Trade in Japan

Japan reported a trade deficit equivalent to 907 Million JPY in May of 2012. Historically, from 1979 until 2012, Japan Balance of Trade averaged 652.9 Billion JPY reaching an all time high of 1608.7 Billion JPY in September of 2007 and a record low of -1476.9 Billion JPY in January of 2012. Exports have been the main engine of Japan's economic growth in the past six years. Japan imports raw materials and processes them into high technology products. Japan’s major exports are: consumer electronics, automobiles, semiconductors, optical fibers, optoelectronics, optical media, facsimile and copy machines. Its main trading partners are The United States, China and European Union. This page includes a chart with historical data for Japan Balance of Trade

For many years, export promotion was a large issue in Japanese government policy. Government officials recognized that Japan needed to import to grow and develop, and it needed to generate exports to pay for those imports. After 1945, Japan had difficulty exporting enough to pay for its imports until the mid-1960s, and resulting deficits were the justification for export promotion programs and import restrictions.

The belief in the need to promote exports is early strong and part of Japan's self-image as a "processing nation." A processing nation must import raw materials but is able to pay for the imports by adding value to them and exporting some of the output. Nations grow stronger economically by moving up the industrial ladder to produce products with greater value added to the basic inputs. Rather than letting markets accomplish this movement on their own, the Japanese government felt the economy should be guided in this direction through industrial policy.

Japan's methods of promoting exports has taken two paths. The first was to develop world-class industries that can initially substitute for imports and then compete in international markets. The second was to provide incentives for firms to export.

During the first two decades after World War II, export incentives took the form of a combination of tax relief and government assistance to build export industries. After joining the International Monetary Fund (IMF) in 1964, however, Japan had to drop its major export incentive — the total exemption of export income from taxes — to comply with IMF procedures. It did maintain into the 1970s, however, special tax treatment of costs for market development and export promotion.

Once chronic trade deficits came to an end in the mid-1960s, the need for export promotion policies diminished. Virtually all export tax incentives were eliminated over the course of the 1970s. Even JETRO, whose initial function is to assist smaller firms with overseas marketing, saw its role shift toward import promotion and other activities. In the 1980s, Japan continued to use industrial policy to promote the growth of new, more sophisticated industries, but direct export promotion measures were no longer part of the policy package.

The 1970s and 1980s saw the emergence of policies to restrain exports in certain industries. The great success of some Japanese export industries created a backlash in other countries, either because of their success per se or because of allegations of unfair competitive practices. Under General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) guidelines, nations have been reluctant to raise tariffs or impose import quotas. Quotas violate the guidelines, and raising tariffs goes against the general trend among industrial nations. Instead, they have resorted to convincing the exporting country to "voluntarily" restrain exports of the offending product. In the 1980s, Japan was quite willing to carry out such export restraints. Among Japan's exports to the United States, steel, color television sets, and automobiles all were subject to such restraints at various times

U.S. goods and services trade with Japan totaled $267 billion in 2011 (latest data available for goods and services trade combined). Exports totaled $113 billion; Imports totaled $154 billion. The U.S. goods and services trade deficit with Japan was $40 billion in 2011.

Japan is currently our 4th largest goods trading partner with $195 billion in total (two ways) goods trade during 2011. Goods exports totaled $66 billion; Goods imports totaled $129 billion. The U.S. goods trade deficit with Japan was $63 billion in 2011.

Trade in services with Japan (exports and imports) totaled $72 billion in 2011 (latest data available for services trade). Services exports were $47 billion; Services imports were $25 billion. The U.S. services trade surplus with Japan was $22 billion in 2011.

Launched in November 2010, the U.S.-Japan Economic Harmonization Initiative (EHI) is a new bilateral Initiative that aims to contribute to our countries’ economic growth by promoting cooperation to harmonize approaches that facilitate trade, address business climate and individual issues, and advance coordination on regional issues of common interest.

Japan was the United States' 4th largest goods export market in 2011.

U.S. goods exports to Japan in 2011 were $66.2 billion, up 9.4% ($5.7 billion) from 2010, and up 1.4% from 2000. U.S. exports to Japan accounted for 4.5% of overall U.S. exports in 2011.

The top export categories (2-digit HS) in 2011 were: Optic and Medical Instruments ($7.7 billion), Machinery ($5.7 billion), Cereals (corn and wheat) ($5.6 billion), Electrical Machinery ($5.0 billion), and Aircraft ($4.8 billion).

U.S. exports of agricultural products to Japan totaled $14.1 billion in 2011, our 4th largest export market. Leading categories include: coarse grains ($3.9 billion), red meats (fresh/chilled/frozen) ($2.8 billion), wheat ($1.4 billion), and soybeans ($954 million).

U.S. exports of private commercial services* (i.e., excluding military and government) to Japan were $47.0 billion in 2011 (preliminary data), 5% ($2.3 billion) more than 2010 and 43% greater than 2000 levels. Other private services (business, professional, and technical services and financial services), travel, and the royalties and license fees categories accounted for most of U.S. services exports to Japan.

Japan was the United States= 4th largest supplier of goods imports in 2011.

U.S. goods imports from Japan totaled $128.8 billion in 2011, a 6.9% increase ($8.3 billion) from 2010, but down 12.1% from 2000. U.S. imports from Japan accounted for 5.8% of overall U.S. imports in 2011.

The five largest import categories in 2011 were: Vehicles ($41.0 billion), Machinery ($31.2 billion), Electrical Machinery ($18.3 billion), Optic and Medical Instruments ($6.9 billion), and Organic Chemicals ($3.0 billion).

U.S. imports of agricultural products from Japan totaled $586 million in 2011. Leading categories include: snack foods (including chocolate) ($54 million), wine and beer ($53 million), and processed fruit and vegetables ($36 million).

U.S. imports of private commercial services* (i.e., excluding military and government) were $24.8 billion in 2011 (preliminary data) up 5% ($1.3 billion) from 2010, and up 51% from the 2000 level. The royalties and license fees, the other private services (business, professional, and technical services), and the other transportation (freight services) categories accounted for most of U.S. services imports from Japan

The U.S. goods trade deficit with Japan was $62.6 billion in 2011, a 4.3% increase ($2.6 billion) over 2010. The U.S. goods trade deficit with Japan accounted for 8.6% of the overall U.S. goods trade deficit in 2011.

Trade in Japan

The United States has a services trade surplus of $22.2 billion with Japan in 2011 (preliminary data), up 5% from 2010.

On March 31 1854 representatives of Japan and the United States signed a historic treaty. A United States naval officer, Commodore Matthew Calbraith Perry, negotiated tirelessly for several months with Japanese officials to achieve the goal of opening the doors of trade with Japan.

For two centuries, Japanese ports were closed to all but a few Dutch and Chinese traders. The United States hoped Japan would agree to open certain ports so American vessels could begin to trade with the mysterious island kingdom. In addition to interest in the Japanese market, America needed Japanese ports to replenish coal and supplies for the commercial whaling fleet.

On July 8,1853 four black ships led by USS Powhatan and commanded by Commodore Matthew Perry, anchored at Edo (Tokyo) Bay. Never before had the Japanese seen ships steaming with smoke. They thought the ships were "giant dragons puffing smoke." They did not know that steamboats existed and were shocked by the number and size of the guns on board the ships.

At age 60, Matthew Perry had a long and distinguished naval career. He knew that the mission to Japan would be his most significant accomplishment. He brought a letter from the President of the United States, Millard Fillmore, to the Emperor of Japan. He waited with his armed ships and refused to see any of the lesser dignitaries sent by the Japanese, insisting on dealing only with the highest emissaries of the Emperor.

 The Americans admired the courtesy and politeness of their hosts, and thought very highly of the rich Japanese culture. Commodore Perry broke down barriers that separated Japan from the rest of the world. Today the Japanese celebrate his expedition with annual black ship festivals. Perry lived in Newport, Rhode Island, which also celebrates a Black Ship festival in July. In Perry's honor, Newport has become Shimoda's sister city.

MITI was created with the split of the Ministry of Commerce and Industry in May 1949 and given the mission for coordinating international trade policy with other groups, such as the Bank of Japan, the Economic planning Agency, and the various commerce-related cabinet ministries. At the time it was created, Japan was still recovering from the economic disaster of World War II. With inflation rising and productivity failing to keep up, the government sought a better mechanism for reviving the Japanese economy.

MITI has been responsible not only in the areas of exports and imports but also for all domestic industries and businesses not specifically covered by other ministries in the areas of investment in plant and equipment, pollution control, energy and power, some aspects of foreign economic assistance, and consumer complaints. This span has allowed MITI to integrate conflicting policies, such as those on pollution control and export competitiveness, to minimize damage to export industries.

MITI has served as an architect of industrial policy, an arbiter on industrial problems and disputes, and a regulator. A major objective of the ministry has been to strengthen the country's industrial base. It has not managed Japanese trade and industry along the lines of a centrally planned economy, but it has provided industries with administrative guidance and other direction, both formal and informal, on modernization, technology, investments in new plants and equipment, and domestic and foreign competition.

MITI lost some influence when the switch was made to a floating exchange rate between the United States dollar and yen in 1971. Before that point, MITI had been able to keep the exchange rate artificially low, which benefited Japan's exporters. Later, intense lobbying from other countries, particularly the United States, pushed Japan to introduce more liberal trade laws that further lessened MITI's grip over the Japanese economy. By the mid-1980s, the ministry was helping foreign corporations set up operations in Japan.

The decline of MITI was described Johnstone:

... by the early 1980s, when Western analysts first became aware of MITI, the ministry's glory days were over. In 1979 MITI lost its primary instrument of control over Japanese firms — allocation of foreign currency. The power, that is, to decide who could — and who could not — import technologies. [For example] ... MITI bureaucrats attempted to deny fledling Sony the $25,000 the company needed to license transistor technology from Western Electric.

The declining significance of MITI to Japanese companies made it a less powerful agency within the bureaucracy, and by the end of the 20th century, it was folded into a larger body. In 2001, it was reorganized into the Ministry of Economy, Trade, and Industry (METI)

Matthew Perry was the son of Sarah Wallace (Alexander) and Navy Captain, Christopher R. Perry and the younger brother of Oliver Hazard Perry. Matthew Perry received a midshipman's commission in the Navy in 1809, and was initially assigned to the USS Revenge, under the command of his elder brother. Under his brother's command, Matthew was a combatant in The Battle of Lake Erie aboard the Flagship Lawrence and the replacement flagship, Niagara.

Matthew's early career saw him assigned to several ships, including the USS President where he served as an aid to Commodore John Rodgers (1772–1838), which had been in a victorious engagement over a British vessel, HMS Little Belt, shortly before the War of 1812 was officially declared. He continued in this capacity during the War of 1812. Perry was also aboard the President when it engaged the HMS Belvidera when Rodgers himself fired the first shot of the war at this vessel with a following shot that resulted in a cannon bursting, wounding Rodgers and Perry and killing and wounding others. Perry transferred to the USS United States, and saw little fighting in the war after that, since the ship was trapped in port at New London, Connecticut. Following the signing of the Treaty of Ghent which ended the conflict, he served on various vessels in the Mediterranean. Perry served under Commodore William Bainbridge during the Second Barbary War. He then served in African waters aboard USS Cyane during its patrol off Liberia from 1819-1820. After that cruise, Perry was sent to suppress piracy and the slave trade in the West Indies. Later during this period, while in port in Russia, Perry was offered a commission in the Imperial Russian Navy, which he declined.

 Perry had an ardent interest and saw the need for the naval education, supporting an apprentice system to train new seamen, and helped establish the curriculum for the United States Naval Academy. He was a vocal proponent of modernizing the Navy. Once promoted to captain, he oversaw construction of the Navy's second steam frigate the USS Fulton, which he commanded after its completion. He was called "The Father of the Steam Navy", and he organized America's first corps of naval engineers, and conducted the first U.S. naval gunnery school while commanding Fulton in 1839-1841 off Sandy Hook on the coast of New Jersey.

 erry returned in February 1854 with twice as many ships, finding that the delegates had prepared a treaty embodying virtually all the demands in Fillmore's letter. Perry signed the Convention of Kanagawa on March 31, 1854 and departed, mistakenly believing the agreement had been made with imperial representatives.The agreement was made with the Shogun, the de facto ruler of Japan.

 

Trade in Japan

Japanese 1854 print relating Perry's visit.

On his way to Japan, Perry anchored off Keelung in Formosa (modern day Taiwan), for ten days. Perry and crew members landed on Formosa and investigated the potential of mining the coal deposits in that area. He emphasized in his reports that Formosa provided a convenient mid-way trade location. Formosa was also very defensible. It could serve as a base for exploration as Cuba had done for the Spanish in the Americas. Occupying Formosa could help the US to counter European monopolization of the major trade routes. President Franklin Pierce declined the suggestion, remarking such a remote possession would be an unnecessary drain of resources and that he would be unlikely to receive the consent of Congress.

A group of Japanese aerospace company representatives traveled to Mexico in May to learn about the country’s aerospace manufacturing footprint and engineering prowess in the development of the industry. The group visited aerospace clusters in the cities of Queretaro, Chihuahua, Mexicali and Tijuana, which together concentrate more than half of the country’s aerospace manufacturing.  

he history of exchange between Japan and the Netherlands started when the Rotterdam ship "de Liefde" drifted ashore in Japan in 1600. From the end of the 16th to the beginning of the 17th century, during the warring states period, Japanese culture was strongly influenced by Portugal and Spain.

In 1639, the Tokugawa Shogunate prohibited the Portuguese from visiting Japan and decided to continue official trade only with the Netherlands. In 1641, the Dutch Factory of the VOC was relocated from Hirado to Deshina in Nagasaki and trade between Japan and the Netherlands entered a new stage. At this time, the Netherlands was the only country that provided Japan with western culture. During the Edo period western culture into Japan was almost exclusively imported through the Dutch Factory of the VOC in Nagasaki.

The celebration of the 400 year cultural and economical exchange between Japan and the Netherlands has induced us to compose some web pages and offerings of a number of beautiful, rare and important items with an accent on this unique relationship between both countries.

The European Commission will next Wednesday (18 July) ask member states for a mandate to start talks with Japan on a bilateral free-trade deal. 

Advocates of a free-trade deal between the world's fourth and fifth-largest economies are urging speed, highlighting the potential to help the European Union's economic recovery. However, a third of the EU's member states have reservations about Japan's readiness for a deal and about the mandate that the Commission is seeking.

At a meeting of trade ministers on 30 May, some countries argued that the 12-month scoping exercise conducted to test the potential for an agreement should have probed more deeply about Japan's commitment to reaching a deal. The Commission refused to re-open the scoping exercise and insists that it has “clear commitments written in stone” from Japan that would not normally be made at this stage.

According to diplomats and EU officials, those countries that will push for a tougher negotiating mandate include four of the EU's largest economies: Germany, France, Italy, and Spain. The others are Austria, Bulgaria, Greece, Romania, Slovakia and the Czech Republic. 

The car industry is an area of particular concern. Manufacturers believe that Japan's standards and regulations – non-tariff barriers – contribute to making it 30% more costly to own a European car than a Japanese care.

There are also doubts about non-tariff barriers in the health sector, and about rules for public tenders. The prospects of agreement on public procurement have, however, improved, as the EU, Japan and the US agreed in December to open up their markets for public contracts.

Arguments for a quick agreement between the Commission and member states, an EU official said, include the EU's need for growth and the political situation in Japan, where the government is pushing through reforms against a backdrop of waning public support and divisions within the ruling party.

According to a Japanese official, the date of this year's EU-Japan summit will be set only once the EU has agreed on a mandate for free-trade talks. His EU contacts suggest that the aim is to agree a mandate at the European Council in October. That would open up the possibility of a summit in November, probably in Tokyo.

The trade mandate will also affect progress on signing a framework agreement between Japan and the EU. That agreement will be debated by European commissioners at their 18 July meeting. 

Trade in Japan

Why is trade important?

Trade can be explained as the exchange of goods between those who produce them (the producers) and those who consume them (the consumers).

Trade is important as it is a vital interaction for every country in the world. Without trade, countries would have to provide their own resources for every aspect in their daily life. Take for instance items such as food, clothing and technology. This would mean that a country is completely self-reliant which is difficult as the resource capacity for each country is limited. This is a particular issue for developing or less developed countries that cannot fully provide for themselves due to a lack of technology or education. However, even a developed country would struggle if it had to be fully self-reliant. Look around the room you are in and pick up an item, it is very unlikely it will be made in the country you are in. Trade is also used within a country. For instance, a small farm may provide produce for a local shop.

Trading is also important as it contributes to the economy of a country. For instance, one country produces a good and then sells it to another country. This provides income which can then be used for development within the country such as by funding education and the emergency services. Trading also adds to the economy as it provides millions of jobs across the globe. Trade is also important as countries may import goods more cheaply than they can produce on their own.

A particularly important part of trade is the idea of fair trade. Fair trade enables that all those involved in the trading network have fair wages and good working conditions. This is particularly important for those in less developed countries that work in unsafe conditions on low wages but the goods they produce are then sold for a high price in the country that gains them. 

As movements in the terms of trade reflect changes in relative prices, it is often unclear how these movements affect the real economy. Although this has been debated extensively in the literature to date, there is still no consensus view about how trends in the terms of trade impact on economic growth.

The most common view is that the terms of trade has a positive impact on economic growth. An increase in export prices relative to import prices allows a larger volume of imports to be purchased with a given volume of exports. The implied increase in the real purchasing power of domestic production is equivalent to a transfer of income from the rest of the world and can have large impacts on consumption, savings and investment. The terms of trade can also be thought of as a rate of return on investment and therefore a secular improvement in the terms of trade leads to an increase in investment and hence economic growth. A graphical illustration of the income effect of a movement in the terms of trade is shown in Figure 2. Real gross domestic income (RGDI) measures the purchasing power of the total income generated by domestic production. The difference between real GDP and RGDI is defined as the terms of trade effect. The appreciation of the terms of trade over 2004 led to a boost in real incomes and this is shown by RGDI exceeding real GDP over 2004 and 2005.

Fair trade is important because in many poorer countries, prices are so low that workers are unable to earn enough to live off of. Also, some goods are produced in ways that are exploitative to workers, or ways that are unsustainable environmentally, damaging to the environment in the communities in which the goods are produced.Fair trade does not instantly solve all these problems, but it aims to potentially address some of them in ways that conventional trade does not.

Trade facilitation can provide important opportunities for Africa by increasing the benefits from open trade, and contributing to economic growth and poverty reduction. Removing trade barriers has contributed to the expansion of global trade in the decade after the conclusion of the trade negotiations of the Uruguay Round in 1994 and the subsequent establishment of the World Trade Organization (WTO). However, the quest for more open trade is not an end in of itself but driven by the experience that open trade provides more economic opportunities for people. Producers can offer their goods and services to more customers, and consumers have more choices, lower prices, and access to innovations. Open markets increase prospects of producing and selling new ideas and products locally, regionally and in global markets, which leads to more income opportunities and the improvement of living standards.

 However, most African countries face considerable challenges to achieving more open trade. One reason is that the costs of trading remain stubbornly high, which prevents potential African exporters competing in global and even in regional markets. Realizing this trend, policy makers have started paying more attention to addressing trade-discouraging non-tariff barriers.

 Trade facilitation measures have become a key instrument to create a better trading environment. The international community has acknowledged that for many lower income countries having better market access to industrial countries is insufficient  unless the capabilities to trade are addressed as well. The resulting trade capacity building activities evolved into a broader and comprehensive Aid for Trade agenda, with trade facilitation playing a major role in these efforts.

This chapter argues for approaching trade facilitation in a comprehensive way by addressing the new challenges to trade, which no longer arise predominantly from high tariffs but from barriers behind the border. This approach highlights the need for cross-sector analysis, for example along the value-chain of products, to address trade bottlenecks. However, the biggest obstacle to greater trade integration is the lack of accompanying policy and regulatory reforms. Trade facilitation can provide opportunities for African exporters if hard infrastructure and technical advice are backed by equally ambitious policy reforms.

important of trade

The reasoning behind the efforts to address the trade challenges beyond the traditional areas is the impact on trade costs of factors along the whole trading chain. The more comprehensive approach to trade facilitation examines the costs that traders and producers face from production until the delivery of their goods and services to the overseas buyer and thereby includes all the transaction costs both directly and indirectly associated with the trading process.

Trade facilitation measures must therefore be designed to assist countries to lower trade costs and become more competitive in regional and global markets. With the removal of most quotas and a general reduction of tariffs, the search for the causes of high trading costs is shifting towards:

Costs of transportation and logistics: determined by components such as availability and quality of logistics services, market structures and the degree of competition that they allow, transportation fleets, and regulatory environments;

Physical infrastructure: for example, hazardous roads, lack of capacity of ports and airports, and railways hampered by decaying networks;

Additional market entry barriers: mandatory or voluntary quality and safety standards which can inhibit the access to regional and overseas markets (particularly prevalent in food trade but also exist in a range of technical products); limited information about overseas markets marketing and consumer demands reduce opportunities.

The term “trade facilitation” has different interpretations. Even among international organizations engaged in trade promotion, such as the World Trade Organization (WTO), the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), and the World Bank slightly different approaches have emerged. However, the classic approach could be described as focused predominantly on the removal of barriers to the international movement of goods and. in particular, on the procedures at and around borders (e.g., simplification of customs procedures).

 The trade facilitation part of the WTO negotiations, for example, focuses on transactions at the border, such as documentary requirements, transparency of customs clearance and transit procedures, and disciplines on fees and taxes. This traditional view of trade facilitation is motivated to improve border and transit management procedures and their implementation and thereby remove obstacles to trade in goods at the border; less attention is paid to “behind and between the border” issues.

he U.S. says that "important progress" has been achieved during the latest round of talks aimed at crafting a wide-ranging trade pact with eight other Pacific nations.

The countries concluded their 13th round of negotiations on Tuesday in the western U.S. city of San Diego. U.S. trade officials said "particularly significant" progress was made on dealing with customs regulations, cross-border services, telecommunications and government purchases.

The Trans-Pacific Partnership scheduled another negotiating session in September outside Washington, with Canada and Mexico slated to join the talks in coming months. Besides the U.S., the partnership now includes Australia, Brunei, Chile, Malaysia, New Zealand, Peru, Singapore and Vietnam.

The office of U.S. Trade Representative Ron Kirk said the talks advanced in twenty areas of negotiation. U.S. President Barack Obama has said that a pact with the Pacific nations is a trade priority, which he sees as a way to cut into the U.S. trade deficit and boost the country's labor market.

One trade expert, Gary Hufbauer of the nonpartisan Petersen Institute for International Economics in Washington, said that after three years of talks, officials had hoped to wrap up an agreement this year. Although that timetable now seems unrealistic, he said an agreement could be reached next year and ratified in 2014.

"Other countries want us to liberalize some agricultural products, which have long not been liberalized: dairy products, sugar, beef," he said, adding that the U.S. is also being asked to liberalize barriers on clothing, textiles, and footwear. "They also want us to liberalize services which have not been liberalized, [such as] government procurement of services like contracts for data-processing, and so on."

Hufbauer said the U.S. is not alone in having to confront difficult issues on specific products, and that tough negotiations remain.

The outcome of the upcoming presidential election between Obama and Republican challenger Mitt Romney, he added, is unlikely to make much difference in the outcome of the talks, as both candidates have said they favor the new trade pact.

WE wish Gov. Chris Gregoire success on her trade mission to the British Isles. No doubt some folks will persist in dismissing such trips as junkets. In fact, they are important to the people of Washington.

The trip's focus is the annual air show, held this year at Farnborough, England. In aerospace, everyone who is anyone is there; to be an aerospace-component CEO is to be one ant on the hill. Having a governor along changes that. It opens doors for participating companies here.

That includes doors at Airbus Industrie, Boeing's rival. People here may think of Airbus as the enemy, but if you are one of 720 aerospace suppliers in Washington, Airbus is a potential customer — and a big one. One of Gregoire's tasks is to take Washington executives to talk to executives of the European aerospace giant.

Another of her tasks is to tell foreign companies that Washington is a good place to invest. Why? Because other states have officials touting their advantages, which may include subsidies. Washington has forbidden itself to offer those, which is all the more reason to have a governor, accompanied by successful business people, to tell investors in person that Washington wants their investments.

European Trade Commissioner, Karel De Gucht, discussed with members of the European Parliament's International Trade Committee (INTA) prospects of a transatlantic trade agreement and its possible impact on the EU and the US economies, emphasising the great potential for supporting jobs and growth.

Commissioner De Gucht underlined the importance of EU-US trade relations, pointing out that “more that €1.8 billion of goods are traded every day between the European Union and United States”. He stressed that during the November 2011 EU-US summit a high-level working group on jobs and growth was established. Subsequently, the US Chamber of Commerce called on creation of a tariff-free trade zone across the Atlantic.

important of trade

“Enhanced compatibility is in economic and political terms the most important challenge for an ambitious transatlantic agreement,” De Gucht said and pointed out that investment regimes between the EU and the US are already open. He emphasised that market access to government procurement should be substantially improved and reminded that both the US and the EU are committed to protection of intellectual property rights. 

President Ma Ying-jeou's government has spelled out interest in the U.S.-based Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), which it regards as crucial for export-dependent Taiwan to remain competitive in the region.

However, the chances of Taiwan being invited to join the Pacific Rim trade bloc are considered limited if it continues its long-running dispute with Washington over its refusal to import U.S. beef containing the leanness-enhancing drug ractopamine, which is banned in Taiwan.

Burghardt said that whether or not Taiwan should be allowed to join in the TPP negotiations is a "legitimate question."

"As Ma was startlingly frank in acknowledging in his remarks, Taiwan has acquired some really serious protectionist habits and gotten used to a protectionist approach to trade. And that's going to be hard to give up," he said.

The United States has hinted on many occasions that as long as Taiwan does not resolve the U.S. beef controversy it will not restart bilateral trade talks that have been stalled since 2007. The resumption of the talks is regarded as helpful to Taiwan's efforts to join the TPP bloc. 

In one of those odd NBA twists, the Lakers’ trade of Lamar Odom to Dallas before last season paved the way for Nash’s arrival. Los Angeles used the trade exception it got in the Odom deal to make the Nash move work.

The 38-year-old Nash was a free agent, but a sign-and-trade agreement was necessary for the Lakers to afford him. He agreed to a three-year, $27 million contract. In return, the Suns get four draft picks — first-rounders in 2013 and 2015 and second-rounders in 2013 and 2014.

Nash’s agent, Bill Duffy, said the deal was completed Wednesday about 9 p.m., EDT.

In a statement released by Duffy, Nash said that after he and the Suns agreed to part ways, he went back to the team and asked it to pursue a sign-and-trade deal with Los Angeles “because it is very important to me to stay near my children and family,” who live in Phoenix.

“They were very apprehensive and didn’t want to do it,” Nash said. “Fortunately for me, they reconsidered. They saw that they were able to get assets for their team that will make them better, assets they would not have otherwise had, and it made sense for them to do a deal that helps their team get better.”

Pour a cup of tea, let it steep, and then take a sip as you ponder this fact: After water, tea is the most popular beverage in the world, with 15,000 cups drunk per second. Tea is everywhere — in our cafes, our kitchens, our offices, schools and stores — but how many of us really know the story of each leaf as it travels from field to cup?

The tea supply chain is a complex trade network with many different players. Each and every farmer, worker, exporter, importer, processor, auctioneer, buying agent, retailer, café worker and tea drinker in the chain played an important role in bringing you the world’s favorite beverage.

Historically, low market prices for tea have led to poor labor and living conditions for both tea garden workers and tea farmers at the beginning of this supply chain, encapsulating them in a cycle of poverty and hardship.  Fair Trade certification seeks to stop this cycle, giving tea garden farmers and workers in eleven different countries the chance to lift themselves out of poverty, improve their communities, and protect their environment.

.

This impact was driven by businesses like Honest Tea, Runa, Choice Organic Teas, Rishi Tea, and Numi Tea, and supplemented by growing awareness and demand from U.S. consumers. In fact, the annual growth rate of tea imports from 2010 to 2011 increased by 21 percent, reaching imports of over two million pounds for the first time in Fair Trade USA’s history.

This increase in imports means more impact for the tea garden workers (on large farms) and tea farmers (in a cooperative) who work so hard to grow and harvest our tea.

Tea farmers and workers across Asia and Africa benefit most when U.S. consumers care about where their tea comes from. When you look for tea bearing the Fair Trade Certified label, you know that the people who produced it are paid fair prices and wages, work in safe conditions, and protect the environment. Fair Trade Certified tea gardens and farms also form committees or associations of workers who then democratically determine how to manage and use their community development premiums. Many choose to invest in things like healthcare, education, environmental conversation, community infrastructure, quality and productivity.

Take, for example, United Nilgiri Tea Estates Co. Ltd (UNTE), a Fair Trade Certified tea garden located in South India who has greatly benefited from Fair Trade. UNTE is comprised of four neighboring tea estates: Chamraj, Korakundah, Allada Valley and Devabetta. Historically, the living and working conditions of the laborers on remote tea estates were notoriously poor. However, Fair Trade has helped to change this story. Thanks to their Fair Trade premiums, UNTE is now able to help fund the higher education of laborers’ children and expose them to new career opportunities.

Chamraj, one of the four tea estates of UNTE, provides secondary education in both Tamil and English through age 18, to prepare students for college and university.  In addition, UNTE used their Fair Trade premiums to build local school lab facilities and eight new classroom multimedia centers.  UNTE also purchased buses to help ensure that children who live up to 30km away have the opportunity to attend school every day. Additionally, the salaries of two secondary teachers are partly paid with Fair Trade premium funds.

 Similar impact can be seen in Dazhangshan Organic Tea Farmer Association (DOTFA), situated in the Wuyuan Mountains of China. The Dazhangshan Organic Tea Farmer Association was also the first producer organization in China to gain Fair Trade certification. The group has over 5,400 member households; additionally, the number of female members has increased dramatically since the cooperative’s inception. Today, women make up almost 35 percent of the organization.

The association extends membership not only to farmers, but also to technicians and tea processors who handle the teas and prepare them for sale to buyers. DOTFA has democratically elected to use their Fair Trade community development premium funds for organic agriculture training and education; high school and university scholarships for children of farm workers, and building a new school with a library, computer lab and student dormitory.

important of trade