1 - 5 of 5
Number of results to display per page
Search Results
2. A Post-Brexit Trade Policy for Development and a More Integrated Africa
- Author:
- Kimberly Ann Elliott
- Publication Date:
- 01-2020
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Center for Global Development
- Abstract:
- The United Kingdom will confirm its departure from the European Union on 31st January 2020. As part of its independent trade policy, the government has committed to improve access to UK mar- kets for the poorest countries. This note sets out three ways it can do so: expanding duty-free market access while avoiding piecemeal trade agreements that undermine Africa’s own trade integration ef- forts; using an alternative framework for those trade agreements it does negotiate with developing countries; and supporting a “back-to-basics” multilateral negotiation at the World Trade Organiza- tion that could help to rebuild confidence in that institution and thus protect the interests of small and vulnerable countries. After a brief review of the background and context, it sets out specific pro- posals in each of these areas.
- Topic:
- Development, International Cooperation, International Trade and Finance, European Union, and Brexit
- Political Geography:
- Africa, United Kingdom, and Europe
3. Developing a More Inclusive US Trade Policy at Home and Abroad
- Author:
- Kimberly Ann Elliott
- Publication Date:
- 06-2019
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- Center for Global Development
- Abstract:
- American policymakers have failed to adequately respond to concerns about globalization’s effects and the resulting backlash has taken an ugly turn in recent years. While globalization is only one of many factors contributing to economic dislocation, sluggish wage growth and inequality in the United States, foreigners, and developing countries in particular, are frequently the target of those who are frustrated at being left behind. Yet few realize that US trade policy effectively discriminates against poorer countries. In addition, provisions in trade agreements that tilt the playing field in favor of business interests over those of American consumers and workers also often undermine development priorities in partner countries. American policymakers should rethink the substance and process of trade policy and negotiations to spread the benefits more broadly, at home and abroad.
- Topic:
- Globalization, International Trade and Finance, Inequality, and Domestic Policy
- Political Geography:
- United States and North America
4. Mexico’s Financial Risks: Solving Pemex for a Solvent Mexico
- Author:
- Laura Alfaro, Augusto de la Torre, Guillermo Calvo, Roque Fernandez, Pablo Guidotti, Paulo Leme, Enrique G. Mendoza, Guillermo Perry, Carmen M. Reinhart, and Liliana Rojas-Suarez
- Publication Date:
- 07-2019
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Center for Global Development
- Abstract:
- Mexico’s financial risks and the policies being adopted by the new administration cannot be ade- quately assessed without recognizing key features that characterize the following initial conditions:
- Topic:
- Development, International Trade and Finance, Governance, Finance, Economic Growth, and Risk
- Political Geography:
- North America and Mexico
5. Chinese Leadership and the Future of BRI: What Key Decisions Lie Ahead?
- Author:
- Brad Parks
- Publication Date:
- 07-2019
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Center for Global Development
- Abstract:
- It’s 2028. The Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) has been underway for 15 years, but the initial enthusiasm and momentum behind BRI has vanished. Many of the governments that initially joined the initiative have publicly withdrawn or quietly wound down their participation. China’s staunchest allies remain engaged but even they have reservations about the wisdom of the initiative. They are saddled with unproductive public investment projects and struggling to service their debts. Domestic public sentiment towards China has soured, and they have come to view their participation in BRI as more of a political liability than an asset. But they worry about the consequences of alienating their most important patron and creditor. China has also assumed a defensive posture. Lacking the goodwill that it possessed at the beginning of BRI, it is now using inducements and threats to prevent its remaining clients from abandoning the initiative. Western donors and lenders watch from the sidelines with a sense of bemusement. They encouraged China to “multilateralize” BRI by establishing a common set of project appraisal standards, procurement guidelines, fiduciary controls, and social and environmental safeguards that other aid agencies and development banks could support. But Beijing chose to go it alone. It opted not to embrace the use of economic rate-of-return analysis to vet project proposals; resisted efforts to harmonize its environmental, social, and fiduciary safeguards with those used by aid agencies and development banks outside of China; and pushed back on the “Western” suggestion that it modernize its monitoring and evaluation practices. China bet that its fast and flexible approach to infrastructure finance would prove to be so compelling that traditional donors and lenders would eventually jump on the bandwagon and co-finance BRI projects. But it miscalculated. Its model was insufficiently attractive on its merits to enlist the participation and support of the other major players in the bilateral and multilateral development finance market. Nor was it sufficiently appealing to sustain elite and public support in partner countries.
- Topic:
- Development, International Trade and Finance, Infrastructure, Leadership, and Belt and Road Initiative (BRI)
- Political Geography:
- China and Asia