WTO trade negotiations are demanding. The issues are complex. Successful participation requires trade ministries with economic and legal expertise, analytical capability, the ability to coordinate the efforts and input of a range of government ministries and departments, and the ability to integrate the knowledge and interests of private sector actors.
Many developing and less developed countries lack the technical expertise to participate effectively. For example, Botswana.
Case #6 in Gallagher, Low, and Stoler, (Managing the Challenges of WTO Participation : 45 Case Studies), argues that, so far, Botswana hasn't cultivated the ability to participate successfully in the WTO, and advance her other trade interests. This case was prepared by Kennedy K. Mbekeani of the Botswana Institute for Development Policy Analysis (BIDPA). The discussion applies through 2004; I suspect this case was written in late 2004 or early 2005.
The reason appears to be that until recently, Botswana saw little need for an active trade policy. The bulk of its exports were diamonds sent to the UK, and beef that entered the EU under preferential terms. Botswana's foreign trade policy was largely in the hands of South Africa, which took primary responsibility for Southern African trade under the auspices of the Southern Africa Customs Union. Trade issues were not a high Botswana policy priority.
Moreover, high turnover among Trade Ministers prevented any of them from developing the expertise to provide effective leadership. Between the Singapore ministerial meetings in 1996, and the Cancun meetings in 2003, Botswana had six trade ministers.
Botswana's trade negotiations are in the hands of the Department of International Trade - a division of the Ministry of Trade and Industry. But, in the absence of effective political leadership, this department has not done a very good job.
Observers say the Department is understaffed (it only has four people dealing with trade issues), and that the staff does not have the economic or legal expertise to deal with the WTO, or its other trade responsibilities.
The Department is responsible for interagency coordination, and outreach to private sector constituencies.
The Department has failed to effectively coordinate input from other agencies. Ministry officials have attended WTO meetings that deal with agriculture, without consulting the officials of the agriculture ministry.
It has also failed to engage the private sector.
The Ministry of Trade and Industry indicated that they find it difficult to attract sufficient industry interest and attendance at WTO consultations; these consultations normally occur before ministerial conferences and attendance is normally very low. The ministry feels that industry does not see the relevance of WTO negotiations.
However, the industry and other non-governmental institutions feel that the ad hoc nature of the meetings does not warrant the allocations of scare resources. They also feel that their institutions have little, if any, impact on the preparatory process for negotiations. (page 102)
Botswana has analytical resources available at the Economics Department of the University of Botswana and the BIDPA, but the she did not use these effectively. Likewise, with the Exporters Association of Botswana. Analysis would be hampered somewhat by data deficiencies. One local observer noted that the most recent trade data available was three years out of date.
In consequence: "The country lacks the capacity for effective participation in the negotiation process, and has had a limited impact on the design of new rules."
Related post: Dipak Patel and Doha (Dec 11, 2005) points to a column in the Financial Times on the problems faced by the Zambian trade minister.
Kennedy Mbekeani on the web:
Hi,
As far as I know trade policy is almost never measured using the most obvious indicators -- such as tariffs....
Posted by: m3 karte | February 25, 2010 at 03:21 AM