Advertisement

Trade Liberalization and Small Economies: The Case of the Caribbean Community

  • Carlton G. Davis
  • Ballayram
  • Edward A. Evans
  • Clive Y. Thomas
Chapter
  • 132 Downloads
Part of the Natural Resource Management and Policy book series (NRMP, volume 20)

Abstract

The Uruguay Round of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade/World Trade Organization (GATT/WTO) confirm the trend toward a liberal international trade regime. The chief features of the agreement are: (1) reciprocal multilateral-trade arrangements based on the prohibition of nontariff barriers (NTBs) and the progressive reduction of tariffs; (2) market-driven economic imperatives and performance-based results; (3) regional or sub-regional cooperation oriented toward open regionalism; (4) linkage of trade to other areas of liberalization, especially trade-related property issues, investment, finance, and the movement of skilled workers and management; (5) linkages of trade to certain non-economic areas, such as environment and labor standards; and, (6) reinforcement of the predictability and certainty of the trade arrangements through appropriate compliance and enforcement mechanisms.

Keywords

Gross Domestic Product Trade Liberalization Uruguay Round Much Favored Nation Agricultural Trade 
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. Bernal, R.L. 1998. The Integration of Small Economies in the Free Trade Area of the Americas, Volume 9. Washington, DC: Center for Strategic and International Studies.Google Scholar
  2. Bernal, R.L. 1994. “From NAFTA to Hemispheric Free Trade.” Colombia Journal of World Business 29(3): 23–31.Google Scholar
  3. Bhagwati, J. 1988. “Export-Promoting Trade Strategy: Issues and Evidence.” World Research Observer 3: 27–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Blackhurst, R., A. Enders, and J.F. François. 1996. “The Uruguay Round and Market Access: Opportunities and Challenges for Developing Countries,” in W. Martin and L.A. Winters, eds., The Uruguay Round and the Developing Countries. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  5. Briguglio, L. 1995. “Small Island Developing States and Their Economic Vulnerabilities.” World Development 23(9).Google Scholar
  6. Bryan, A.T. 1995. “Copying with the New Dynamics,” in A.T. Bryan, ed., The Caribbean: New Dynamics in Trade and Political Economy. Miami, FL: North-South Center, University of Miami.Google Scholar
  7. CARICOM Community Secretariat. 1994. Review and Analysis of the Performance of the Agricultural Sector in CARICOM Member States (1988–1992). Georgetown, Guyana.Google Scholar
  8. CARICOM Secretariat Statistical Office (n.d.). Georgetown, Guyana.Google Scholar
  9. Caribbean Update. 1997. “Banana Trade Row Ruling.” 3(4).Google Scholar
  10. Caribbean Week. 1997. “E.U. files appeal.” 21 June to 4 July.Google Scholar
  11. CGCED (Caribbean Group for Cooperation in Economic Development). 1998. Caribbean Economic Overview. Washington, DC: CGCED.Google Scholar
  12. Davis, CG., Ballayram, E.A. Evans, and C.Y. Thomas. 1999. “Trade Liberalization and Small Economies in the Americas: The Case of the Caribbean Community.” International Working Paper IW99-1, Food and Resource Economics Department, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL (February).Google Scholar
  13. Dookeran, W.C. 1996. Choices and Change: Reflections on the Caribbean. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins Press.Google Scholar
  14. Durrant, N. and H. Kendall. 1997. “Structural Effects of Non-Reciprocal Preferential Trading Arrangement on the Agricultural Sector of Guyana in the Context of Structural Adjustment.” Paper presented at the Twenty-Second West Indies Agricultural Economics Conference, Barbados, West Indies (27–30 August).Google Scholar
  15. FAO (Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations). 1995. Impact of the Uruguay Round on Agriculture CCP:95/13. Rome, Italy.Google Scholar
  16. Finger, M, F. Ng, and I. Soloaga. 1998. “Trade Policies in the Caribbean Countries: A Look at the Positive Agenda.” Paper prepared for discussion at the meetings of the Caribbean Group for Cooperation on Economic Development (CGCED), Washington, DC (June).Google Scholar
  17. Gonzales, A.P. 1993. “Trade Liberalization, Growth, and Employment in CARICOM.” Paper presented at the Conference on Trade Liberalization, Growth, and Employment in the Caribbean Basin, Washington, DC (8–9 September).Google Scholar
  18. Greenfield, J., M. De Negris, and P. Konandreas. 1996. “The Uruguay Round Agreement on Agriculture: Food Security Implications for Developing Countries.” Food Policy 21(4): 365–375.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Group of Experts. 1998. Overcoming Obstacles and Maximizing Opportunities: Smaller Economies and Western Hemisphere Integration. Kingston, Jamaica (March).Google Scholar
  20. Hathaway, D. and M. Ingco. 1996. “Agricultural Liberalization and the Uruguay Round,” in W. Martin and L. Winters, eds., The Uruguay Round and the Developing Countries. Washington, DC: The World Bank.Google Scholar
  21. Konandreas, P. and J. Greenfield. 1996. “Uruguay Round Commitments on Domestic Support: Their Implications for Developing Countries.” Food Policy 21(4/5): 433–446.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Lal, D. and S. Rajapatirana. 1987. World Bank Research Observer 2(2 July): 189–217.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. McIntyre, A.M. 1993. A Paper on Regional Trade Policies. OECS Secretariat, Castries, St. Lucia, West Indies.Google Scholar
  24. Nurse, K., and W. Sandiford. 1995. Windward Islands Bananas: Challenges and Options Under the Single Economic Market. Kingston, Jamaica: Friedrich Ebert Stiftung.Google Scholar
  25. OAS (Organization of American States). 1997. Small and Relatively Less Developed Economies and Western Hemispheric Integration. Washington, DC: Trade Unit.Google Scholar
  26. SELA (Latin American Economic System). 1998. “Implementation of the Uruguay Round Agreement on Agriculture: Issues for Latin America and the Caribbean.” SP/DRE/Di No. 22–98, Permanent Secretariat of SELA, Caracas, Venezuela.Google Scholar
  27. Thornsbury, S., D. Roberts, K. DeRemer, and D. Orden. 1997. “A First Step in Understanding Technical Barriers to Agricultural Trade.” Draft copy of contributed paper presented at the XXIII International Conference of Agricultural Economics, Sacramento, California (10–16 August).Google Scholar
  28. Tincani, A. 1996. “The European Union and the Caribbean: Challenges Ahead,” in W.C. Dookeran, ed., Choices and Change: Reflections on the Caribbean. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins Press.Google Scholar
  29. UNDP (United Nations Development Program). 1998. Human Development Report. New York, NY: UNDP.Google Scholar
  30. USDA/ERS (U.S. Department of Agriculture/Economic Research Service). 1998. Free Trade in the Americas: Situation and Outlook Series. WRS-98-1, Washington, DC (November).Google Scholar
  31. USDA/ERS (U.S. Department of Agriculture/Economic Research Service). 1995. “Supplementary Tables.” Foreign Agricultural Trade of the United States. Washington, DC: USDA/ERS.Google Scholar
  32. Valdes, A. and A. McCalla. 1996. “The Uruguay Round and Agricultural Policies in Developing Countries and Economies in Transition.” Food Policy 21(4/5): 419–431.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. West Indian Commission. 1992. Time for Action: Report of the West Indian Commission . 2 nd ed. Kingston, Jamaica: University of the West Indies Press.Google Scholar
  34. Witter, M. 1992. The Poultry Industry in Jamaica: The Impact of the Reform of the Common External Tariff (CET). Consortium Graduate School, University of the West Indies, Jamaica, West Indies.Google Scholar
  35. World Bank. 1994. Coping with Changes in the External Environment. Report No. LAC 12821, Caribbean Division. Washington, DC: The World Bank.Google Scholar
  36. WTA/GATT (World Trade Agreement/General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade). 1994. “GATT, Agriculture, (MTN/FA II-A1 A-3).” Internet website: http://www.itl.irv.uit.no/trade_law/documents/freetrade/wta-94/art/iia 1 a3.html.
  37. Yamazaki, F. 1996. “Potential Erosion of Trade Preferences in Agricultural Products.” Food Policy 21(4/5): 409–417.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2002

Authors and Affiliations

  • Carlton G. Davis
    • 1
  • Ballayram
    • 1
  • Edward A. Evans
    • 1
  • Clive Y. Thomas
    • 2
  1. 1.University of FloridaUSA
  2. 2.University of the West IndiesJamaica

Personalised recommendations