FLOW – where the money is going!

international trade