We have detected that the browser you are using is no longer supported. As a result, some content may not display correctly.
We suggest that you upgrade to the latest version of any of the following browsers:
close notification
A sl
uggish global economic outlook, with slower growth in the next
12 to 18 months than previously anticipated, will impede poverty
reduction in developing countries, according to a new World Bank
report. Action to remove barriers to trade and investment that hurt
poor people in developing countries is becoming increasingly
urgent.
According to Global Economic Prospects and the Developing Countries
2003: Investing to Unlock Global Opportunities, uncertainties in
global financial markets have sapped the momentum of the modest
recovery that began in late 2001. The report outlines steps that
rich countries and developing countries can take in the current
uncertain environment to increase growth rates and speed poverty
reduction in developing countries.
Slower Global Growth Undermining Poverty Reduction
After exceptionally slow growth in 2001 and 2002, global GDP is now
expected to rise by 2.5 percent in 2003, higher than the previous
two years but still well below the 3.9 percent expansion recorded
in 2000 and significantly below long-term potential growth rates,
according to the report. The report warns that the global rebound
might quickly lose momentum and there is a significant risk that
the world could slip back into recession.
"The recovery has been much more hesitant and uneven than we had
expected," says Nicholas Stern, World Bank Chief Economist and
Senior Vice President for Development Economics.
According to the latest forecasts, high-income countries are
expected to grow at about 2.1 percent in 2003. On average
developing countries will grow considerably faster, at 3.9 percent.
But the average masks wide regional differences, with East Asia
leading the pack at 6.1 percent, followed by South Asia at 5.4
percent. Other regions are expected to grow less than 4 percent,
with Latin America managing a mere 1.8 percent. Outside of Asia and
Eastern Europe, growth rates in most developing countries are too
low to generate a marked reduction in poverty.
According to the report, factors suppressing global growth in the
near term include waning consumer confidence, high debt levels in
the face of a weak equity market, and the fallout from corporate
financial scandals in the U.S., continuing investor worries over
imbalances in the Japanese banking system, and over-investment in
telecommunications and other high technology in Europe, as well as
concerns about debt problems in Latin America.
Private Capital Flows to Developing Countries Down
Sharply
The sagging global economy has reduced private capital flows to
developing countries. Net commercial bank lending has turned
negative, and foreign direct investment flows to developing
countries have fallen since their peak in 1999. "We're looking at
the most sustained fall in foreign direct investment in developing
countries since the global recession of 1981-83" says Richard
Newfarmer, lead author of the report.
Private foreign investment in infrastructure is down 25 percent
from 1997 in developing countries. Investors are becoming averse to
long-term projects; accounting scandals in industrial countries
have driven from the market major players such as Enron and
Worldcom; and slower growth in East Asia, Russia and Brazil has
reduced investment demand.
"Beyond the macroeconomic difficulties this retrenchment imposes,
attracting private domestic and foreign investment to
infrastructure is essential for development," says Newfarmer. "But
in the current environment, many important projects3❄4 such
as in power, roads or water system3❄4 simply won't be able
to attract the necessary private capital."
Not only is there less investment, but investors are more
discriminating. Investment in developing countries is being
redirected to countries with better investment climates.
Action on Doha Trade Agenda More Important Than Ever
Uri Dadush, Director of the Bank's International Trade Department,
says that the slowing global economy threatens to distract
attention from the need for rapid progress in global trade talks.
"It would be unfortunate indeed if a myopic focus on short-term
issues permitted protectionist forces to stifle progress in
removing trade barriers and other impediments to investment and
poverty reduction in developing countries," he says.
Global trade talks launched at Doha in November last year to
address the needs of developing countries are showing signs of
becoming bogged down. "The U.S. farm bill and the recently
announced accord to maintain E.U. spending on farm subsidies until
2013 have complicated agricultural talks," says Dadush. World Trade
Organization (WTO) Ministers plan to review progress at the next
global trade summit, in Cancun, Mexico, in September 2003.
The Cancun meeting will have to take up, among other things, two
new controversial issues, a proposed international investment
agreement and requirements for competition policy. Multinational
corporations hope such an agreement would provide them with
increased market access and new protections against adverse
government policies, such as expropriation. However, the report
finds that a global agreement to add new investor protections
against adverse government policies would probably do little to
increase FDI in developing countries.
According to Global Economic Prospects 2003, an investment
agreement could potentially help developing countries3❄4 but
only if it takes up the issues with the largest development impact
such as removing investment-distorting trade barriers facing
developing countries' exports. Developing countries in general face
external barriers to their trade in manufactures that are twice
that of rich countries. The report enumerates many of these
barriers, including for example, tariff escalation. Fresh Chilean
tomatoes exported to the US pay a tariff of 2.2 percent; if they
are dried and put in a package they have to pay 8.7 percent, and if
they are made into ketchup or salsa they have to pay nearly 12
percent. These barriers discourage domestic and foreign investment
alike.
"Removing barriers to trade and investment that hurt poor people in
developing countries should continue to be the main focus of global
trade talks—this includes barriers in the rich countries and
in the developing countries themselves," says Stern. "Straying too
far into domestic regulatory issues without getting this big
picture right risks delaying an agreement or producing outcomes
that don't really help poor people."
One barrier to competition described in the report that does hurt
developing countries but has received relatively little public
attention is international cartels, usually based in rich countries
that agree among themselves to fix prices and allocate export
markets. Six international cartels prosecuted in the 1990s are
estimated to have over-charged developing countries a total of
about $3 to $7 billion. The cartels covered products such as
vitamins, citric acid and stainless steel tubes.
Some cartels, such as maritime transport, are officially exempt
from anti-trust laws. Bank research cited in the report found that
breaking up price fixing arrangements among private shipping lines
could reduce maritime transport prices by about 20 percent, saving
developing countries at least $2.3 billion per year on their import
costs.
The report proposes greater information disclosure and stronger
enforcement mechanisms to prevent such abuses. It also recommends
allowing developing countries that have been adversely affected by
cartels to sue in rich country courts.
Improving the Investment Climate in Developing
Countries
Even in a sluggish global economy, developing countries can do much
on their own to promote growth and poverty reduction. While
previous Bank studies emphasized good governance, sound
institutions, and property rights as necessary conditions to
produce greater quantities of private investment, both domestic and
foreign, this year's Global Economic Prospects 2003 goes further by
considering policies to promote competition as a way of improving
the quality of investment, that is, making investment more
productive.
The report analyzes policy barriers that limit competition in
developing countries: trade barriers can prevent import
competition; legal restrictions can prevent foreign entry that
would increase the number of competitors; state monopolies can
prevent entry of private firms, foreign and domestic alike; and
badly-designed regulatory regimes in industries that have been
privatized can impede both domestic and foreign competitors, to the
detriment of consumers.
Addressing one area without addressing the others can produce
perverse results: for example, permitting foreign entry behind high
tariffs can create foreign-dominated oligopolies that reduce
national income. But lowering trade barriers can help compete away
monopoly profits. According to the report, increasing imports in
concentrated industries from zero to 25 percent of domestic sales
reduces oligopoly profit mark-ups by 8 percent through lower prices
to consumers. Firms in Korea, Malaysia and Thailand are more
productive than firms in India and China, in part because of lower
trade restrictions and administrative barriers to entry.
Similarly, although privatizations often have contributed to growth
and poverty reduction, privatization itself is no panacea and may
not improve outcomes when competition is lacking and the
post-privatization regulatory regime is weak. "Simply transforming
a state monopoly into private monopoly squanders the potential of
privatization," says Newfarmer. "The real benefits from
priviatization come from introducing competition to drive
productivity improvements and regulations that provide poor people
with access to services."
In Africa, for example, telephone service in countries with
competitive networks has expanded three times faster than in
countries with private telephone monopolies. Improving the quality
of infrastructure and its management can improve the
competitiveness of exports. For example, India's shipping costs to
the US are more than 20 percent higher than in Thailand - World
Bank.