You may have to Search all our reviewed books and magazines, click the sign up button below to create a free account.
Recurring balance of payments crises in countries that pursued import substitution have led some of them to establish a variety of export incentives, in particular subsidies, as a way to revive and re-orient their economies. However, exporters are likely to be uncertain of the government’s commitment to export promotion because of the years of neglect. This paper analyzes the issue of the credibility of export subsidies and suggests that a government is able to convince exporters of its commitment only at a cost, which reduces the attractiveness of promoting exports by means of subsidies.
This paper develops a model to estimate the effects of export subsidies on the supply of exports. Using data for Costa Rica over the 1980’s, it is shown that while the export subsidy scheme in operation led to an increase in exports, the direct fiscal costs of the scheme were quite large. Furthermore, the subsidy scheme led to a significant increase of imports. These results suggest that elimination of export subsidies would not have a particularly harmful effect on the trade balance, and would increase the fiscal position and generate economic efficiency besides.
A new impetus has been given to faltering WTO trade discussions by the recent EU mandate supporting the liberalisation of agricultural trade policies and removal of export subsidies on agricultural products, within an environment in which all countries start reforming their trade policies.Until now, discussions have centred on agriculture in general, rather than at specific commodity level. This paper rises to the challenge laid down by the EU by identifying the specific commodities for which developing countries would gain benefit in any subsequent reforms.Agricultural Export Subsidies and Developing Countries? Interests outlines the nature of export subsidies. It discusses the effect of reform on developing countries, indicating the scale of any changes. The policy implications of removing agricultural support in the EU are given and the consequences for net food exporting and importing countries examined. Finally, the paper considers the impact of EU agricultural policy reform on other policies, such as the Protocols of the Lom? Convention.(previously announced as EU Farm Subsidies and Developing Countries)
This publication examines a range of issues relating to agricultural export subsidies, under the following headings: regulations and use of export subsidies; economic effects of export subsidies; agricultural trade policy proposals and the Agricultural Trade Policy Simulation Model; simulating export subsidy reductions; and a discussion of implications and limitations including in relation to world prices, consumers and producers in different country groups, welfare changes and a sectoral analysis.
Recoge: 1. Legal constraints en export financing for EC member countries - 2. Export financing subsidies in Belgium, France, Germany and the United Kingdom - 3. The competitive effects of export financing subsidies.
Countries often perceive themselves as being in competition with each other for profitable international markets. In such a world export subsidies can appear as attractive policy tools, from a national point of view, because they improve the relative position of a domestic firm in noncooperative rivalries with foreign firms, enabling it to expand its market share and earn greater profits. In effect, subsidies change the initial conditions of the game that firms play. The terms of trade move against the subsidizing country, but its welfare can increase because, under imperfect competition, price exceeds the marginal cost of exports. International noncooperative equilibriumis characterized by such subsidies on the part of exporting nations, even though they are jointly suboptimal.
The failure of export subsidies, particularly in Argentina, should remind us to distinguish what is possible from what is likely. In Latin America the money would be better spent on infrastructure, health, and education.