WTO非关税措施成本考核.pdf

《WTO非关税措施成本考核.pdf》由会员分享，可在线阅读，更多相关《WTO非关税措施成本考核.pdf（33页珍藏版）》请在淘文阁 - 分享文档赚钱的网站上搜索。

1、Staff Working Paper ERSD-2012-02 Date:15 February 2012 World Trade Organization Economic Research and Statistics Division This paper appears in the WTO working paper series as commissioned background analysis for the World Trade Report 2012 on Looking beyond International Co-operation on Tariffs:NTM

2、s and Services Regulations in the XXIst Century Michael J.Ferrantino U.S.International Trade Commission Revised:15 February 2012 Disclaimer:This is a working paper,and hence it represents research in progress.This paper represents the opinions of the authors,and is the product of professional resear

3、ch.It is not meant to represent the position or opinions of the WTO or its Members,nor the official position of any staff members.Any errors are the fault of the author.Copies of working papers can be requested from the divisional secretariat by writing to:Economic Research and Statistics Division,W

4、orld Trade Organization,Rue de Lausanne 154,CH 1211 Geneva 21,Switzerland.Please request papers by number and title.Using Supply Chain Analysis to Examine the Costs of Non-Tariff Measures(NTMs)and the Benefits of Trade Facilitation 1 Using Supply Chain Analysis to Examine the Costs of Non-Tariff Mea

5、sures(NTMs)and the Benefits of Trade Facilitation Michael J.Ferrantino U.S.International Trade Commissioni Abstract It has become increasingly common to produce goods in a number of geographically dispersed stages linked by international trade.This tendency,known by names such as“production fragment

6、ation”,“processing trade”,and“vertical specialization”,has important implications for the analysis of non-tariff measures(NTMs)and trade facilitation.First,different types of NTMs or trade facilitation issues are naturally associated with different stages in the movement of goods.Different price gap

7、s can be assigned to these stages,making it possible to decompose the overall amount of distortion and to prioritize the policies with the largest potential efficiency gains.Second,NTMs may accumulate in long supply chains,implying that their trade-distorting effects are greater for goods produced i

8、n a fragmented manner than for goods with simple production processes.There is evidence that trade costs are more important for high technology goods or goods undergoing several stages of processing.Issues with product standards may be particularly important for goods with long supply chains.The lin

9、k between NTMs and supply chains also has implications for economic development and for the relationship between liberalization in services and goods.JEL Classification:F13,F15,F29 Keywords:trade costs,non-tariff measures,standards,intermediate goods i This piece represents solely the views of the a

10、uthor and is not meant to reflect the views of the U.S.International Trade Commission or any of its Commissioners.Helpful comments by Marc Bacchetta,Renee Berry,Cosimo Beverelli,and Danielle Trachtenberg are gratefully acknowledged.All errors and omissions remain the responsibility of the author.2 1

11、.Why supply chain analysis of NTMs?(a)The growing role of supply chains In recent decades,it has become increasingly common to produce goods in a number of geographically dispersed stages linked by international trade.Such international supply chains have been described variously by economists as“pr

12、oduction fragmentation”(Arndt and Kierzkowski,2001),“processing trade”(Grg,2000),“vertical specialization”(Hummels,Rapoport and Yi 1998),“slicing up the value chain”(Krugman,Cooper and Srinivasan 1995),or“the second unbundling”(Baldwin 2006).The implications of this global change in the organization

13、 of industry is that it takes many more export and import transactions to provide a single unit for final demand of complex goods like computers and automobiles than previously.While there are examples of production fragmentation going back to ancient times,1 the widespread adoption of this method o

14、f production and trade has a number of implications for how the world economy works today.These include reallocating the value added by trade among different countries depending on where they fit in the supply chain(Koopman et al.2010)and,possibly,making international trade flows more sensitive to t

15、he business cycle,as demonstrated in the recent Great Recession and Great Trade Collapse of 2008-09(Baldwin 2009).(b)The inseparability of price gaps,and the desire to prioritize policy efforts At the same time,there is an increasing interest among policymakers in addressing barriers to trade other

16、than tariffs,known collectively as“non-tariff measures”or NTMs2.As tariffs have 1During the height of the Roman Empire,trade in marble and manufactures of marble linked various provinces in multi-stage production processes(Moore and Lewis 1999,pp.255-260).The marble production chain was coordinated

17、by the equivalent of todays multinational companies.Major quarries,often owned by the Caesars,operated in Egypt,Numidia(modern Tunisia and Algeria)and Bithynia,in the northwest of modern Turkey.Blocks and columns of marble were mass-produced on a prefabricated and standardized basis.The production o

18、f marble caskets or sarcophagi could involve several stages,with hollowing out taking place in Asia Minor(western Turkey)and finishing in Athens,Alexandria,or Beirut.The resulting products were exported throughout the Empire,differentiated for local tastes and customs.2 The term“non-tariff measures”

19、is often taken to be synonymous with“non-tariff barriers”(NTBs),the latter term being more common in the earlier literature.For the purposes of economic inquiry,I adopt“non-tariff measures”as relatively value-neutral,while“non-tariff barriers”may convey the connotation of trade policies which violat

20、e some negotiated or agreed norms.3 declined steadily since the 1940s,both in seven GATT/WTO rounds and in numerous unilateral,bilateral,and plurilateral liberalizations,government interventions to restrict imports have increasingly taken non-tariff forms.These include,but are not limited to,quantit

21、ative restrictions,technical barriers to trade,sanitary and phytosanitary measures,price-based measures,and so on.3 Quantifying the effects of these policies on world trade is challenging;indeed,NTMs have often been held to represent“murky protectionism”(Baldwin and Evenett 2009),since,unlike ad val

22、orem tariffs,they are not immediately associated with numerical measures of their impact.Attempts to assess the trade impacts of NTMs have led to the development of the“price gap”or“tariff equivalent”method,which seeks to estimate the level of ad valorem tariff that would have an equally trade-restr

23、icting effect to the NTM in question.If country A is imposing an NTM,and its import price is higher than the“world price”,this can be taken as evidence that the NTM is trade-restrictive.There are a number of issues involved in estimating the“world price”should the CIF prices of other importers be us

24、ed,or the FOB prices of exporters?Can transport costs be accounted for?More importantly,what about the effects of differences in quality on prices?These issues are more or less surmountable.Given sufficient data on export and import prices,tariffs,and transport margins,4 it is possible to do a reaso

25、nably good job of estimating price gaps.An alternate method of assessing the impact of NTMs is to estimate“quantity gaps”i.e.are actual trade flows in the presence of the NTM less than expected trade flows,as estimated by a statistical model of trade,such as a gravity model?Quantity gap estimates ar

26、e essentially the dual of price gap estimates.While price gaps are often preferred on a number of grounds,5 quantity gaps are particularly useful when the NTM is absolutely prohibitive,so that no prices are observed,or when the product is highly differentiated,so that unit values are either not obse

27、rved or not particularly informative.3 For a categorization of NTMs see UNCTAD(2010,pp.121-142).4 Transport costs must be subtracted from the price gap in order to identify the residual potentially attributable to NTMs.Since the CIF and FOB prices usually used to calculate the price gap do not inclu

28、de tariffs,an additional adjustment for the tariff is unnecessary or superfluous.See Linkins and Arce(1994),Deardorff and Stern(1998)and Ferrantino(2006)for information on the price gap method.5 Ferrantino(2006,pp.20 and 69).4 However,there are problems in moving from estimates of price gaps or quan

29、tity gaps to recommendations to policymakers.It is notoriously the case that when there is a preference to restrict imports,multiple NTMs may be in place.Indeed,exporting firms,or governments negotiating on their behalf,may remove one NTM only to see new ones emerge,leading to what is often called t

30、he“whack-a-mole”problem.6 When there are multiple NTMs in place,it is natural for policymakers to want to know which are more restrictive or more important.Suppose that an imported product is affected simultaneously by non-automatic licensing,a technical standard,and slow customs procedures.The tota

31、l effect of such procedures is estimated to be represented by a tariff equivalent of 50 percent.Is it possible to decompose the tariff equivalent,so that we can say,e.g.that non-automatic licensing has a 25 percent ad valorem equivalent,the technical standard 15 percent,and customs procedures 10 per

32、cent?Such a decomposition would be very useful in prioritizing policy efforts,and targeting interventions to the most severe problems first.In principle,price gaps cannot be so decomposed.Since there is only one distorted domestic price and one world price(after appropriate adjustments to each),ther

33、e is only one price gap.No further information is available.If there are multiple policies,their individual and specific impact on the distortion in question is unknown.Indeed,it may be that one or more of the policies are binding constraints there may be a key policy which,when removed,gets rid of

34、most of the distortion,or it may be necessary to reform the whole set of policies in order for anything observable to happen in the market place.The same objection applies to quantity gaps in the presence of multiple NTMs there is only one actual quantity observed in the market place,and one estimat

35、ed quantity,and thus one non-decomposable quantity gap.6“Whack-a-mole”is a childrens arcade game in which the player strikes rodents on the head with a mallet only to have them pop up again repeatedly.See Tilton(1998)for an example of multiple NTMs in practice.See also Ferrantino(2011).5 (c)The poss

36、ibility that NTM effects may cumulate in supply chains In 2006,I proposed that NTMs could be decomposed by the study of goods as they move through supply chains.7 The idea is to follow a typical exported good from its location of production(ex-farm or ex-factory)through multiple steps in the process

37、 of shipping and delivery.For example,goods once produced are moved to the export port;handled in the export port;moved internationally by water,air,or road;handled in the import port;cleared through customs,paying any applicable duties;moved in the import market;and subject to wholesaling and retai

38、ling.At each stage in the process the price of the good increases,as additional costs are imposed(Figure 1).Moreover,the costs associated with each move through the supply chain can now be separated into their constituent parts.Different policies and practices apply to each part of the supply chain.

39、For example,market distortions in international shipping specifically affect the difference between the FOB and CIF prices;import customs procedures affect the difference between the CIF price and the landed duty-paid price,and restrictions on the size or hours of retail operations in the importing

40、country affect the difference between the wholesale and retail price.Thus,it is possible at least in principle to have a common metric to compare the restrictiveness of different types of NTMs.7 Ferrantino(2006,p.38).6 Figure 1.Traded-goods prices along the supply chain8 Some costs,such as those ass

41、ociated with land transport to export or port procedures,may not represent NTMs as usually conceived,but may be amenable to trade facilitation interventions.Another advantage of a supply chain framework is that NTMs,which raise prices of traded goods,and trade facilitation efforts,which should lower

42、 prices,can be compared using a common metric.Indeed,this reflects the general point that NTMs and trade facilitation can be analyzed with similar tools.9 For example,inefficiencies in customs procedures are sometimes thought of as NTMs and sometimes as trade facilitation issues.Since this framework

43、 reveals the comparability of NTMs and trade facilitation,it does not matter what one considers them improving customs procedures reduces a distortion.The limited available evidence suggests that total markups along the supply chain can be substantial.In one widely-cited exercise,Anderson and Wincoo

44、p(2004)estimate that among developed countries,the typical cost increase from the factory in an exporting country to the retailer in the importing country amounts to 170%,consisting of 21%transportation costs,44%border related 8 For an algebraic representation of Figure 1,see Ferrantino(2006,Annex 1

45、).9 Dee and Ferrantino(2005),Ferrantino(2006),Shepherd(2010).Factory or farm price Land transport and port costs Freight and insurance costs Tariffs Wholesale markups Retail markups FOB price when exported CIF price when imported Landed duty-paid price Wholesale price Retail price 7 trade barriers,a

46、nd 55%retail and wholesale margins(1.21*1.44*1.55=2.7;2.7-1=1.7,for a markup of 170 percent).The 44%markup may include tariffs,NTMs and“natural”barriers,sucyh as different languages,information costs,and the transaction costs associated with using different currencies.An even higher estimate is give

47、n by Feenstra(1998),citing Tempest(1996),which suggests that the mark-up on Barbie dolls produced in China and sold in the United States is on the order of 900 percent.While some of the costs associated with international trade are unavoidable,others are associated with policy-induced distortions or

48、 technological inefficiencies.Thus,it should be possible in principle to compare actual costs at each step of the supply chain with best-practice costs,consisting of necessary marginal costs of processing the goods in the absence of rents,and with efficient use of technology(Figure 1).The difference

49、s at each step can be attributed to step-specific NTMs,or to unresolved trade facilitation issues.Some of these will have rents associated with them which accrue to specific actors,while others represent pure inefficiency.With a supply-chain decomposition,it would be in principle possible to identif

50、y where the greatest rents and inefficiencies are,and to identify policy priorities which are most likely to expand trade and benefit both producers and consumers of traded goods.In principle,the price increase at each step should include not only the monetary costs of moving along the supply chain,