Advertisement

Intereconomics

, Volume 31, Issue 1, pp 33–42 | Cite as

Africa's marginalisation in world trade

A result of the Uruguay Round agreements
  • Robert Kappel
International Trade

Abstract

Since 1975 the Lomé Conventions have granted trade preferences to African exports to the European Union, Africa's main trading partner. The liberalisation of trade foreseen by the Uruguay Round means that these preferences will disappear, leading to net reductions in African exports. What lessons should the countries of Africa draw from this?

Keywords

African Country Trade Policy Common Agricultural Policy Uruguay Round Custom Duty 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    See Ishrat Husain and John Underwood (eds.): African External Finance in the 1990s, Washington, D.C., 1991.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    See Ronald L. Parker, Randell Riopelle and William Steel: Small Enterprises Adjusting to Liberalisation in Five African Countries, World Bank Discussion Papers, No. 271, Washington, D.C., 1995; Roger C. Riddel: The Future of the Manufacturing Sector in sub-Saharan Africa, in: Thomas M. Callaghy and John Ravenhill (eds.): Hemmed In. Responses to Africa's Decline, New York 1993, pp. 215–247.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    See Frances Stewart: Are Short-term Policies Consistent with Long-term Development Needs in Africa?, in: Giovanni Andrea Cornia and Gerald K. Helleiner (eds.): From Adjustment to Development in Africa, New York 1994, pp. 98–128.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    See Hartmut Brandt: Auswirkungen von Exporterstattungen der Europäischen Union auf die Rindfleischsektoren westafrikanischer Länder, DIE Berichte und Gutachten 1/95, Berlin 1995.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    See Sara S. Berry: No Condition is Permanent. The Social Dynamics of Agrarian Change in sub-Saharan Africa, Madison, London 1994.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Thomas M. Callaghy and John Ravenhill (eds.), op. cit. Hemmed In. Responses to Africa's Decline, New York 1993, pp. 215–247.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    See Dirk Hansohm and Robert Kappel: Schwarz-weiße Mythen. Afrika und der entwicklungspolitische Diskurs, Münster/Hamburg 1994 (2nd edition).Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    For a detailed analysis, see Paul Collier: The Marginalization of Africa, Centre for the Study of African Economies, Oxford 1994.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    For a detailed analysis see Michael T. Hadjimichael, D. Ghura, M. Mühleisen et al.: Sub-Saharan Africa. Growth, Savings, and Investment, 1986–1993, IMF Occasional Papers, No. 118, Washington, D.C., 1995.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    See Dirk Hansohm and Robert Kappel, op. cit., Schwarz-weiße Mythen. Afrika und der entwicklungspolitische Diskurs, Münster/Hamburg 1994 (2nd edition). pp. 15 ff.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    See John Ravenhill: Collective Clientelism: The Lomé Conventions and North-South Relations, New York 1985; Enzo R. Grilli: The European Community and the Developing Countries, Cambridge 1993.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    See Olivier Cadot and Jaime de Melo: The Europe Agreements and EC-LDC Relations, CEPR Discussion Paper Series, No. 1001, London 1994; Paul Collier and Jan Willem Gunning: Trade Policy and Regional Integration: Implications for the Relations between Europe and Africa, in: The World Economy, Vol. 18, No. 3, 1995, pp. 387–410.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Sheila Page: The Outlook for Textiles and Clothing, in: Christopher Stevens and D. C. Faber (eds.): The Uruguay Round and Europe 1992, ECDPM Occasional Paper, Maastricht 1990, p. 106.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Michael Davenport: Africa and the Unimportance of Being Preferred, in: Journal of Common Market Studies, Vol. 30, No. 2, 1992, pp. 233 ff.Google Scholar
  15. 16.
    See Ian Goldin and Dominique van der Mensbrugghe: The Uruguay Round: An Assessment of Economywide and Agricultural Reforms, Paper presented at the World Bank Conference “The Uruguay Round and the Developing Countries”, 26–27th January 1995, Washington, D.C., 1995; Joseph F. Francois, B. McDonald and H. Nordström: Assessing the Uruguay Round, Paper presented at the World Bank Conference “The Uruguay Round and the Developing Countries”, 26–27th January 1995, Washington, D.C., 1995.Google Scholar
  16. 17.
    see Alexander J. Yeats. What are OECD Trade Preferences Worth to sub-Saharan Africa?, World Bank Policy Research Working Paper No. 1254, Washington, D.C., 1994; Christoper Stevens and Jane Kennan. How Will the EU's Response to the GATT Round Affect Developing Countries?, IDS Working Paper No. 11, Brighton 1994; Piritta Sorsa: The Burden of Sub-Saharan African Own Commitments in the Uruguay Round-Myth or Reality?, IMF Working Paper WP/95/48, Geneva; Michael Davenport, Adrian Hewitt and Antonique Koning. The Impact of the GATT-Uruguay Round on ACP States, ODI and ECDPM, London, Maastricht 1994; Peter Harrold.) The Impact of the Uruguay Round on Africa: Much Ado About Nothing?, Paper presented at the World Bank Conference “The Uruguay Round and the Developing Countries”, 26–27th January 1995, Washington, D.C., 1995; Sheila Page and Michael Davenport: World Trade Reform. Do Developing Countries Gain or Lose?, London 1994.Google Scholar
  17. 18.
    Alexander J. Yeats, op. cit., What are OECD Trade Preferences Worth to sub-Saharan Africa?, World Bank Policy Research Working Paper No. 1254, Washington, D.C., 1994; p. 9.Google Scholar
  18. 19.
    Alexander J. Yeats, op. cit. What are OECD Trade Preferences Worth to sub-Saharan Africa?, World Bank Policy Research Working Paper No. 1254, Washington, D.C., 1994; pp. 24 f.Google Scholar
  19. 20.
    See Christopher Stevens and Jane Kennan, op. cit.; How Will the EU's Response to the GATT Round Affect Developing Countries?, IDS Working Paper No. 11, Brighton 1994; Michael Davenport, Adrian Hewitt and Antonique Koning, op. cit.; The Impact of the GATT-Uruguay Round on ACP States, ODI and ECDPM, London, Maastricht 1994; Jürgen Wiemann: Entwicklungspolitik nach der Uruguay-Runde. Ergebnisse der GATT-Verhandlungen und Schlußfolgerungen für diedeutsche Entwicklungszusammenarbeit, DIE, Berlin 1994.Google Scholar
  20. 22.
    See Irma Adelman and Steven J. Vogel: The Relevance of ADLI for sub-Saharan Africa, in: African Development Perspectives Yearbook 1990/91, Vol. II, Münster/Hamburg 1992, pp. 258–279.Google Scholar
  21. 23.
    See Michael Davenport, Adrian Hewitt and Antonique Koning, op. cit.; The Impact of the GATT-Uruguay Round on ACP States, ODI and ECDPM, London, Maastricht 1994; Sheila Page and Michael Davenport, op. cit. World Trade Reform. Do Developing Countries Gain or Lose?, London 1994.Google Scholar
  22. 24.
    See Tyler Biggs, G. R. Moody, J.-H. van Leeuwen and E. D. White: Africa Can Compete: Export Opportunities and Challenges for Garments and Home Products in the U.S. Market, World Bank Discussion Papers, No. 242, Washington, D.C., 1994.Google Scholar
  23. 25.
    Sheila Page and Michael Davenport, op. cit., World Trade Reform. Do Developing Countries Gain or Lose?, London 1994. p. 63.Google Scholar
  24. 26.
    See Alexander J. Yeats, op. cit., What are OECD Trade Preferences Worth to sub-Saharan Africa?, World Bank Policy Research Working Paper No. 1254, Washington, D.C., 1994, p. 18.Google Scholar
  25. 27.
    See Peter Harrold, op. cit. The Impact of the Uruguay Round on Africa: Much Ado About Nothing?, Paper presented at the World Bank Conference “The Uruguay Round and the Developing Countries”, 26–27th January 1995, Washington, D.C., 1995; p. 53; Sheila Page and Michael Davenport, op. cit.; World Trade Reform. Do Developing Countries Gain or Lose?, London 1994. Michael Davenport, Adrian Hewitt and Antonique Koning, op. cit. The Impact of the GATT-Uruguay Round on ACP States, ODI and ECDPM, London, Maastricht 1994.Google Scholar
  26. 28.
    See Robert Kappel: Afrikas Randsituation in der Weltgesellschaft und die Perspektiven für strategische Kooperation, in: Wolfgang Hein (ed.): Umbruch in der Weltgesellschaft—auf dem Wege zu einer “Neuen Weltordnung”?, Hamburg 1994, pp. 191–236; Paul Collier, op. cit. The Marginalization of Africa, Centre for the Study of African Economies, Oxford 1994.Google Scholar
  27. 29.
    See Paul Collier and Jan Willem Gunning, op. cit. Trade Policy and Regional Integration: Implications for the Relations between Europe and Africa, in: The World Economy, Vol. 18, No. 3, 1995, pp. 387–410.Google Scholar
  28. 30.
    See Judith M. Dean, Seema Desai and James Riedel: Trade Policy Reform in Developing Countries Since 1985, World Bank Discussion Papers, No. 267, Washington, D.C., 1994.Google Scholar
  29. 31.
    Nevertheless, there is considerable potential here; see Faezeh Foroutan and Lant Prichett: Intra-sub-Saharan Africa Trade: Is it too Little?, in: Journal of African Economies, Vol. 2, No. 1, 1993, pp. 74–105.Google Scholar
  30. 32.
    Robert Kappel: Future Prospects for the CFA Franc Zone, in: INTERECONOMICS, Vol. 28, No. 6, 1993, pp. 269–278.Google Scholar
  31. 33.
    See Paul Collier and Jan Willem Gunning, op. cit. Trade Policy and Regional Integration: Implications for the Relations between Europe and Africa, in: The World Economy, Vol. 18, No. 3, 1995, pp. 387–410.Google Scholar
  32. 34.
    See Robert Kappel: Afrikas Randsituation …, op. cit. in der Weltgesellschaft und die Perspektiven für strategische Kooperation, in: Wolfgang Hein (ed.): Umbruch in der Weltgesellschaft—auf dem Wege zu einer „Neuen Weltordnung”?, Hamburg 1994, Jürgen Wiemann, op. cit. Entwicklungspolitik nach der Uruguay-Runde. Ergebnisse der GATT-Verhandlungen und Schlußfolgerungen für diedeutsche Entwicklungszusammenarbeit, DIE, Berlin 1994.Google Scholar
  33. 35.
    See John Ravenhill, op. cit., Collective Clientelism: The Lomé Conventions and North-South Relations, New York 1985; Enzo R. Grilli: The European Community and the Developing Countries, Cambridge 1993. p. 14.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© HWWA and Springer-Verlag 1996

Authors and Affiliations

  • Robert Kappel
    • 1
  1. 1.University of BremenGermany

Personalised recommendations