Reactions to Manmohan Singh’s choice for Commerce Minister: Anand Sharma

Anand Sharma is India’s new Commerce minister. How is this news being received?

DNA India:

Former commerce minister Kamal Nath will head the much sought after road transport and highways ministry in place of the DMK’s TR Baalu. Kamal Nath had made no secret of his desire to move out of commerce to a ministry with strong domestic content.
This infrastructure ministry forms a key part of the prime minister’s strategy to revive the economy. Under Baalu, road development did not make good progress and the prime minister wants to reverse this.

Singh, however, surprised many with his choice of Sharma as the new minister for commerce. It is a huge elevation for Sharma, who was only one of two ministers of state in the external affairs ministry earlier. Jyotiraditya Scindia is the minister of state for commerce.

Swapan Dasgupta in a CNN-IBN debate:

Political heavyweights have been inducted in infrastructure and social sector, is that the tone of the governance that we will see in this new Government?

“That is difficult to say but the move of Kamal Nath away from Commerce is very interesting. He in fact did not want Road Transport and Highways, he wanted a bigger portfolio. But the fact is that he has got an important ministry which is about infrastructure. The point is that in Commerce we have Anand Sharma and there might have to be adjustments made with WTO in the international scale and that could be one of the reasons,” Adhikari said.

Is that a possible climbdown by the new Government?

“India has taken certain positions which are completely at odds with the US. Now the WTO position was equated with Kamal Nath. He was standing up to American protectionism. So it will be interesting to see what stand the Government will take,” Dasgupta said.

The Economic Times:

Commerce ministry, under Anand Sharma, has been entrusted with the task of taking urgent steps to boost exports. The minister has the dual task of giving suggestions to the finance ministry for budget formulation as well as finalising the foreign trade policy for 2009-10, a senior official in the ministry said.
The free trade agreements with Asean and South Korea are also waiting for final touches to be given by Mr Sharma, he added.
Speaking to ET, Mr Sharma said; “I am humbled by this responsibility that is entrusted upon me at this critical juncture when globally commerce and industry is challenged by the ongoing downturn.”
He also hinted that India will remain aggressive at multilateral trade negotiations. “I will look at all possible measures to ensure and enhance our commercial engagements with the world and contribute in creating a global economy which will be more trusting and not creating protectionist barriers,” he said.

The Times of India:

NEW DELHI: It was at 9.30pm on Thursday that news finally came – the portfolios were out. At first look it seemed along expected lines, but then a few surprises surfaced: there was a new commerce minister in Anand Sharma with the previous one, Kamal Nath, being moved to surface transport. …

The delay in announcing portfolios betrayed that allocation of jobs wasn’t easy. As Sonia Gandhi said, it was a balancing act. Political considerations had to be married with merit to create a team that will deliver. And as Manmohan Singh said, people expected efficiency from the government; “business as usual” would not do.

Will the team deliver? Well, here are its key players. For a government for which rural upliftment is a stated priority, the man on the spot is newcomer C P Joshi who has been given the rural development ministry. Another priority, infrastructure, has the effective Kamal Nath in charge of surface transport (although there were whispers about him being being removed from “glamorous” commerce), and Sushil K Shinde as power minister.
…

If Anand Sharma looked pleased after his elevation as cabinet minister, being named commerce and industry ministry should make him beam. He is now in the big league. Perhaps a background in international law and diplomacy weighed in his favour for a ministry where global trade talks are among top concerns.
…

Jairam Ramesh, the man behind Congress’s poll campaign, is expected to play a crucial role as environment minister as important negotiations on global warming are on the agenda later this year.

…

Industry reactions as quoted in the Economic Times:

India Inc hails PM’s ministerial team
28 May 2009, 2300 hrs IST, PTI

NEW DELHI: India Inc on Thursday welcomed Prime Minister Manmohan Singh’s new ministerial team and expressed hope that they will live up to the expectations.
“People and industry have great aspirations … We hope this team will work committedly to come up with their expectations,” Assocham Secretary General D S Rawat said.
Ficci Secretary General Amit Mitra said, “It is a team of experience, excellency and balance.”
Commenting on the new Commerce and Industry Minister Anand Sharma, Mitra said he has good international networks which will help him in dealing with the critical and important issues of the World Trade Organisation.
“He will make an excellent negotiation as he has great diplomatic experience at the global level,” Mitra added.
Confederation Of Indian Industry (CII) said: “There is a shuffle which is fine as we have worked with them earlier and looking forward to closely work with them. We are happy to see the portfolio distribution.”
“Kamal Nath is known to be a person of great skills … there are great expectations from him … highways development should be highest priority for the economy,” CII Director General Chandrajit Banerjee said.
Nath, who was previously the Commerce and Industry Minister will now hold Road Transport and Highways portfolio.

Reuters India:

Sharma, who was the junior foreign minister in the previous government and has his roots in youth politics, has little experience of economic portfolios and is likely to toe the line set by his reformist boss, Prime Minister Manmohan Singh.

Sharma is an articulate speaker and defended a controversial nuclear deal with the United States in parliament last year.

India is a leading negotiator for emerging nations in the struggling Doha round of talks, and its efforts to protect poor farmers have been one of the stumbling blocks to an agreement.

Sharma is unlikely to soften India’s pro-farmer stand at the talks but could be flexible in giving market access in other sectors, analysts said.

While the global financial crisis may have made market reforms unfashionable, it is the ruling Congress party itself that may prove a bigger obstacle to deep change.

Congress won the election not only because of four years of rapid growth but also because of a pro-farm policy that may make it difficult for the government to make a radical shift in its position at the Doha talks.

India expects the next round of negotiations at the World Trade Organisation (WTO) to start in January or February 2010.

The appointment of Kamal Nath, who is seen as pro-business, as road transport and highways minister signals the government’s intention to speed up the implementation of infrastructure projects which had slowed under the previous government.

India’s new Commerce Minister: Anand Sharma

Well, the wait got over last night and we now know who the new commerce and industry minister is.

Here is a profile of Anand Sharma, (a lawyer incidentally) the new man in charge of India’s WTO negotiations:

Profiles: Anand Sharma is Mr Popular

Press Trust Of India

New Delhi: Anand Sharma, 56, who served the Congress Party as a spokesman for years, will now be India’s chief spokesman at multilateral trade bodies like World Trade Organisation seeking fair deal for the country.

His well-measured words and oratory skills, which got polished as the Minister of State for External Affairs, must have weighed heavily on Prime Minister Manmohan Singh’s decision to give him the Commerce portfolio.

That is not enough. As a combined portfolio of Commerce and Industry, Sharma would also be in-charge of attracting foreign direct investment into the country at a time when money is hard to come.

He will also be presiding over policies that have to be friendly to the global investors and the fledgling domestic industry.

Sharma’s key challenge would be to put India’s shrinking exports back on track. Exports have been declining sharply for the last six months under the impact of the global meltdown.

Many believe he has been rewarded for his services to the Congress, particularly his election campaign strategies.

Congress leader from Himachal Pradesh, Sharma was part of the party’s ‘War Room’, which had been set up to spearhead the party’s election campaign.

It was his idea of using the ‘Jai Ho’ song from Oscar winning movie Slumdog Millionaire during campaigning to strike a chord with the masses. It apparently served the purpose, even though rival BJP tried to counter it with Bhay Ho slogan.

A well-known face of the Congress, he has been the party spokesman for several years when the party was in the Opposition and some time after it came to power in 2004.

He was made Minister of State for External Affairs in the outgoing government in 2006. After PR Dasmunsi fell critically ill last year and was indisposed indefinitely, Sharma was given additional charge of Minister of State for Information and Broadcasting.

A lawyer by profession, Sharma is a member of Rajya Sabha. He has been the member of the Upper House on four occasions earlier also. He has also been member of the Defence as well as Business Advisory Committees.

A prominent leader of the student and youth movement in the country, he was one of the founders of Congress’ students wing NSUI.

Sharma first came to limelight during Rajiv Gandhi days as chief of the Indian Youth Congress, which was a period when the youth body was proactive on the issue of apartheid in South Africa, which is now a thing of the past. Incidentally his wife Zenobia is from South Africa.

Kamal Nath is now cabinet minister for road transport and highways. He will now be more engaged with domestic infrastructural development rather than negotiations at the international stage. I will do a follow-up post on reactions to this news.

Kamal Nath might not be commerce minister

Moneycontrol is quoting CNBC-TV18:

Will Kamal Nath get Commerce Ministry this time?

Published on Wed, May 27, 2009 at 20:48 , Updated at Wed, May 27, 2009 at 21:51
Source : CNBC-TV18

Kamal Nath has been a high profile minister of Commerce and Industry, and has made a name for himself as a tough trade negotiator. But he may not return to Udyog Bhavan. CNBC-TV18‘s Economic Policy Editor Vivian Fernandes reports.

Here is a verbatim transcript of Vivian Fernandes’ comments on CNBC-TV18. Also watch the accompanying video.

We do not know where the previous Commerce Minister Kamal Nath is going but we know where he is not going. He is not going to be in Udyog Bhavan. Now Kamal Nath had made a name for himself as a tough trade negotiator. The WTO talks broke down in Geneva last July because of the tough stand he had taken to protect Indian farmers and there is a feeling that India might have to make a climb-down and Kamal Nath would not like to be that person. But more than that I think Kamal Nath is a mass leader, he would like to be recognized as a politician of consequence which is why he wants a large domestic footprint.

There was talk of the industry portfolio being carved out as a separate ministry with additional charge of small and medium enterprises and heavy industry portfolio being added to it but such a minister sounds large but it is not weighty enough. So I think Kamal Nath wanted the Rural Development Ministry but we understand that, that is going to go to CP Joshi who is the Congress President in Rajasthan.

The other ministry that Kamal Nath fancied was the Infrastructure Ministry where there is a lot of broken things to be mended, for example, surface transport or even power and he would not be averse to the idea of being HRD Minister as well.

But I spoke to him, and he played his cards very close to his chest. He said that he would be comfortable with whatever Sonia Gandhi and Prime Minister Manmohan Singh deemed suitable for him.

Commerce Ministry to be split into industry and trade? Kamal Nath might not get trade ministry?

The Economic Times reports that the new Cabinet might have separate ministers for industry and trade departing from the usual practice of one ministry looking after both industry and commerce including trade. There were hints earlier about an imminent restructuring of the commerce ministry. This might be a good move, as both trade and industry are big enough responsibilities to deserve separate ministers. How will this affect the influence of industry on trade negotiations? This might also mean that Kamal Nath might not be the trade minister. Another name being mentioned is Mr. Kapil Sibal, a lawyer turned politician who was minister for science and technology in the previous cabinet. Here is the report in full:

Commerce, industry likely to part ways
26 May 2009, 0241 hrs IST, Amiti Sen, ET Bureau

NEW DELHI: The government is looking at splitting the commerce and industry ministry into two ministries with two full Cabinet ministers. The commerce ministry will deal primarily with all trade-related areas previously under the commerce department, and the responsibilities of the industry ministry will be much more than what was earlier held by the department of industrial policy and promotion, a government official has said.
In addition to the administration and monitoring of industrial growth and laying down of foreign direct investment guidelines, new sectors, such as heavy industry and micro, small & medium enterprises, will also come under the purview of the new industry ministry being considered.
“The government is seriously considering dividing the commerce and industry ministry into two. Names of the Cabinet ministers, who will head the two separate ministries, are likely to be announced on Tuesday,” an official, who did not wish to be named, said.
Former commerce and industry minister Kamal Nath is a likely candidate for the industry ministry, another official said on conditions of anonymity. The front-runners for the commerce ministry include Salman Khursheed and Kapil Sibal.
If Kamal Nath is not satisfied with the industry ministry, despite the added responsibilities, he could be given the human resources development ministry, the second official added.
Commerce, as an individual ministry, will continue to hold a lot of weight, as important areas, such as export-import policy, bilateral trade negotiations, the World Trade Organisation and the special economic zones (SEZs), will fall under its purview.
With senior politicians in the UPA scrambling for important portfolios, the split in the commerce and industry ministry can also be looked at as a move to accommodate more.

The Indian Express reports:

Kapil Sibal, Kamal Nath and Moily are chief stars of every ministry speculator, having been assigned almost every important ministry below Raisina Hill. Kamal Nath, who was hoping to go up the Hill, is now slightly disappointed and is learnt to have held lengthy meetings with Finance Minister Pranab Mukherjee but came out with no firm answer. In fact, at one point, Defence Ministry mandarins had the bio-data of both A K Antony and Kamal Nath ready while the suspense was on.

Berths now being tossed around between the three are Law, Commerce, Roads, Shipping and Transport, Human Resource Development, even Environment and Forests. While Kamal Nath is said to be not so keen to return to his old beat despite the persuasion, Sibal makes no bones about the fact that he will not accept the Law portfolio.

Moily, incidentally, has no such preference but does not particularly like being in the dark. “I am more eager than you to know what is my ministry, but no phone call has come,” he said.

Last night CNN-IBN was reporting:

CP Joshi, the Rajasthan Congress President, will be the new Rural Development Minister, Kamal Nath will get Commerce and Company Affairs, Kapil Sibbal is likely to get either HRD or Commerce portfolios while Ambika Soni, the tourism minister in the previous government, could now be the new Health Minister.

Kamal Nath on Doha round prospects, Indian reforms, export stimulus measures and more …

We still don’t know who will be given charge of India’s commerce ministry, but this announcement can be expected by Tuesday. My sense is that Mr Kamal Nath himself is keen on continuing as Commerce minister and conclude the unfinished Doha round as well as FDI and other industrial  sector reforms.

In an interview to CNN-IBN (see the text here) Mr. Nath spoke about the prospects of the Doha round:

Rajdeep Sardesai: Between 2004-09, Kamal Nath came to be identified with the World Trade Organisation (WTO) talks. Do you believe that with this clear mandate you will have a freer hand in the sense negotiating at the WTO you should be the commerce minister. Do you see a quick completion of the Doha round?

Kamal Nath: I think India needs to have a rule based multilateral system, we have a big stake in that. But today I think the Western countries who are bigger proponents of this are the ones getting cold feet and not India.

Rajdeep Sardesai: Yes, exactly that is why the US democratic administration seems protectionist.

Kamal Nath: That is what I am saying, they are getting cold feet not us.

On FDI:

Rajdeep Sardesai: Just before the elections, you had amended the Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) policy through a press note. Now investments made by a company registered in India in which a foreign company has a less than 50 per cent stake will not be considered as FDI. Some believe this has allowed foreign companies to breach sectoral limits, was this the objective to open up?

Kamal Nath: When we have a global recession, we have to make India a good investment destination. I want to separate ownership and control and this seeks to do that and get more investment.

On FDI in retail:

Rajdeep Sardesai: In your first tenure, between 2004-09 there was this ghost of Left which was always haunting you. This time it doesn’t even exist, will there be FDI in the multi-sector retailing or do you believe that this might affect the kiranewalla (small grocery shop) and that might be a concern that your fellow Cabinet Ministers will against you?

Kamal Nath: It is not FDI, it is big versus small and if it is big you can have a multi-brand Indian company, you have Reliance, ITC etc.

Rajdeep Sardesai: Will you allow FDI?

Kamal Nath: No, I am not talking about retail. As long as FDI doesn’t displace existing employment it is good but talking about the retail sector it is a very grey area.

Rajdeep Sardesai: You see it as a grey area, I thought at one point of time you believed that it would help Indian agriculture.

Kamal Nath: No, we cannot generalise on retail. Retail is not cement and motor, it is technology. If we can have access to retail technology and in fact we must not be looking at man at the moment, we must be looking for the niece and the son and the daughter. And that is the key thing to look at.

On liberalisation (FDI) in education:

Rajdeep Sardesai: The Commerce Ministry had also been wanting to liberalise high education but the HRD Ministry previously under Arjun Singh was not helpful. He is no more there but the fact is that will it happen now?

Kamal Nath: I can’t say that this will happen, I can only say that we have to ensure that our youngsters have the access to the best education in India. Why are we sending thousands of youngsters abroad, why can’t they stay here and study at a fraction of the cost?

On the need for export stimulus measures:

Rajdeep Sardesai: Exports, a critical area again. The export sector has been badly hit by recession. Your (Commerce) ministry had proposed a one year exemption in the payment of the fringe tax to these export oriented companies. Will we see that?

Kamal Nath: Exemption is about competitiveness and cost. Today, if the economy is in recession we can’t plan a package for Europe or the US. We are going to ensure that all levies and taxes are refunded and are not there for export.

Rajdeep Sardesai: But the aam aadmi is the one who is being hit. Do you think the time has come for a comprehensive package for the export sector?

Kamal Nath: There is a need for a comprehensive package to refund taxes, levies on anything that is being exported. Today you go anywhere in the world and you buy something from a shop, you refund immediately. So, you must have all taxes and levies because no taxes and levies are exported.

On differences between the Commerce and the Finance ministeries (in the previous administration the Commerce and Finance ministries had differed over SEZs and over sops for exporters):

Rajdeep Sardesai: Last time there was a feeling that the Commerce Ministry and the Finance Ministry were not on the same track. Will it be different this time with Pranab Mukherjee as the Finance Minister?

Kamal Nath: Well, I think the job of the Finance Ministry is to collect the revenue and see that they do resource management so any Finance Ministry would do that. But you need to weigh it off, you may not export and you may be having an economic impact because of that.

On financial sector liberalisation:

Rajdeep Sardesai: The new Government this time is largely free of the pressures of allies and therefore you will expected to push it with reforms. Last time, every time you were asked about reform you said look my hands are tide. Your hands are no longer tide, will it be different this time?

Kamal Nath: Let’s not say that there were no reforms in the last government. There were reforms in the financial sector which we didn’t do but let us recognise this. We should remember that the reforms that were asked by those financial icons of the Western world, the ones which were wound up.

Rajdeep Sardesai: So, are you among those who think that it is good to be cautious about financial sector liberalisation?

Kamal Nath: No, it depends which reforms we are talking about. We are looking at the reforms which are India specific; we can’t be talking about reforms all over the world. Today the most important reform is the reform in the governance. Reform in our Labour Act, the labour laws must be made employment generating.

On labour law reforms:

Rajdeep Sardesai: So, you would support reforms in labour laws which allow companies to hire and fire easily?

Kamal Nath: We must recognise this that for example if a textile company wants to hire some people to complete an order in four months but they can’t take that order because he can’t hire them for four months. So at that point of time, we are losing on that amount of employment.

Rajdeep Sardesai: But will the politicians allow this kind of labour laws reform? The problem is this is where the politics seem to clash with good economics.

Kamal Nath: No, I am all for the reform in labour laws which generate employment, provide employment security. We have to have this because employment generation is our No 1 priority with the young population.

On Special Economic Zones:

Rajdeep Sardesai: But let’s look at land because there has been controversy over Kamal Nath’s policies as commerce minister when it came to the Economic Zones. You were looked at someone who was liberally granting Special Economic Zones (SEZs), some suggested that it was little more than a land scam. And now you have got Mamata Banerjee who after Nandigram and Singur is going to get tough with any attempts made to liberalise land acquisitions.

Kamal Nath: Let us not talk in the abstract. There are SEZs today on the ground, you can measure easily how much investment is coming to the nearest rupee. We can measure how much employment has been generated, how much export has happened so all that are stories of the past. There are concerns in high density states.

Rajdeep Sardesai: But after Singur and Nandigram, won’t there be pressure to sort of modify your land acquisition policies, your own minister will suggest that.

Kamal Nath: I am all for that and that is what I am suggesting that there was a Cabinet committee, there was a group of ministers selected for that. That has moved the new land acquisition rehabilitation suggestive policy and that parliament had approved that and now this Parliament will take it up.

The videos of this interview (in 5 parts) can be watched here.

Direct effect of WTO law in India

Here is an interesting SSRN paper on the issue of the status of WTO law within the Indian legal system.

Chowdhury, Nupur,The (Absence of) Direct Effect of WTO Law – Current Developments within the Indian Legal System(May 20, 2008). Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=1136585

Abstract:
This chapter gives an overview of the status of international law under the Indian Constitution and its implications for the status of the WTO Agreement and the covered agreements within the Indian legal system. The Indian legal system is dualistic and international legal instruments ratified by the country become part of the national system only when it is transposed into national law. However such a strict interpretation has often been circumvented by the Courts in favor of a direct applicability of international law on the basis of the principle of consistent interpretation as provided for in the Constitution. In that sense it is interesting to note that notwithstanding the dualistic nature of the legal system, the Courts have applied the consistent interpretation, supremacy and the (in)direct effect principles in a varied number of cases to strengthen the conformity of national law with international law. In that sense, the relationship between these principles is dynamic and can be temporally located within the different trends of judicial activism in the Indian courts. Amongst the WTO agreement it is the TRIPS agreement that has been at the center of most legal disputes. Given the considerable economic interests of the Indian biotechnology sector (drugs and pharmaceuticals) and therefore the high stakes, in concomitance with the considerable textual ambiguity, which the TRIPS amendment has created, this is not surprising. It also underlines the currency of such a debate on the application of the principle of direct effect in the present context of the Indian legal system.

Some international relations & political science research on India in the WTO

See:

Gupta, Surupa. "Developing Country Interests and Coalitions-Building at WTO Negotiations: Some Lessons from India’s Experience" Paper presented at the annual meeting of the International Studies Association, Le Centre Sheraton Hotel, Montreal, Quebec, Canada, Mar 19, 2004 Online <.PDF>. 2009-04-17 <http://www.allacademic.com/meta/p73469_index.html>

Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Review Method: Peer Reviewed
Abstract: Despite recurrent last minute defections, developing countries such as India continue to rely on forming coalitions with other like-minded countries during multilateral trade negotiations. This paper seeks to explain why they do so and to assess the extent to which such a strategy brings benefits by looking at India’s experiences during 1995-2001. It argues that in India’s case coalition formation should be seen within the context of India’s search for a new strategy for multilateral trade negotiation after the conclusion of the Uruguay Round. The impetus for the new strategy came from the perceived “selling-out” of India’s interests during the Uruguay Round. That experience also generated a negative perception in India about the World Trade Organization, a perception that was further strengthened as its agenda was sought to be expanded by the United States and the European Union beginning in 1995-96. The attempt at enlarging the agenda also strained the meager negotiating resources that India had at the time. On each of the new issues that were proposed, India’s position was farthest from that of the US and the EU. It was obvious that India would have to work hard to protect its interests and in the absence of adequate resources of its own, working in coalitions turned out to be an obvious choice. The strategy has allowed India to have a much larger voice in these negotiations than what we would expect looking at its global trade share. In the area of furthering Indian interests, the success of the strategy has been more modest. .

Friesen, Kenneth. "Understanding Globalization in India: A Flattened or a Layered World?" Paper presented at the annual meeting of the International Studies Association 48th Annual Convention, Hilton Chicago, CHICAGO, IL, USA, Feb 28, 2007 Online <APPLICATION/PDF>. 2009-04-17 <http://www.allacademic.com/meta/p180435_index.html>

Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Abstract: Understanding the nature of globalization in India is more than just understanding an
economic definition of poverty – it includes an understanding of the culture and history of
India and ways in which globalization means adding layers of complexity within India, not
simply replacing one India (traditional) with another (modern). This paper situates the
economic liberalization policies of the Indian government from the early 1990s to the
present in the context of the larger globalization debate. The paper then puts the context
around which the economic reforms were taken within India’s recent development history.
After understanding this greater context the paper reviews several recent studies that have
examined whether the economic growth in India has come at the expense of growing
inequality.

Gupta, Surupa. "Protecting the half-billion: Domestic and international determinants of India’s agricultural trade policy at the WTO negotiations" Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Political Research Online, Town & Country Resort and Convention Center, San Diego, California, USA, Mar 22, 2006 <Not Available>. 2009-04-17 <http://www.allacademic.com/meta/p99692_index.html>

Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Abstract: Although economists have argued that India has a comparative advantage in several farm products, India’s position in the WTO negotiations in agriculture has been primarily defensive. This paper explains India’s defensive posture by tracing it to a new consultative mechanism for decision-making on WTO issues that explicitly recognizes the role of the agriculture ministry in agenda-setting. India’s definition of its core interests and its ability to maintain its defensive position have also been shaped by the multilateral trade regime itself and by the changing coalitions within it.

Sinha, Aseema. "Global Linkages and Domestic Politics: Trade Reform and Institution Building in India in Comparative Perspective" Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Political Research Online, Town & Country Resort and Convention Center, San Diego, California, USA, Mar 22, 2006 <Not Available>. 2009-04-17 <http://www.allacademic.com/meta/p99690_index.html>

Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Abstract: This paper examines how the World Trade Organization (WTO) affects institutional development and policy responses in India. India is a country traditionally resistant to external pressures but in which participation in an international organization stimulated a transformation in trade policy processes and procedures, unleashed a new bureaucratic politics, institutional innovation, and activation of policy-expert linkages. I argue that we go beyond zero-sum assumptions in understanding the relationship between globalization and national state institutions. Key rules of international organizations increase transaction and sovereignty costs for states, which may catalyze new domestic capacities and create the impetus for new governance mechanisms. I demonstrate this argument with an analysis of India’s engagement with the WTO and with illustrative evidence of China, Brazil, Japan, and United States’s interaction with the WTO. The evidence is drawn from 18 month fieldwork in India, Washington DC, and Geneva, a newspaper database, and reliance on 100 interviews. [149 words]

Gupta, Surupa. "Tying Hands and Cutting Slack: Comparing India?s Negotiating Positions in Agriculture and Services using the Two-Level Game Framework" Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Political Research Online, Hilton Chicago, CHICAGO, IL, USA, Feb 28, 2007 <Not Available>. 2009-04-17 <http://www.allacademic.com/meta/p180085_index.html>

Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Abstract: How states behave in the context of a negotiation can best be understood within a domestic-international framework such as two-level game which focuses on international and domestic-level inputs simultaneously and attempts to understand the strategic interaction between them. However, the literature on two-level games, with some exceptions, focuses primarily on bilateral negotiations between developed states. Studying developing country responses in the context of multilateral negotiations requires us to both modify certain assumptions and question some of the conclusions. The existing literature looks at cases where the negotiations are initiated by the executives of states engaged in the negotiations and thus assumes that at least at the agenda-setting phase, the executive has substantial autonomy. This paper, which compares the processes through which India?s negotiating agenda on agriculture and services were arrived at, focuses on negotiations, which were not initiated by the Indian executive but were mandated by the WTO. The very fact that the executive is responding to an international regime stirs up domestic political actors, including but not restricted to specific interest groups whose interests may be affected. India?s negotiating agenda in the two sectors were thus shaped simultaneously by international political and economic factors as well as domestic politics within India. Contrary to the literature?s finding that the executives prefer not to tie their hands, the Indian government made an explicit attempt to involve relevant stakeholders. The paper analyzes how such domestic-international interactions and the executive?s attempt at involving stakeholders have shaped India?s negotiating response and in process, suggests modifications in the two-level game framework.

Campos, Taiane. "Joining the Domestic and the International: Brazil and India in the Building Process of G-20" Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Political Research Online, Hilton San Francisco, SAN FRANCISCO, CA, USA, Mar 26, 2008 <Not Available>. 2009-04-17 <http://www.allacademic.com/meta/p253569_index.html>

Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Abstract: The aim of this paper is to analyze the factors that determined the position of Brazil and India in the G-20 formation. In order to do so, it will be analyzed a set of factors that determined the size of the win set of both countries. The focus lays on domestic political institutions as well as on the negotiation strategies of both countries in G-20. To be able to understand the G-20, we have to consider the diversity of the economic, social and political conditions that characterizes its members and, consequently, their interests. The Brazilian and Indian positions deserve special attention either because of their political performance as interlocutors of the group or because of their difference of interests in agricultural agenda in WTO.The initial supposition is that these two countries have divergent interests on the negotiation process of agricultural trade. It would be reasonable to think that India would automatically align with USA and EU in defending mechanisms to protect this sector, which would place India in an opposite side from Brazil. However, what we see is an alignment between them and the formation of a coalition against those other proposals. The question which guides this research concerns the factors that made possible the formation and maintenance of G-20 despite the apparent conflict of interest between Brazil and India. This research is structured within an analytical framework that seeks to combine the domestic and international factors in the understanding process of formal and informal international agreements structuring.

Mukherji, Rahul. "The Politics of the Shift to Foreign Investment Friendly Regulation: The Case of Indian Telecommunications" Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Political Research Online, Hilton San Francisco, SAN FRANCISCO, CA, USA, Mar 26, 2008 <Not Available>. 2009-04-17 <http://www.allacademic.com/meta/p251887_index.html>

Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Abstract: This paper explores the political economy of three significant policy decisions taken by the Congress – United Progressive Alliance (UPA) government between November 2005 and February 2006, which have improved the incentives for foreign investment in India’s telecommunications sector. This was a notable departure from the past when policies had clearly favoured domestic investment over foreign investment. The paper argues that these decisions occurred due to the increasing sensitivity of the Department of Telecommunications (DOT) to the needs of the relatively smaller Indian service providers, who were dependent on foreign capital. They were not driven by a crisis of investment or foreign pressure to change policies in India’s telecommunications sector. The paper challenges explanations for embracing globalization such as those based on economic crisis or those based on a clear technocratic consensus. The political economy of this shift to foreign investment friendly regulations in the telecommunications sector suggests that economic reforms in India can occur in normal times. They depended to a large extent on the nature of the political economy that the ruling party was willing to support.

Moore, Candice. "Multilateralism and Trilateralism in the IBSA Partnership: Tensions and Congruities" Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Political Research Online, Hilton San Francisco, SAN FRANCISCO, CA, USA, Mar 26, 2008 <Not Available>. 2009-04-17 <http://www.allacademic.com/meta/p251820_index.html>

Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Abstract: This paper seeks to examine the tensions between trilateralism and multilateralism in the IBSA partnership. While one of the stated goals of the partnership is multilateralism and the reform of the United Nations (IBSA Communique, 2005), the trilateral partnership that IBSA embodies appears antithetical to the representation of broader interests in each member’s region. This issue came to a head in the months preceding the debates on UN reform in September 2005, when India, Brazil and South Africa each voiced their interest in permanent representation on the UN Security Council, but failed to win the support of their regional neighbours. More recently, it is evident in the prominence of India and Brazil in exclusive trade talks with the EU and US to save the Doha Development Round. The paper draws on the middle power literature, which sees middle powers as committed to multilateralism, but problematises this commitment by considering the growing economic and strategic significance of these states. Trilateralism is not pursued to the exclusion of North-South links, as evidenced in Brazil’s and India’s increasing closeness to the US. It is thus not an alternative to robust North-South relations, as older forms of South-South solidarity (NAM and G-77) were portrayed. The paper concludes thus that the IBSA partnership is not a successor of older forms of South-South solidarity premised on multilateralism, but rather a vehicle for the development and increased levels of participation in international affairs of its three members.

Sinha, Aseema. "Change from Inside-Out or Outside-In? Trade Reform in India’s Closed Economy" Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Political Research Online, Hilton San Francisco, SAN FRANCISCO, CA, USA, Mar 26, 2008 <Not Available>. 2009-04-17 <http://www.allacademic.com/meta/p253177_index.html>

Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Abstract: What makes trade reform possible in a traditionally closed economy? Economic reform and structural adjustment have been global movements for more than a decade by now, yet trade reform remains one of the most difficult arenas of policy change in many developing countries. The distributional politics of trade, and the rise of protectionist pressures in the advanced countries of the world, have contributed to a backlash against serious trade reform in many countries. Despite countervailing pressures in favor of rising protectionism, India’s trade regime has undergone serious reform in the last decade, encompassing policy changes, outcomes, and institutional changes. During these years a party espousing economic nationalism and fear of the open economy has ruled the country. This empirical puzzle forms the starting point of this paper. I ask: how has trade reform been consolidated in a traditionally closed economy like India? I argue that crucial domestic societal changes are a necessary precondition for changes in state’s attitudes; yet, external forces may change the preferences of domestic forces, as well as change the balance of power among interest groups. These, new coalitions in favor of greater global integration, come into contact with a activated state; these intra-group/intra-class factors combine with state-class transformations to effect change in trade orientation and reform turning toward a global openness. This paper, thus, highlights important mechanisms through which global trade integration and institutions shaped the domestic politics of trade. The international trade institutions not only constrain behavior of domestic actors, but also constitute interests and identities of key domestic actors. Moreover, participation in global trade negotiations changes the preferences of some producers, and strengthens the hands of recently created, externally oriented, domestic producers by bringing them closer to the national-state actors and by encouraging collaborative strategies between business and state actors.

Alden, Christopher. and Vieira, Marco. "The New Diplomacy of the South: Brazil, South Africa, India and Trilateralism" Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Political Research Online, Hilton Hawaiian Village, Honolulu, Hawaii, Mar 05, 2005 <Not Available>. 2009-04-17 <http://www.allacademic.com/meta/p69301_index.html>

Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Review Method: Peer Reviewed
Abstract: The failure of the negotiations at the World Trade Organisation (WTO) ministerial in Cancun in September 2003 could well have marked a turning point in the emergence of a new post-Cold War paradigm. Indeed, while much has been made of the realist ‘world restored’ (or its converse) in the aftermath of 9/11, surely of greater significance is the reassertion of the South-North divide as a defining axis of the international system. In this context, the emergence of coterie of South countries actively challenging the position and assumptions of the leading states of the North is an especially significant event. What has been missing from most of the international accounts of the Cancun meeting and its repercussions is a recognition that the positions adopted there were part of a broader strategy formulated and implemented by key states within the South. This activism on the part of three middle income developing countries in particular – Brazil, South Africa and India – has resulted in the creation of a ‘trilateralist’ diplomatic partnership, itself a reflection of broader transformations across the developing world in the wake of globalisation. The establishment of this new diplomatic partnership of the South begs a number of questions about the states involved, the nature of their co-operation and its relationship to international system as a whole. Specifically: What are the motivations and dynamics of ‘trilateralist’ co-operation amongst these middle income developing states? What role does ideology play in this process? Given the uneven record of co-operation across the South and the growing economic diversity between developing countries, how sustainable is the ‘trilateralism’ initiative? This paper will examine the rise and promulgation of the co-operative strategy known as ‘trilateralism’ by regional leaders within the South. Specifically, it will first provide an overview of the theoretical approaches to the new regionalism and the South; secondly, it will review the domestic, regional, and international factors which have traditionally conditioned the foreign policies of Brazil, South Africa and India; thirdly it will investigate the formulation and implementation of ‘trilateralism’ as a initiative framed within the context of the new regionalism; and, finally, it will conclude with an analysis of the initiative’s prospects for success in the contemporary environment.

Kastner, Scott. "The Domestic Politics of Trade with Adversaries" Paper presented at the annual meeting of the ISA’s 49th ANNUAL CONVENTION, BRIDGING MULTIPLE DIVIDES, Hilton San Francisco, SAN FRANCISCO, CA, USA, Mar 26, 2008 Online <APPLICATION/PDF>. 2009-04-17 <http://www.allacademic.com/meta/p251262_index.html>

Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Abstract: Many recent studies find that international political conflict—operationalized in a variety of ways—harms trade. Well-known cases help to underscore these general findings. For example, Cold War tensions helped to undermine East-West trade, and trade between India and Pakistan slowed sharply in the years after partition. On the other hand, however, trade between adversaries also appears to vary substantially across cases. Indeed, trade can sometimes flourish despite intense political rivalry. In the current relationship between mainland China and Taiwan, for example, China has become Taiwan’s largest trading partner despite persistent political tension across the Taiwan Strait.How can we explain variation in the extent to which states trade with their adversaries? Building on existing literature, I develop a framework through which to understand how domestic coalitions concerning trade with an adversary are likely to form. While some actors are likely to favor or oppose trade for purely economic reasons, those without a direct economic stake in the relationship are likely to focus more on the political and security consequences of trade with the adversary. In this framework, two variables emerge as central in determining a country’s trade policy with an adversary: the relative political strength of internationalist versus protectionist economic interests, and whether those concerned primarily with politics believe trade will have positive or negative political and security externalities. I use the framework to develop several testable hypotheses, and evaluate them via short case studies of three contemporary rivalries: China/Taiwan; India/Pakistan; and North Korea/South Korea

Campos, Taiane. and Las Casas, Luciana. "Similar roles, different strategies: Brazil, India and South Africa trade policies" Paper presented at the annual meeting of the ISA’s 50th ANNUAL CONVENTION "EXPLORING THE PAST, ANTICIPATING THE FUTURE", New York Marriott Marquis, NEW YORK CITY, NY, USA, Feb 15, 2009 Online <PDF>. 2009-04-17 <http://www.allacademic.com/meta/p313872_index.html>

Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Review Method: Peer Reviewed
Abstract: The trade policies of Brazil, India and South Africa have significant historical similarities: these countries are original WTO members; they adopted import-substitution industrialization; promoted neoliberal reforms; have been playing important roles in their regional contexts; and, more recently, they have also formed alliances and coalitions (IBSA, G20) in order to increase their capacity to influence the trade regime. At the same time, they are intensifying bilateral and regional ties which are different in scope and degrees of institutionalization. The result is that, despite of having similar roles which are derived from their status as middle powers, these three countries have developed different strategies concerning their trade policy. Therefore, the aim of this paper is to analyze comparatively the trade policies of Brazil, India and South Africa in the multilateral and regional environments. Our contention is that there are significant differences in their conduct on those two levels, in such a way that it is not possible to establish a fixed pattern of trade policy amongst middle powers, at least not amongst these three.

Sondhi, Sunil. "India’s big leap forward: Capacity and Preference" Paper presented at the annual meeting of the International Studies Association, Hilton Hawaiian Village, Honolulu, Hawaii, Mar 05, 2005 Online <.PDF>. 2009-04-17 <http://www.allacademic.com/meta/p70644_index.html>

Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Review Method: Peer Reviewed
Abstract: India has changed dramatically in recent years. This paper examines India’s winning strategies-liberalization, a focus on high technology, and its resolve to become a regional leader- as well as its challenges- the wide gap between its urban and rural populations, growing unemploymeny, and the challenge posed by extremist ideologies and organisations. It also considers the effects that India’s success has had both at home and abroad. India’s progress has unnerved some of its neighbours and trading partners. South Asian countries worry about India’s economic dominance, in the US concern has been mounting over loss of jobs in the service sector. India has tried to soften its neighbours concerns by spearheading regional free trade zone. It continues to signal its desire to integrate into the world economy by pursuing liberalization and encouraging trade. It is argued in this paper that an economically strengthened India will increasingly regard itself as a great ppower and expect more deference from other countries. There is little doubt that India’s emergence as an economic power will rank as one of the principal issues confronting world leaders in next few decades and that its role demands careful analysis.

Pigman, Geoffrey. "Economic and Security Convergence: Governments and Firms in U.S.-India Diplomacy from Super 301 to the 2002 Kashmir Crisis" Paper presented at the annual meeting of the International Studies Association, Le Centre Sheraton Hotel, Montreal, Quebec, Canada, Mar 17, 2004 Online <.PDF>. 2009-04-17 <http://www.allacademic.com/meta/p72364_index.html>

Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Review Method: Peer Reviewed
Abstract: U.S.-India economic relations evolved substantially between the 1989 Super 301 trade dispute and the 2002 India-Pakistan crisis over Kashmir. Traditional models of economic diplomacy focusing on the leading role of governments and their relevant ministries, in which business had a subordinate lobbying role in the decisionmaking process, could be used to describe the low-level U.S.-India economic and security relationship that prevailed in the 1980s. However, the conclusion of the GATT Uruguay Round, the technology boom of the 1990s and other structural factors have intensified the economic relationship between the two countries significantly. The attacks on New York, Washington and New Delhi in 2001 culminated a process of convergence of the two countries’ security interests. A complex network of diplomatic interactions between governments, U.S. and Indian global firms, and the U.S.-Indian business and cultural diaspora contributed to convincing the Indian Government to defuse tension with Pakistan in summer 2002. Understanding this process requires an updated model of economic diplomacy that incorporates the role of non-state actors, multiple channels of communication and integration of domestic and international politics. Neo-Gramscian notions of hegemonic power structures integrating political leadership, transnational capital and civil society contribute to explaining the exercise of power in these newer, complex business-government diplomatic networks

Brookes, Marissa. "Toward Transnationalism: Comparative Insights on Organized Labor’s Strategic Responses to Offshore Outsourcing in the Telecommunications Industry" Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Midwest Political Science Association 67th Annual National Conference, The Palmer House Hilton, Chicago, IL, <Not Available>. 2009-04-17 <http://www.allacademic.com/meta/p362173_index.html>

Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Abstract: Why do some unions confront global capital through transnational action, while others act only nationally? I address this question through the lens of union responses to offshoring in the telecommunications industry in Australia, the US, and the UK. Union strategies vary both across and within these countries, despite their institutional similarities as liberal market economies. While some unions pursue solidaristic partnerships with their labor counterparts abroad, others restrict action to pressuring governments and mobilizing domestic coalitions. The joint project of the Communications Workers of America (U.S.) and the New Trade Union Initiative (India) contrasts sharply with the Communication Workers Union’s (UK) nationalist anti-offshoring campaign. Most other cases fall in between. For example, the Australian Services Union focuses on government action and consumer mobilization yet is actively involved in several Global Union Federations and international campaigns. I argue that this variation is due to three factors: the union’s ability to adjust to historical changes in the telecom industry; employers’ actions affecting unions’ mobilization of domestic coalitions; and the viability of potential labor partners abroad.

Mishra, Pramod. "China-India Bonhomie: A Harbinger of Multilateralism" Paper presented at the annual meeting of the International Studies Association, Hilton Hawaiian Village, Honolulu, Hawaii, Mar 05, 2005 Online <.PDF>. 2009-04-17 <http://www.allacademic.com/meta/p69909_index.html>

Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Review Method: Peer Reviewed
Abstract: CHINA-INDIA BONHOMIE: AN HARBINGER OF MULTILATERALISM By Dr Pramod Mishra Associate Professor in Politics, University of Delhi, New Delhi, India China and India have emerged as important global players at the dawn of the twentieth century. The former by discarding its isolationism and closed-door policy in the early 1980s took a number of corrective measures under Deng Xiaping’s stewardship and integrated its economy to the developed western world. As a result of that by the mid-1990s, China achieved a high growth rate of 9 to 10 per cent per annum. Its political process has not been an obstacle to the expansion of its diplomatic and commercial links with the rest of the world. In fact, its civil service has been surprisingly very resilient. India on the other hand has been a late starter to globalization and the restructuring of its hitherto mixed economy. Although the background to India’s modernization was provided by the Raja Gandhi government (1985-89), it was left to the Narasimha Rao government to integrate India to the global economy. The bold initiative taken by the-then Finance Minister Man Mohan Singh brought healthy dividends and India’s rate of growth remained steady at 7 to 8 per cent per annum during the 1990s. The NDA government headed by Atal Bihari Vajpayee has continued that initiative and as a result of that India at present maintains one of the highest growth rates in the world. The proposed paper will closely examine the nuances of mutual economic and political interactions between China and India. Although their present trade turnover is place at $5 billion only it has a potentiality to triple by the end of 2010. The leadership in both the countries have ignored the past decades of mistrust after a limited border war in 1962.It is quite possible that the two nations may amicably sort put their border demarcation problem and go ahead to make a concerted effort to establish a more democratic and humane world order. They can also systematically neutralize the unhealthy unilateralism which has heightened the global insecurity in various regions leading to immense sufferings to large part of humanity.

Moore, Candice. "Multilateralism and Trilateralism in the IBSA Partnership: Tensions and Congruities" Paper presented at the annual meeting of the ISA’s 49th ANNUAL CONVENTION, BRIDGING MULTIPLE DIVIDES, Hilton San Francisco, SAN FRANCISCO, CA, USA, Mar 26, 2008 <Not Available>. 2009-04-17 <http://www.allacademic.com/meta/p251820_index.html>

Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Abstract: This paper seeks to examine the tensions between trilateralism and multilateralism in the IBSA partnership. While one of the stated goals of the partnership is multilateralism and the reform of the United Nations (IBSA Communique, 2005), the trilateral partnership that IBSA embodies appears antithetical to the representation of broader interests in each member’s region. This issue came to a head in the months preceding the debates on UN reform in September 2005, when India, Brazil and South Africa each voiced their interest in permanent representation on the UN Security Council, but failed to win the support of their regional neighbours. More recently, it is evident in the prominence of India and Brazil in exclusive trade talks with the EU and US to save the Doha Development Round. The paper draws on the middle power literature, which sees middle powers as committed to multilateralism, but problematises this commitment by considering the growing economic and strategic significance of these states. Trilateralism is not pursued to the exclusion of North-South links, as evidenced in Brazil’s and India’s increasing closeness to the US. It is thus not an alternative to robust North-South relations, as older forms of South-South solidarity (NAM and G-77) were portrayed. The paper concludes thus that the IBSA partnership is not a successor of older forms of South-South solidarity premised on multilateralism, but rather a vehicle for the development and increased levels of participation in international affairs of its three members.

Turner, Robin. "Liberalization and Domestic Politics: The Case of Livestock Policy Reform in India" Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Political Science Association, Hilton Chicago and the Palmer House Hilton, Chicago, IL, Sep 02, 2004 Online <.PDF>. 2009-04-17 <http://www.allacademic.com/meta/p59903_index.html>

Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Review Method: Peer Reviewed
Abstract: This paper explores the dynamics of livestock policy reforms in two Indian states, Andhra Pradesh and Orissa. Livestock policy reforms have been shaped by the intersection of domestic politics and power relations, international actors—especially foreign governments and development organizations, and international trade regimes. The international policy environment and global trade regime has set the context for India’s market-oriented reforms, but it is largely domestic political leaders, institutions, bureaucratic structures, and organized interests that have shaped the form and extent of reform in this sector. Marked differences in the reform trajectory of different livestock sectors in the neighboring states of Andhra Pradesh and Orissa show how domestic politics can shape the implementation of global reforms. This paper focuses on the politics of reform in the large ruminant (cattle, buffalo) and animal health and breeding subsectors.

Singh, J.P.. "Culture or Commerce? A Comparative Assessment of International Negotiations and Developing Countries at UNESCO and WTO" Paper presented at the annual meeting of the International Studies Association 48th Annual Convention, Hilton Chicago, CHICAGO, IL, USA, Feb 28, 2007 Online <APPLICATION/PDF>. 2009-04-17 <http://www.allacademic.com/meta/p178918_index.html>

Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Abstract: The proposed paper will depart from ominous warnings regarding globalization in arguing that international trade and cultural diversity can co-exist. The study will show that while negotiating trade issues, increasing international and domestic coalition building in cultural issues leads to preservation of policy autonomy for addressing cultural identity and diversity concerns. Two important international negotiations on cultural issues ? one at the World Trade Organization and the other in UNESCO — will be examined for empirical substantiation. A comparative assessment of the way these negotiations balanced culture and trade issues will be undertaken for a set of developed countries (particularly US and EU) followed by a set of developing countries representing those remaining fearful or confident of the impact of international trade on cultural diversity. Developing countries analyzed will be India, China, Mexico, Brazil, Argentina, Senegal, and South Africa. We would expect developed countries most likely to preserve cultural policy autonomy and the developing countries least likely to do so. The empirical evidence collected so far seems to show that depending on their coalition-building efforts, both sets of countries can preserve cultural policy autonomy.

Arnold, Caroline. "Late Industrialization in International Perspective: Historical Reflections on Turkish and Indian Industrialization" Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Midwest Political Science Association 67th Annual National Conference, The Palmer House Hilton, Chicago, IL, <Not Available>. 2009-04-17 <http://www.allacademic.com/meta/p363074_index.html>

Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Abstract: This claim is surprising given that India and Turkey are portrayed in both robust area studies and the wider development literatures as the prototypes of state-led industrialization. I argue that links between local industries and international markets have diverged to create three phases of industrialization in India and Turkey as technologies and the character of international trade and production have shifted. They have done so in ways that influenced the very patterns of capital accumulation and technological acquisition that are central to traditional accounts of late industrialization. Contra the entire lineage of development theorizing, from Gerschenkron to the developmental statists, that views the state as the defining factor in the character of national industrialization patterns, Turkish and Indian cities that industrialized in the same international and historical context exhibit greater similarities with each other than they do with other Turkish or Indian cases that industrialized at other times. This paper demonstrates that international factors, rather than the role of the national state, determined the sources of capital, role of technology, and the role of labor in Turkish and Indian industrialization.

Guisinger, Alexandra. "Who Liberalizes? Explaining Cross-Country Variations in Trade Protection Though International Networks" Paper presented at the annual meeting of the International Studies Association, Hilton Hawaiian Village, Honolulu, Hawaii, Mar 05, 2005 <Not Available>. 2009-04-17 <http://www.allacademic.com/meta/p71395_index.html>

Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Review Method: Peer Reviewed
Abstract: Despite the theoretical benefits of zero-tariff trade and a recent trend towards trade protection liberalization, large cross-national variations in trade policy endure. What determines countries’ trade policy choices? Traditional comparative politics explanations have focused primarily on domestic determinants: the economic constraints faced by leaders as determined both by domestic resource endowments and previous policy choices and/or the effects of domestic political institutions (for example: Magee et al, 1989; Mansfield and Busch, 1993; Nielson, 2003). However, while support for such arguments is evident in studies of OECD behavior, they lack explanatory power for a broader class of countries (Guisinger, m.s. 2003). More recently, alternative explanations based on membership in the GATT/WTO have received at best inconclusive support (for example: Rose, forthcoming). Breaking from the traditional comparative research agenda on trade and its focus on decision-theoretic models, I posit a set of diffusion hypotheses in which a country’s decision to liberalize is conditioned on its network of trading partners and peers. Levels of protection at the country-wide level converge upon those of trading partners and of peers. Not only do these networks permit the identification of likely liberalizers and non-liberalizers, but also they allow more precise determination within these groups as to the source of a country’s behavior. Expanding upon previous quantitative analysis of the trade tariffs of 60 developing countries from 1988 to 1998 (Guisinger, m.s. 2003), four qualitative case studies drawn from this analysis are presented: Brazil, Argentina, India, and Nepal.

Herring, Ronald. "Politics of Transgenic Property in India: Biopiracy, Monopoly Power or Cottage Industry?" Paper presented at the annual meeting of the International Studies Association 48th Annual Convention, Hilton Chicago, CHICAGO, IL, USA, Feb 28, 2007 Online <PDF>. 2009-04-17 <http://www.allacademic.com/meta/p180347_index.html>

Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Abstract: The genomics revolution in biology has spawned a new politics, with strikingly similar themes from California to Gujarat. The spread of biotechnology internationally continues on an accelerating curve upwards. Developmental states in China, India and Brazil promote the technology to make their agriculture competitive with that of richer nations. Equally, resistance in an international civil society escalates with the increasing number of crops, acres and farmers involved with genetically engineered organisms. Property is one strand of this contentious politics. Trade-Related Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) have become a flash point of mobilization of civil society against corporate globalization. Concentration of property rights in powerful multinational firms with no incentive to find solutions to problems of poor farmers in poor countries and potential for monopoly profits at the expense of poor farmers both figure prominently in the critique of genetic engineering in developmental terms. Worse, appropriation of intellectual property in biota of the global South is held to threaten poor societies for the profit of firms in the global North. This paper explores the ground realities related to these political claims. It argues that the oppositional critique reifies intellectual property ? in the form of ?patents? ? in a way that has proved inconsistent with behavior of actors on the ground in India and other countries. Property is here conceptualized as a relationship between actors; the outcome cannot be derived logically but must be investigated empirically. In the absence of the much critiqued ?terminator technology,? reverse ?biopiracy? seems not only fairly easy to accomplish, but popular in farming communities. This move by farmers puts them in conflict, objectively, with some, but not all, NGOs that claim to represent their interests. The paper will discuss outcomes from a national case study in terms of differentiations of property that make sense theoretically, from hard to soft and from common to private. It will conclude with suggestions about what the divergence of interests between farmers and NGOs means for representation and political power in rural areas.

Sequeira, Vikrum. "IBSA, International Relations Theories, and Changes in the Global Architecture" Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Political Research Online, Palmer House Hotel, Hilton, Chicago, IL, Apr 03, 2008 <Not Available>. 2009-04-17 <http://www.allacademic.com/meta/p267593_index.html>

Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Abstract: In June 2003, India, Brazil, and South Africa inaugurated the IBSA Alliance, which aimed to become what South African President Thabo Mbeki hailed as a "G-8 of the South." The three nations would try to expand the permanent membership of the UN Security Council, modify the TRIPS laws, and impel the US and EU to eliminate agricultural subsidies. The countries also agreed to cooperate in agricultural research, IT, trade, and defense (among other issues). This paper asks four broad questions: 1. Can the paradigms of international relations (e.g., realism, pluralism, Marxism, etc.) explain the IBSA alliance? 2. Will IBSA be able to accomplish its stated goals? 3. Has the IBSA alliance modified the foreign policies of the participant states? 4. Is the creation of IBSA emblematic of a new global architecture? I argue that none of the IR paradigms alone can explain IBSA; IBSA may achieve success in its clearly stated goals but will be unsuccessful in its other goals; the alliance has slightly modified the countries’ foreign policies; the creation of IBSA does indeed represent a change in the world political-economic system.

Oliveira, Amancio. and Onuki, Janina. "South-South Cooperation: Coalitions and Multilateral Negotiations. The Case of IBSA (Brazil, India and South Africa)" Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Political Research Online, Town & Country Resort and Convention Center, San Diego, California, USA, Mar 22, 2006 <Not Available>. 2009-04-17 <http://www.allacademic.com/meta/p99910_index.html>

Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Abstract: The international coalition formation process has played a central role in the dynamics of multilateral and regional trade negotiations, particularly as concerns the outlook for the re-balance of central-peripheral forces of the international system. The reopening of a new round of multilateral negotiations, focusing precisely on new thematic challenges regarding international trade and routes to development, reintroduces the centrality of the role of South-South alliances.In practice, cooperative efforts of this nature are already making themselves felt with the formation of a series of coalitions, whereas emphasis must be placed on G-20 and G-3 (IBSA). The essential aspect to be retained is that, taking into consideration the dimension of the convergence of international business interests strictly speaking, the partnership between India and Brazil, at the starting point of efforts to build international coalitions, is clearly counterintuitive.With a basis on the Compared Foreign Policy Analysis, the objective of this paper is to contribute towards a more comprehensive understanding of the bases (domestic and international) of the formation of international coalitions, of the South-South type in the new context of the multilateral agenda. A comparative matrix will be built as an analytical instrument. Based on databased with variables, the compared analysis of these variables will permit the itemization of vectors of convergence and divergence among the countries capable of indicating the stability and effectiveness of the coalition.

de Mello Souza, André. "Global Governance, Developing Countries and Advocacy Networks: The Struggle over Pharmaceutical Patent Rights" Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Political Research Online, Hilton San Francisco, SAN FRANCISCO, CA, USA, Mar 26, 2008 <Not Available>. 2009-04-17 <http://www.allacademic.com/meta/p251818_index.html>

Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Abstract: The Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) has challenged developing countries in issue-areas as diverse and important as public health and agriculture. Most notably, these countries have often contended that patents block access to essential medicines, and opposed strict rules of patentability for genetic resources which encourage biopiracy and fail to protect traditional knowledge. Whereas developing countries have become increasingly assertive in multilateral forums, their capacity to successfully negotiate with the countries that champion intellectual property protection and especially the US has varied considerably across issue-areas. Developing countries have succeeded in amending TRIPS to allow greater international trade of patented medicines, but have failed to resist the patenting of genetic resources and to create effective rules for benefit sharing. The paper argues that the negotiating capacity of developing countries with regard to pharmaceutical patent rights has been largely determined by the strength of their alliances with transnational advocacy networks, as well as by these networks’ strategic use of science and human rights discourse. Field work has been conducted in South Africa, Brazil and India as well as in Geneva, consisting mostly of interviews with government officials, company executives and representatives of the non-governmental sector, as well as analysis of policy documents.

Kastner, Scott. "How International Conflict Affects Commerce: Domestic Interests and Institutions as Intervening Variables" Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Political Research Online, Hilton Chicago and the Palmer House Hilton, Chicago, IL, Sep 02, 2004 <Not Available>. 2009-04-17 <http://www.allacademic.com/meta/p61628_index.html>

Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Review Method: Peer Reviewed
Abstract: Limited commercial integration between India and Pakistan, or within much of the Middle East, suggests that conflicting political interests between countries can have a detrimental effect on their economic relations. Indeed, a number of empirical studies have shown that tension or conflict between countries tends to be associated with lower levels of commerce. Yet rapidly growing economic ties between Mainland China and Taiwan shows that commerce can also flourish even in the presence of severe political tension and a potential for military conflict. In this paper, I develop an argument that accounts for variation in the relationship between conflict and commerce. Defining conflict as the level of underlying preference dissimilarity between countries, I argue that conflict’s effects on trade are contingent on the types of governing coalitions and political institutions within the states enmeshed in a conflictual relationship. Specifically, if free-trade interests are relatively strong politically, the independent effects of conflict on trade are less severe; conflict’s effects on trade are also less severe when conflict involves at least one democracy. I test my argument quantitatively on a large sample over the years 1960-1992, and find robust support for my hypotheses.

Biermann, Frank. and Sohn, Hans-Dieter. "Multipolar Global Governance: India and East Asia as New Partners for Europe" Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Political Research Online, Le Centre Sheraton Hotel, Montreal, Quebec, Canada, Mar 17, 2004 <Not Available>. 2009-04-17 <http://www.allacademic.com/meta/p74421_index.html>

Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Review Method: Peer Reviewed
Abstract: Whereas European foreign policy used to be defined through the alliance with the United States, it is now clear that this one-sided orientation is no longer sufficient. This is especially the case for global environmental governance, where Europe stands in most negotiations, almost by default, against the United States. The core examples are the almost universally recognised biodiversity convention of 1992, its Cartagena protocol on safety in the trade of genetically modified organisms, the Basel agreement on the transboundary shipment of hazardous waste and their disposal, and, most crucially, the Kyoto protocol to the UN framework convention on climate change. All these agreements have been rejected by the United States of America. In this situation, we argue that if Europe wants to make progress in environmental and other issue areas, it needs new and stable alliances, in addition to the old transatlantic linkage. We will direct attention towards possible partners in Asia and primarily address the great powers of Asia: Japan, China and, in particular, the world’s largest democracy, India. We argue for a twofold strategy. Internally, Europe must unite more strongly. The old Kissinger question still has to be answered: which phone number does the US president—or the prime minister of India—have to call if he or she wants to get Europe’s opinion? The European Union must improve the coherence of its foreign policy, primarily through becoming further communitised. The office of a EU president could take joint responsibility for foreign and security policy in the medium term. Externally, Europe needs to reform its foreign policy and rethink well-trodden paths. This applies in particular to redefining the traditional North-South antagonism in international negotiations, which hardly corresponds any longer to the reality of the international system in many policy areas. New international partnerships between the European Union and the large Southern democracies could redress the traditional confrontation between the group of Western industrialised countries and the ‘Group of 77′, possibly pointing out solutions if global governance projects should threaten to fail because of unilateral rejection by the USA. The political drifting apart of the ‘First World’, the dissolution of the ‘Second World’ and the political, economic and social differentiation of the ‘Third World’ thus offer scope for the recharting of world politics. The development of a multilateral global governance structure requires a strong global alliance of democratic players: many recent environmental treaties—but also the international criminal court, the anti-landmine treaty and other examples—show that Europe and the Bush administration often no longer act together but rather against each other. The European Union must therefore look for other partners—to complement rather than replace the United States of America. We argue that increased dialogue and more intensive political co-operation on the part of Europe with the world’s biggest democracy, India, could be one element of such a reorientation.

Wolfe, Robert. "Power and Institutional Structure in Global Governance: The Changing Dynamics of Agricultural Trade Negotiations" Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Political Research Online, Town & Country Resort and Convention Center, San Diego, California, USA, Mar 22, 2006 <Not Available>. 2009-04-17 <http://www.allacademic.com/meta/p98022_index.html>

Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Abstract: This paper will present work from a larger project on institutional dynamics and power in the WTO based on an analysis of the evolution of the negotiating process on agriculture since the Tokyo Round. I am selecting for variation on aspects of process, expecting to see variation in outcome. When we are interested in processes more than structures, qualitative case studies can be more useful than large n statistical studies. I propose to use the ?method of difference? to examine a set of apparently similar cases in which key aspects of the process differ to see if the outcomes differ. The outcome variable will assessments in the press, the academic and policy literature, and participant interviews, of the success or failure of the agriculture component of successive GATT and WTO ministerial meetings. The explanatory variables are A) institutional structure (nature of the committee structure, repertoire of formal and informal techniques used by the chair to build consensus) and B) the nature and role of negotiating coalitions that reflect different constellations of material interests and diplomatic skill. The role of coalitions in the trading system appears to be changing with the emergence of the G-20 group of leading developing countries interested in agriculture. Regional groups of developing countries, and the LDC group, now coordinate among Geneva ambassadors, they have ministerial meetings, and since Cancun they are working together at ministerial level as the G-90 grouping of the African, ACP, and Least-developed countries. And there are separate groups for agriculture including the Cairns Group (exporters), and the G-10 and the G-33 of developed and developing importers. At the heart of the negotiations on agriculture is a ?non-group? (because not like-minded) of ?Five Interested Parties?, EU, USA, Brazil, India and Australia. Can we explain outcomes on the basis of process or the power of the leading participants?

Saksena, Jyotika. "International Organizations and Erosion of State Sovereignty" Paper presented at the annual meeting of the ISA’s 49th ANNUAL CONVENTION, BRIDGING MULTIPLE DIVIDES, Hilton San Francisco, SAN FRANCISCO, CA, USA, Mar 26, 2008 <Not Available>. 2009-04-17 <http://www.allacademic.com/meta/p251222_index.html>

Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Abstract: Since the end of the Second World War, the international system has seen the multiplication of international organizations that have made inter-state cooperation a sustainable reality. In doing so states have agreed to give up part of their decision-making authority to international organizations leading to a growing concern that in the process states are losing their sovereignty, namely their right to make decisions on behalf of their people. This paper uses John Ruggie’s definition of sovereignty, defined as “the institutionalization of public authority within mutually exclusive jurisdictional domains”. This study will attempt an examination of the impact of international organizations in eroding state sovereignty. After an initial discussion of what constitutes a loss of sovereignty, the study will focus on the impact of a specific international organization – the WTO – in eroding state sovereignty. Finally, in order to achieve a comparative dimension, the study will investigate the impact on the state at two levels – great/super power level and middle power level by examining the response of the United States and India to the dictates of the WTO.

Sinha, Aseema. "Global Trade Rules and India: Modifying Putnam?s Two-Level Framework" Paper presented at the annual meeting of the International Studies Association 48th Annual Convention, Hilton Chicago, CHICAGO, IL, USA, Feb 28, 2007 <Not Available>. 2009-04-17 <http://www.allacademic.com/meta/p180081_index.html>

Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Abstract: Putnam outlined a powerful metaphor for understanding domestic-international interactions in his two-level framework. In his analysis domestic politics drives international negotiations. Negotiators must make their international actions consistent with domestic support and policy: leaders respond to international obligation to the extent that these commitments are domestically viable. Aseema Sinha offers a modification to this framework in two important respects. First, she shows how the specific negotiation structure of the international context shapes the domestic win set. Global rules need to be disaggregated and their variable effects analyzed more carefully than has been done from within the terms of the two-level model. Further, India?s experience with GATT and WTO offers the opportunity to exploit within case variation across time to analyze how global rules of the game affect and change domestic imperatives and interests.

Souza, Manoela. "India’s Accession to TRIPS: The IP Legislation Reform (2005) and its Reflections on India’s Foreign Policy on HIV/AIDS Matters" Paper presented at the annual meeting of the ISA’s 49th ANNUAL CONVENTION, BRIDGING MULTIPLE DIVIDES, Hilton San Francisco, SAN FRANCISCO, CA, USA, Mar 26, 2008 Online <APPLICATION/PDF>. 2009-04-17 <http://www.allacademic.com/meta/p252134_index.html>

Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Abstract: This paper will discuss the relevance of India’s accession to the TRIPS-mandated regime for its foreign policy on HIV/AIDS matters. This study will investigate whether the formal accession to WTO’s norms regarding patents, through 2005′s third amendment, eventually brought about a new background for its foreign policy on HIV/AIDS. With concern for Doha’s flexibilities, this work intends to show how India’s pharma industry and local/global activism might have influenced, respectively, a watershed on the country’s advocacy on international health (especially with regard to anti-retroviral drugs).

New paper looks at Indian agricultural trade policymaking from institutional perspective

See Gupta, Surupa. "The Institutional Basis of India?s Defensive Position on Agricultural Trade Policy" Paper presented at the annual meeting of the International Studies Association 48th Annual Convention, Hilton Chicago, CHICAGO, IL, USA, Feb 28, 2007 <Not Available>. 2009-02-04 http://www.allacademic.com/meta/p181265_index.html

Here is the abstract:

This paper analyzes trade policymaking in India in the context of the ongoing negotiations on trade in agriculture at the WTO. During the past decade, the overall direction of India’s trade policy has become more liberal. However, India’s position on liberalization of trade in agriculture at multilateral trade negotiations is dominated by its defensive/protectionist interests expressed in terms of a focus on livelihood security rather than its aggressive/liberal interests in gaining market access. This presents a puzzle for existing trade theory which would expect India’s farm trade policy to be more liberal, given that about 80% of India’s farm prices are globally competitive. This paper adopts an institutional perspective, and argues that the policy is ultimately a product of the existing domestic agricultural policies and the new consultative trade policy-making apparatus. Reform of existing policies has proved difficult and the Ministry of Agriculture resists liberalization because it sees itself primarily as a protector of farmers’ interests. At the same time, the government has changed the institutions for making trade policy since 1998, giving the protectionist Ministry of Agriculture greater voice in decisions at the expense of the Ministry of Commerce and Industry. The former has often vetoed more liberal positions advocated by the Commerce Ministry. The Parliament, unlike in the west, plays a minor role in setting the tone of the policy since its ratification is not required. Moreover, although in India’s federal system state governments could have used their power to shape policy, they have not organized politically to press for liberalization, instead supporting the protectionist views espoused by the agriculture ministry.This paper also shows that conventional institution-based explanations of trade policy, mainly based on the US and West European experience, need to be modified when being applied to developing countries like India. For example, institutional theories suggest an association between democracies and liberal trade policies, but this case shows that democracies can sometimes be more protectionist. Discussions of the role of bureaucracies focus on the relation between bureaucratic autonomy and trade liberalization. However, some relevant bureaucracies are not autonomous, and some autonomous bureaucracies may not support liberalization. This research suggests that bureaucracies should not be treated as unitary actors.

Farmer suicides in India and Doha round agricultural negotiations

India’s insistence on an adequate special safeguard mechanism for agriculture is widely viewed as one of the contributing factors to the failure of the July framework talks in 2008.  Indian trade Minister Kamal Nath often describes India’s position on agriculture, including its demands for reduction in agri-subsidies by the developed world,  as a question of livelihood (and not of business) on which India cannot compromise.

What interests me is the connection between farmer suicides in India and the formulation of Indian trade policy on agriculture and the formulation of India’s Doha round negotiating position on agriculture. News reports in India about the Doha agricultural negotiations and Mr Nath’s various speeches do not directly refer to the spate of farmer suicides in India. Indeed, the political discourse in India itself (as visible in news publications) has not remained consistently engaged with this issue. Small periods of noisy outrage exist between longer periods where the issue is almost absent from the mainstream political discourse.

Though the numbers on these farmer suicides are disputed, yet even allowing for these variations, the figures are high enough to warrant a serious political impact and to expect an engaged political discussion. One would also expect that the issue would seep into agricultural trade policy issues and into Indian demands and sensitivities in the Doha round. (For example see my previous post about India wanting to be included in cotton subsidy talks – surely farmer suicides by cotton farmers in India show the serious impact of cotton subsidies for India and justify its inclusion. But I would suppose the emerging India story makes it embarrassing for the Government to flaunt this issue on the international stage).

Are farmer suicides an issue in the coming national elections? At least not in the English national press.   

So what are the facts? Where is the academic and policy research on these issues? Where are the domestic consultations with farmers groups over India’s position at Doha?

I plan to keep an eye out for what I come across on this and will post about what I find on this blog. But for the moment, the following would be of interest:

A March 2008 paper by Nagaraj of the Madras Institute of Development Studies titled ‘Farmers’ Suicides in India: Magnitudes, Trends and Spatial Patterns’, available online here  estimates that between 1997 and 2006, 166,304 farmers have killed themselves in India. For 1995-2006, the figure is close to 200,000. An average of 16,000 farmers have committed suicide in India every year for the last 12 years. The author considers even these figures an underestimation of the full extent of farmer suicides. Farmers without a property title to their farmlands are not included in the official definition of a farmer in some Indian states. The rate of suicides has shown an increase over the years. The farmers who have killed themselves are overwhelmingly male as per official figures. Female farmer suicides are most likely not counted as most female farmers would not have title to the land. Maharashtra, Karnataka, Andhra Pradesh,  Chhatisgarh and Madhya Pradesh are the top five states with the most farmer suicides. These are five contiguous states in the India heartland.

While India is now touted as a fast-growing booming economy (or at least was until the recent global recession), it is also undergoing a serious agrarian crisis. What is the link between farmer suicides and India’s agrarian crisis? The paper by Nagaraj points to a multi-causal explanation behind farmer suicides. He describes these as a social phenomenon certainly linked to India’s widespread and persistent farm crisis coupled with pre-existing conditions of vulnerability and an absence of alternative livelihood opportunities. Nagaraj dismisses sporadic, disjointed and single-point policy interventions and suggests that the crisis needs comprehensive policy intervention and a complete reorientation of agrarian policies. So where is the research on what should be India’s agricultural trade policy in the context of these suicides? 

Also see the Final Report on Causes of Farmer Suicides submitted to the Mumbai High Court from 2005 by the Tata Institute of Social Sciences.

Leaves me wondering who is accountable for these large number of deaths?

For more see this Counterpunch story, this New York Times story

Making Indian trade policy: Indian NGOs demand access to India’s FTA negotiations

The sixth round of India-EU FTA negotiations in New Delhi has Indian NGOs demanding access to “secret” FTA negotiating texts. The Times of India reports that protestors were detained outside the office of the European Commission in New Delhi. A body called the Forum on FTAs (described elsewhere as an umbrella group of 75 organizations) is spearheading these Indian civil society protests. An entity called FTA Watch-India has sprung up recently.

While I cannot comment specifically on the demands of this group in the EU-India FTA context, a discussion on how India makes its trade policy and whether it adequately consults with domestic stakeholders in formulating negotiating positions is much needed. Domestic stakeholders who ought to be consulted include not only NGOs, but also parliament, business, labor unions, farmers groups and consumers. Not much literature is available on the Indian trade policy-making process. There is however an interesting paper by Biswajit Dhar on this in a publication by IISD available here.  See Biswajit Dhar and Murali Kallummal, “Trade policy off the hook: The making of Indian trade policy since the Uruguay Round”, in Halle and Wolfe (eds.) Process Matters: Sustainable Development and Domestic Trade Transparency, IISD 2007.

I had earlier posted on a news report on the low appetite in India these days for new FTA commitments given imminent elections and the domestic impact of the global economic downturn. An Economic Times story shows that the concerns about the EU-India negotiations are not limited to civil society, but also emanate from business and agricultural economic interests.

Speaking to ET last week, a commerce ministry official sought to allay the growing concerns in domestic circles over the proposed India-EU economic agreement. “There are strong complementarities between the EU and India. After all, we have not yet reached the stage of making the trade-offs and so the fears being expressed now are unfounded,” said the official, who was busy preparing for the sixth round of India-EU bilateral talks beginning Tuesday.
This, however, could be an over-simplistic view. There is clearly a need for greater involvement of all stakeholders in the negotiation process. The high-level trade group which had drawn the broad contours of the agreement was not representative enough.
The EU is India’s largest trading partner, accounting for a fifth of India’s total trade and also one of the largest sources of foreign investment in India. As opposed to this, India currently accounts for less than 2% of the EU’s total trade.
Clearly, as things stand now, India has much to lose (or gain) from the agreement as compared to the EU. Note that the agreement would cover a gamut of areas—trade in goods and services, IPRs, cross-border investments, competition policy, government procurement etc. So India’s policymakers ought to be more chary of the proposed pact than their European counterparts. There is a need for more transparency as well as greater involvement of all stakeholders in the negotiations.
Going by the high-level group’s report, India might need to go WTO-plus in the area of trade in goods, with no commensurate reciprocal gestures from the EU side. The agreement would, as things stand now, allow India to keep just 10% of the tariff lines—which include both agricultural and industrial goods—outside its scope.
It may be noted that India has been resisting the multilateral (WTO) trade liberalisation deal even as it did not have to cut tariffs on 5%f agricultural tariff lines and only make less-than-average reductions in another 7%, and looked close to getting the freedom to keep 5% of industrial tariff lines outside tariff reduction formula. Besides, India has already got preferential (zero) access to EU in case of several tariff lines under the GSP system, which reduces the scope for India to gain in terms of reduction in tariff barriers by the EU.

China criticizes new Indian mandatory standards for Chinese toys before TBT Committee

The Economic Times reported yesterday that China has raised the issue of the mandatory safety standards imposed by India on imported Chinese toys before the WTO Committee on Technical Barriers to Trade. 

In its complaint to the WTO, China has alleged that India’s quality checks violate the condition of “national treatment” laid down under WTO’s trade rules as they did not apply to toys manufactured in India or imported from any other country.

In its submission to the WTO committee on technical barriers to trade, China pointed out that since the restrictions apply only to Chinese toys, it could be viewed as a general ban on and a discriminatory measure against Chinese toys.

This breached a series of fundamental principles embodied in the WTO agreement, including that of most favoured nation treatment (every member country will be treated on a par with other member countries), and national treatment (product from a member country will be given the same treatment as that given to a product made locally), along with provisions of technical barriers to trade (TBT) agreement.

China also pointed out that India did not inform WTO about the restrictions, a procedure necessary under the transparency obligations of TBT agreement.

“China strongly requests that India revoke its discriminatory and WTO-inconsistent restriction on Chinese toys immediately,” the submission stated.

So China is alleging that even the revised Indian notification violates both MFN and national treatment. Further, it violates the notification requirement in the TBT agreement. For more background, see earlier posts on this subject under the category –public health. See http://indiainthewto.wordpress.com/2009/03/02/indian-government-relaxes-ban-on-chinese-toy-imports/

Why did the Indian government not use Clause 2.10 of the TBT agreement permitting the issue of safety standards in urgent cases with post-facto notification to the WTO secretariat and other members? Such a notification requires the statement of objectives and the rational for the standards. India will probably argue that these are international standards not requiring notification, but the application of these standards exclusively to imports from China does raise potential violations of MFN and NT.

The Indian authorities could have avoided a lot of trouble if only they had also followed the letter of WTO rules in this matter. The flexibility to take action against imports for safety reasons is fully available, but the Indians seem to have messed up on procedure. Is this an example of lack of capacity in Indian government institutions to use the WTO rules effectively? Why do they not consult lawyers more? 

The Hindu meanwhile has an interesting take on the matter:

China is likely to convey its concern to India over New Delhi trying to restrict import of Chinese goods, even though Beijing has not "yet" dragged its neighbour to the World Trade Organisation on the issue.

Chinese Vice Minister of Commerce Zhong Shan is expected to convey his country’s strong resentment over India resorting to protect its industry against imports from China, when he meets Commerce Secretary G K Pillai here this week, sources said.

"We have nothing on this yet," WTO spokesperson said in an e-mail from Geneva when asked whether China has lodged any formal complaint against India. China was upset over India slapping a ban on import of Chinese toys on January 23, which was partially eased within six weeks, provided the toys conformed to international health and safety standards.

The official Chinese media had reported that the country was mulling to drag India to WTO for contesting the ban. However, Mr. Pillai is expected to confront Mr. Zhong with data showing surge in imports from China.

While the bilateral trade has seen a sharp rise in the fiscal 2008-09, it is highly skewed in favour of China. In 2007-08, India’s exports to China stood at USD 10.83 billion, while imports was USD 27.11 billion.

So why would Indian Commerce Secretary talk to the Chinese about surging imports in a matter to do with safety issues? To be fair, the discussions between the Indian Commerce Secretary and the Chinese Vice Minister of Commerce will likely cover all the recent trade tensions between the two countries. And the discussion of import surges will probably feature in that context.

The role of trade and institutions in promoting religious and other tolerance

I found an extremely interesting paper on SSRN on this topic that examines the historical relationship between trading institutions and religious violence in India.

See  Jha, Saumitra,Trade, Institutions and Religious Tolerance: Evidence from India (January 10, 2008). Stanford University Graduate School of Business Research Paper No. 2004. Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=948734. The full-text is available for download.

Jha examined the prevalence of Hindu-Muslim religious riots in India during the period 1850 –1950 and found that trading ports had 25% less religious riots than other Indian towns. He also found that trading ports in Gujarat dating back to medival times, were less afflicted by the 2002 Gujarat riots. Jha explains this difference as due to the persistence of institutional mechanisms that developed to support inter-religious medieval trade. These institutions encouraged specialization, inter-ethnic complementarity, and the mitigation of incentives for ethnic violence by allowing the gains from inter-ethnic trade to be shared between religious groups. Mechanisms for sharing the gains from trade included joint ventures, voluntary provision of public goods and direct inter-group transfers.

Jha’s paper demonstrates the effects of social institutions in preserving social capital  and draws attention to how policy interventions are required for trade to contribute to peace.  It provides a good example of John Ruggie’s “embedded liberalism” idea, the need for trade liberalization to be embedded in the social community. 

India in the USTR 2008 Annual Report – a spotlight on India-US bilateral trade ties

The USTR has released its 2009 Trade Policy Agenda and 2008 Annual Report (these can be accessed here) and the section on India would be of interest to this blog’s readers. This is extracted below: 

5. India

a. General

The United States and India completed another year of active dialogue on trade policy in 2008. The bilateral trade agenda continued to expand to support the significant opportunities for bilateral trade and investment that U.S. and Indian companies are pursuing. The Civil Nuclear Agreement signed on October 10, 2008, opens the door even wider for U.S. exports to help India meet its tremendous energy needs. That said, many challenges to trade and investment in India persist, and USTR continued to work with the Indian government to address such concerns as India’s tariff and tax regime, intellectual property rights policies, investment climate and regulatory hurdles. India continues to limit market access in various sectors through non-tariff barriers such as high border taxes and tariffs, foreign direct investment caps, non-transparent procedures, and discriminatory treatment of imports. Despite these barriers, trade expanded rapidly. In 2008, bilateral goods trade totaled $45 billion. Bilateral services trade totaled $19 billion in 2007.

b. Trade Dialogue

Ambassador Schwab and India’s Minister of Commerce and Industry Kamal Nath convened the fifth ministerial-level meeting of the United States-India Trade Policy Forum (TPF) in February 2008 in Chicago, Illinois. The discussions under the TPF cover bilateral trade, investment and related issues and also address multilateral issues such as the ongoing WTO Doha Round negotiations. The TPF is part of the overall Economic Dialogue between India and the United States. Through regular dialogue under the TPF, the United States and India seek to remove impediments to bilateral trade and investment by anticipating potential trade problems and jointly resolving concerns.

The TPF serves as the umbrella for five Focus Groups: Agriculture, Tariff and Non-Tariff Barriers, Services, Investment, and Innovation and Creativity (focusing on intellectual property rights issues). Ongoing Focus Group discussions in 2008 addressed priority issues such as foreign direct investment caps, intellectual property rights protection and enforcement, restrictive Indian telecommunications policies and market access for a wide range of manufactured and agricultural products and services. Noteworthy developments in 2008 included the agreement to launch negotiations on a bilateral investment treaty and India’s withdrawal of certain import restrictions on fresh fruit.

Another development in the 2008 bilateral U.S.-India trade dialogue was the Private Sector Advisory Group’s (PSAG) identification of key policy issues on which it would provide strategic recommendations and insights to the TPF. The membership of the PSAG includes trade experts and representatives of private sector organizations in the United States and India with in-depth knowledge of international economic and trade policy. The PSAG identified completion of a bilateral investment treaty as its top recommendation.

In addition to the February 2008 TPF meeting, Ambassador Schwab and Minister Nath met a number of times in the context of the Doha Round negotiations in an effort to find common ground in the pursuit of an ambitious outcome.

With regard to intellectual property rights, the United States has been working constructively with India to improve its IPR regime. The U.S. dialogue with India takes place through the TPF’s Focus Group on Innovation and Creativity, the Commerce Department-led High-Technology Cooperation Group, and work by the U.S. Government’s Intellectual Property attaché stationed in New Delhi and other government officials from multiple U.S. Government agencies. There has been some progress in India’s protection of intellectual property rights, including through the introduction of the proposed Drugs and Cosmetics (Amendment) Bill 2008 that will increase penalties for spurious and adulterated pharmaceuticals, and create a Customs recordation system. However, India still needs to improve its copyright regime to address issues related to protection of digital works on the Internet, strengthen its patent regime, including by clarifying the scope of patentable subject matter, provide effective data protection for pharmaceutical and agricultural chemicals, and increase enforcement against piracy and counterfeiting.

Capacity building in trade policy for Indian diplomats

The Foreign Service Institute in New Delhi is where Indian diplomats learn about trade policy. Here is the Business Standard story:

Where diplomats learn to talk bread

KS Manjunath / New Delhi February 23, 2009, 0:22 IST

Diplomacy in a globalised world increasingly is about mastering the Heckscher-Ohlin theorem, trade policy, absolute and comparative advantage, and economics of scale. With its year-round programmes, the Foreign Service Institute (FSI) in the capital is the place where an Indian Foreign Service (IFS) probationer with a background in veterinary science is taught the finer aspects of economic diplomacy.

The institute’s international economics and economic diplomacy module is designed not just for the heterogeneous annual batch of probationers. Every year, there are three to four courses for Assistants and three courses for Section Officers, who are taught to handle trade enquiries and disputes, conduct surveys to gather data and arrange buyer-seller meets. And Director-rank officers have a mid-career distance training programme on WTO negotiations and the Indian economy.

But the lion’s share of coursework is for probationers. They get the basics of our trade policy, finer points of economic ties with regional trading partners and big global players, and India’s institutional set-up for export promotion.

The FSI has linkages with IIM-Bangalore, the ministry of commerce, RBI, Exim Bank, Sebi, and various chambers of commerce and some industries. The course is under constant review, says FSI Dean, Ajai Choudhry.

Further, over the years the institute has conducted 47 courses for foreign diplomats, teaching them regional economic issues and on international financial institutes such as the IMF and WB. With such programmes for foreign diplomats, India is not just educating them but also generating goodwill, notes the Dean.

Options for protection against imports: mandatory import licences versus safeguards

Here is a curiously interesting report from the Economic Times … the Indian Committee of Secretaries has advice for the Ministry of Commerce:

Apply WTO-approved curbs to ban imports, advises CoS
28 Feb 2009, 0102 hrs IST, Amiti Sen, ET Bureau

NEW DELHI: The commerce department, which restricted the import of a number of items from China this fiscal by allowing only actual users to import them through special licences issued by the government, may no longer be able to take the measure on its own.

The committee of secretaries (CoS), headed by the Cabinet secretary, is of the view that such restrictions could lead to violation of multilateral trading norms established by the World Trade Organization (WTO) and should be used sparingly. It suggested that the decision to impose such restrictions, when absolutely necessary, should be taken by the CoS, a government official said.

The commerce department should, instead, use the WTO-approved special safeguard mechanism (SSM)—where special import duties are imposed to prevent import surges—to help industry against cheap imports, the CoS proposed in a recent meeting.

The commerce department, in November last year, had put a number of items on the restricted list of imports like hot-rolled steel and radial tyres which are being mostly imported from China. Import of all items on restricted list is allowed only by actual users through import licences issued by the government.

The import of restricted products is, thus, totally in control of the government — a situation WTO may not tolerate. “If we are taken to WTO by an exporting country and found guilty of violating WTO rules, retaliatory sanctions can be imposed against our exports,” an official said.

The use of special safeguard mechanism, however, is allowed by WTO as it leads to imposition of additional import duties on products once it is conclusively proved there has been a surge in the import of an identified product leading to domestic market disruption and injury to the industry.

New Delhi has already imposed safeguard duties on four items, all chemicals. The directorate general of safeguards, set up under the department of revenue, carries out investigations following complaints made by the domestic industry against increased imports of a particular commodity.

Once it is satisfied that there has been a sharp increase in the import of a product and has led to losses for the domestic industry, it imposes 200-day temporary import duties on the product. The safeguard duty could be in place for up to three years if the domestic industry continues to be threatened by imports.

With the slowdown leading to contraction in global demand, the government is focusing on protecting the domestic industry against cheap imports.

Thoughts … turf wars?

Also, the Committee of Secretaries view might give ideas to Chinese trade officials about a potential WTO violation here on Indian restrictions on imports of hot-rolled steel and radial tyres. 

And with the global economic crisis and the slow-down in India, there seems to be general protectionist sentiment all-around. In an election year, the Indian government has not much option but to protect domestic industry and very little appetite for signing new FTAs and lowering any tariffs. See earlier post

Kamal Nath issues new interim trade policy for India

The new Annual Supplement to India’s foreign trade policy was released by commerce minister Kamal Nath on 26 February.

His speech on the occasion can be accessed here. It provides an interesting insight into the trade policy priorities of the Indian government. Incidentally there is no mention of the stalled Doha round and the WTO  finds mention only in passing (the Minister quotes the WTO to warn about how the growth rate in global trade in goods and services is expected to decline from 7.2% in 2007 to 4.6% in 2008 and further to 2.1% in 2009).

On Indian FTAs the Minister had this to say:

We concluded a Comprehensive Economic Cooperation Agreement (CECA) with Singapore in 2004. It is India’s first CECA with any country covering goods, services, investment and other areas of cooperation. We are in an advanced stage of negotiations with ASEAN, Korea and Japan and are engaging significantly with SAARC, EU, EFTA and Thailand. These efforts have increased our confidence for a deeper engagement with other trading partners and also to understand their markets for promotion of trade in both goods and services.

The annual supplement with the trade facilitation measures can be accessed here while the Foreign Trade Policy 2004-2009 can be accessed here.

A new full year policy for 2009-2010 will be issued by the new government constituted after elections this year.

Indian FTAs – little success

The Business Standard has an article with an update on India’s FTA negotiations. The outgoing government has only signed 1 out of the 15 proposed FTAs on which it initiated talks.

Here’s the article in full:

UPA’s FTA success rate 1 out of 15

Rituparna Bhuyan / New Delhi February 25, 2009, 0:56 IST

The United Progressive Alliance (UPA) government, which initiated talks on about 15 free trade agreements (FTAs), could sign only one of them during its current tenure.

Opposition from the domestic industry lobby in some FTAs and inconclusive negotiations in other cases were reasons for slow progress in finalising FTAs with trade partners, experts said.

Government sources said that at least three of the proposed trade treaties, negotiations on which were concluded last year, would be cleared by the new government that takes charge at the Centre in a few months.

The present regime signed the Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement (CEPA) — which covers goods, services and investment — with Singapore in mid-2005.

* Talks Completed with Asean (FTA on goods), South Korea and Sri Lanka

* Ongoing talks with Japan, European Union, European Free Trade Association, Southern African Customs Union, Gulf Co-operation Council, Malaysia, Thailand and New Zealand

* Joint study group formed with China, Australia , Russia and Indonesia

“The fact that not many FTAs were sealed shows the cautious approach of the policy makers,” said Ram Upendra Das, fellow, Research and Information System for Developing Countries (RIS). “But India has recognised that these duty-free agreements are the order of the day as other countries are engaging in similar deals. Indian exporters will be left out if the nation does not engage in these type of agreements with its trading partners”, he added.

Government sources said that the ambitious FTA with the Association of South-East Asian Nations (Asean) and a CEPA with South Korea were unlikely to be cleared by the Union Cabinet. Talks on both these agreements were concluded successfully in 2008. After successful conclusion of talks, the agreement has to be approved by the Union Cabinet before it can be signed.

“The call on these two agreements is likely to be taken by the next government,” said a government official, adding the Cabinet had met probably for the last time on Monday before dates for the elections are announced next week.

There was no announcement on the South Korean and Asean duty-free agreements. Once elections are announced, the Cabinet will not be able to clear any proposals.

Sources added that the government was facing a lot of opposition from the industry on these two FTAs, as it is wary of any cheap imports at a time when the domestic economy is going through a downturn in the wake of the global economic crisis. The Asean FTA was to be signed in December 2008, but was postponed because of a domestic strife in Thailand, an Asean member.

Moreover, a separate CEPA with Thailand could not materialise as India first wants to sign the deal with Asean. “Thailand has also asked for some additional concessions,” officials said. Meanwhile, Both the countries have are trading through a Early Harvest Scheme (EHS), which translates to duty free trade of about 84 goods.

Experts maintain that given the present economic situation, FTAs could wait. “We do not know how things will shape up in the near future. It probably makes sense at times of uncertainty to calibrate policy to suit domestic needs,” said Bishwajit Dhar, head of centre for WTO studies at Indian Institute of Foreign Trade.

But Das feels that as the United States and Europe see a downturn, India needs to diversify its exports and imports.

Significantly, a CEPA with Sri Lanka could not materialise because of the political developments in the island nation. The agreement was to be signed on the sidelines of the SAARC meeting in Colombo in August 2008. Government officials maintained that Sri Lanka did not want the CEPA due to opposition by some political parties. Both the countries already have an operational FTA, covering goods, since 1998.

An agreement with Japan, which was scheduled to be concluded by the end of 2008, is also stuck. The bone of contention was the reluctance of the island country to allow easy market access of Indian pharmaceutical products.

 

India and TRIPS plus intellectual property rights

Latha Jishnu of the Business Standard has a very well-researched article recently on what she calls the "policy of encirclement" in the way TRIPS plus and TRIPS plus plus obligations are being pushed through in new international and forums where developing country resistance is not as strong as in the WTO, WIPO and the WHO. She writes about SECURE, which are voluntary new customs standards and best practices for intellectual property rights enforcement and are being formulated by the World Customs Organization (WCO).

That is, if a group of developed countries and their rights holders are successful in pushing through a clever initiative at the World Customs Organization (WCO) to lay down global norms and model laws for heightened protection of IP rights. Unsurprisingly, the majority of developing countries have been caught off guard by the move to push SECURE (Standards to be Employed by Customs for Uniform Rights Enforcement) simply because they did not expect WCO to be looking at IP issues. Besides, SECURE was not a member-driven initiative but put together by the secretariat of the 174-member organisation based in Brussels. SECURE, says the WCO, will be a set of standards, procedures, and best practices to coordinate the “global effort to suppress all kind of IP rights infringements”.

The most lethal provision of SECURE is that rights holders are not obliged to provide adequate evidence to show that there is prima facie an infringement to initiate action. This is not to be wondered at since rights holders (private industry associations) have been driving the agenda. Viviana Muñoz Tellez, programme officer for the Innovation and Access to Knowledge Programme of the South Centre in Geneva, has highlighted the “cosy relationship and role of right holder groups at the WCO” who were participating in the meetings at the same level as member-states. Shockingly, they have their own vice-chair in the SECURE working group.

Latha Jishnu points out the lack of Indian participation in the WCO on this issue and is scathing in her commentary:

India is once again missing in action. Bureaucratic and political apathy have been characteristic of India’s approach to critical trade negotiations, the country usually waking to a fait accompli, allege trade watchers. This has been specially so in the case of IMPACT (International Medical Products Anti-Counterfeiting Taskforce), a WHO-sponsored agency whose proposed regulations for stamping out counterfeit medicines would have had a lethal impact on India’s pharmaceuticals industry (see ‘Choking India’s generics exports’, Business Standard, January 29, 2009). Dilip Shah, secretary-general of the Indian Pharmaceutical Alliance, points out that although there was clear notice that IMPACT was planning a dangerous change in its definition of counterfeit goods, India had not participated in many working groups of IMPACT, “denying itself an opportunity to influence the outcome and thus faced with a definition of counterfeits that would harm its interests”.

As a developing country with a putative reputation for tough bargaining at the World Trade Organization (WTO), India’s officialdom needs to have its pulse on the processes being initiated in different forums by rich countries. Forum shopping is the name of the game: The agenda that cannot be successfully pushed in one forum is shifted to the next and the next till an objective —or part of it — is reached. Even an informal agreement on certain standards can be dangerous because it is then imported into the subsequent forum as a new standard. And as the SECURE proposal shows, even the most unlikely organisations can be used to promote the interests of the developed world and its industries.

Jishnu refers to a report by Professor Susan Sell of George Washington University which documents how "IP maximalists" are engaged in a relentless and multifaceted campaign in multiple forums to ratchet up IP protection and enforcement worldwide. Professor Sell’s report dated June 2008 can be accessed here

Annette Kur and Henning Grosse Ruse-Khan have an interesting paper on this titled "Enough is Enough: The Notion of Binding Ceilings in International Intellectual Property Protection" available on SSRN here. Annette and Henning propose a concept of maximum rights ceiling rules under TRIPS which would protect the flexibility and policy space under the TRIPS agreement from TRIPS plus standards being advocated by IP maximalists in other international forums and under developed country national regulation. Here is the abstract:

Traditionally, international agreements on IP rights are built on the concept of minimum protection which members must implement in their national laws. The concept implies that members are free to provide more extensive protection. However, that observation needs to be qualified in certain regards. First some agreements do contain provisions which seem to impose ceilings, i.e. maximum rights, or mandatory limitations. Examples for this are the express anchoring of the idea/expression dichotomy in TRIPS and the WCT, and the citation right to be found in Art.10 (2) Berne Convention. Furthermore, pursuant to TRIPS Art.1:1, more extensive protection may only be granted "provided that such protection does not contravene the provisions of this Agreement". In spite of that, the general perception in international IP regulation so far has been that above the prescribed minimum standards there is no ceiling or limit other than the sky. This construction results in a spiral movement – driven by bilateral agreements – towards ever-increasing levels of protection, and reducing the flexibilities and policy space left open under the TRIPS Agreement.
In this situation, the concept of maximum rights or ‘ceiling rules’ which provide for a binding maximum amount of IP protection WTO Members can offer in their national laws gains in importance: It might offer a way to ensure and maintain a balanced approach towards IP protection, and to protect members states’ autonomy in preserving public policy goals vis-a-vis pressure exerted against them in bilateral trade negotiations. However, as appealing as the concept may be, it also has potential drawbacks that must be thoroughly explored. This concerns substantive issues – such as the risk that to espouse the principle of maximum rules might reduce instead of enhance member states’ flexibilities – as well as institutional and procedural questions – in particular, how this would fit with the current WTO/TRIPS system. The paper will address those issues. In addition, the meaning and possible impact of existing maximum rules will be set forth, and initiatives will be presented which may give the concept of ceilings a broader range of application than to-date.

Agricultural trade policy making in India

Business Line published an article recently that discusses ministerial turf battles in the way trade policy is made in India. Here is the article in full with items of interest highlighted for those interested in trade policy formulation issues:

Harish Damodaran

New Delhi, Jan. 15 The Centre has rejected the proposal to accord statutory status to the Commission for Agricultural Costs and Prices (CACP) while also extending its mandate to provide advice on tariff policy and other trade-related matters.

The Cabinet Committee on Economic Affairs (CCEA), which met here on Thursday, did not accept the recommendation by an Expert Committee under Prof Y.K. Alagh to confer statutory status to the CACP.

The proposal, had it gone through, would have made it mandatory for the Centre to fix the minimum support prices (MSP) for various crops at levels recommended by the CACP. The underlying idea here was to insulate fixation of MSPs from political pressures and subject these, instead, to rational economic principles.

But the Expert Committee’s suggestion was rejected by the Cabinet, ostensibly at the instance of the Union Agriculture Ministry. The latter held that the CACP recommends MSPs well before the start of the cropping season, whereas the crop gets harvested much later.

‘No flexibility’

If the Centre was bound by the MSPs recommended by the CACP, there would be no flexibility to respond to changing market conditions and fix procurement prices accordingly. In such a situation, it was felt that the CACP’s present status as a purely ‘recommendatory body’ be maintained, official sources told Business Line.

The CCEA also rejected the Expert Committee’s proposal to extend the CACP’s terms of reference so as to include, “To advice from time to time on the tariff structure and other measures relating to imports and exports of agricultural commodities and their processed products”.

This would, in effect, have made it mandatory for the Centre to consider the CACP’s views regarding increases or decreases in import tariffs for any agri-commodity and measures to restrict or ban export/import of particular products.

“The opposition in this case came mainly from the Commerce Ministry, which expressed reservations on any role for the CACP to advice on trade and tariff matters, so as to integrate these with MSP policy,” the sources said.

“The Commerce people felt the CACP cannot be authorised to advice on what the tariff levels for individual commodities should be, so as to maintain the MSPs recommended by it. This may result in trade distortions which go against the basic economic principles of free trade,” they pointed out.

The Commerce Ministry, on the contrary, held that the CACP incorporate a member representing the Ministry. This would, in turn, ensure that the CACP would recommend MSPs and related actions that “do not come in conflict with broad trade objectives” and “are compatible with the World Trade Organisation and other bilateral and multilateral arrangements,” the sources added.

The CCEA also rejected the Expert Committee’s suggestion to expand the coverage of MSP and the official cost of Cultivation Scheme to horticulture crops, i.e. fruits and vegetables.

Methodological issues

The Prof Alagh-headed Committee was constituted by the Agriculture Ministry on May 7, 2003 to study various methodological issues in fixing MSPs of crops. Its terms of reference also included examining the existing mandate of the CACP and whether or not to reposition its role so as to provide greater teeth to its recommendations.

The Committee submitted its report on May 31, 2005, which was then forwarded to other Ministries (Finance, Commerce, Food, Planning Commission) for seeking their views before being placed for the Union Cabinet’s consideration.

The author of the report in question, Prof Alagh discusses ministerial turf battles and the difficulties of policy coordination because of bureaucrats unwilling to give up power. See his comment in the Financial Express here. An excerpt:

Finally the real differences. Apparently the government, or parts of it, does not want tariffs to be integrated with price policy in agriculture. It therefore does not agree with the Alagh Committee’s real concern that integrated policy should be followed to give incentives for a competitive agriculture. The report takes crops, works out the efficient farmer set and shows how within tariff bounds, with some monetary policy built in (the Venugopal Reddy simulation), it is possible to hold the farmer’s hand for the transitional period in which he moves over to a lower cost per unit of output, not land, or in which global trade is modernised following Kamal Nath. The report describes this in terms of ‘efficiency pricing’ or other variants of long-range marginal cost pricing, fully aware that it is not talking of industry. Anybody who reasons against this needs to do serious home work.

There seem to be sections of government that don’t want this. We don’t know why. Turf battles could be one reason. Policy coordination is always easy in a textbook and a report but normal persons don’t like to give up power. Only the exceptional become more powerful by shedding power and coordinating for the larger good. Another reason could be the fear of rule based systems for these can dilute the power play in weak coalition regimes. There is a trend in not having a chapter on perspectives in the Eleventh Plan and not accepting the challenge of creating a medium term environment for competitive agriculture. But then you are in real trouble, for to have MSPs and separately free imports is like pouring water in a leaking bucket. You did this at great cost a few years ago in the grain crisis period. Finally there could be the fear of the unknown.

But we are traveling in uncharted territory. After the dithering of the nineties, we are doing a superb job in the WTO. I am sure whatever the first reaction, having accepted a trade dominated regime, we will finally accept the challenge of the rational transition to it. The friendly ghost of the Alagh Committee will keep on coming back and will be exorcised only when we are fully competitive in our agriculture.

Those interested in going deeper, can find out more about the Commission on Agricultural Costs and Prices (the CACP) here.

Call for India-EU FTA to be debated in Indian parliament

The role of the Indian parliament in trade policy making has mostly been marginal. While many countries (both developed and developing) struggle with ensuring democratic control over trade policy making through parliamentary supervision, the issue in the Indian context, needs to be considered in the light of the low quality of parliamentary governance in India in policy making overall. While some (perhaps rightly) argue that more parliamentary supervision in India of trade policy making will make any policy reform impossible and create efficiency concerns, the need for democratic control over trade policy making – a component of governance that affects every citizen, is also an issue that cannot be ignored in the long term.

This call from one of India’s leftist political parties for the India-EU FTA to be debated in Parliament is therefore important. According to the Hindu newspaper:

Ahead of the ninth India-European Union Summit in Marseille, the Communist Party of India (Marxist) on Saturday asked the United Progressive Alliance Government not to make any commitment on the Free Trade Agreement without a debate in Parliament.

As Prime Minster Manmohan Singh leads the Indian delegation for the summit on Monday, the Polit Bureau, in a statement, said it was a matter of concern that while the European Parliament had already discussed the issues related to the proposed FTA, the Indiangovernment was yet to share details of the negotiations with Parliament and people.

…

The draft proposals, existing negotiating positions and studies conducted by the Indian government on the India-EU FTA should be placed and debated in Parliament before it initiated any further step, the statement said.

Indian government to educate citizens on Doha Development Round through White Paper

With national elections looming, the Indian government will issue a White Paper in October to explain to ordinary Indians and stakeholders what the Doha negotiations are all about, what is at stake and what is India’s negotiating position based upon.

The Financial Express in a report quoting a senior commerce ministry official discloses:

India would give another shot at taking forward the talks next month if the US gives positive signals and then the Centre would come out with the ‘white paper’ by October-end , a senior government official told FE. The ‘white paper’, devoid of all the jargon, would contain the nitty-gritty of the multilateral trade negotiations, India’s stance on all the issues on the table alongwith the positions of other countries as well as the reasons for the failure or success, the official added.

Once again, this proposal shows how trade policy making processes in India have evolved since the Uruguay Round. This move is commendable for promoting transparency about the WTO system at the domestic level. However, the government should encourage transparency in international trade negotiations through similar iniatiatives throughout the WTO negotiation rounds and not just before an election.

Paper on Chinese Indian cooperation at the WTO

This looks like a very interesting paper on a subject where not much has been published.

See Julien Chaisse and Debashis Chakraborty. “Identifying Mutual Interest Areas at World Trade Organisation: a Sino Indian joint perspective” China Report 41.3 (2005): 267-288. Available at: http://works.bepress.com/julien_chaisse/4

 

Abstract

China and India, in spite of being signatory members of GATT (1948), witnessed a dissimilar experience in the arena of multilateral negotiations and trade. China lost its membership after the withdrawal of Taiwan from GATT in 1950, but gained steady access in the global market since late eighties. India, on the other hand, in spite of maintaining the membership of GATT, never focused on export promotion strategies before late eighties. Both the countries expect further growth in their exports in coming future, as the tariff and non-tariff barriers (NTBs) in member countries are likely to go down in the post-transitory phase of WTO, which started from January 1, 2005 onwards. However the WTO-compatibilities of several domestic polices of both China and India have been questioned by their trade-partners on various occasions and the debate is likely to continue in the future. Moreover, the exports of both of them are subject to various NTBs in principal markets, which are likely to intensify in the future. This bears serious implications on the export potentials of the two countries. Considering the domestic policies of China and India as well as the barriers on them, the paper attempts to identify material and institutional areas where the two countries could jointly negotiate at the multilateral forum. The paper argues that collective bargaining by the two countries on key issues is likely to provide them an edge in future negotiations.

Should there be an Indian Trade Organization?

The Hindu carried a report a few days ago on comments by eminent Indian agricultural scientist Dr. M. S. Swaminathan at a conference. He called for an “Indian Trade Organization” as a “national counterpart to the WTO”. The article does not say more about his ideas and what such an organization would look like or do. India does need trade policy making domestic institutional reform but its structure, functions and organization need to be carefully designed. And the Government has no such revamping plans at the moment. What would be the role of Parliament in such a set-up? Also, would there be a place for a more formalised public-private partnership in trade policy making and in market access enforcement?

For a profile of Dr. M S Swaminathan see here

Also see the M S Swaminathan Research Foundation

Indian participation in the Doha Round – no shortage of material for research studies, books, and PhD theses!

As is now clear, India has emerged as a major player in the WTO and its role in the Doha round is significant. And no doubt, many books, papers, and theses are being planned (once the round gets over) on questions like – How India negotiated? What influence did India exert? Did India adopt a successful negotiating strategy? Did India manage to protect its interests? Has India moved away from representing broad developing country interests to a more self-interested negotiating strategy? How did India define its interests? And was there adequate stakeholder consultation and involvement?  What were the turning points when deals were made? And in all this, how did India compare with other important players?

India’s participation in the Doha round could not be more different from its participation in the Uruguay round. And the differences are a result of many changes – India’s growth story; the tectonic shifts in global power; the shifts in power within the WTO; and of course everyone’s favourite “cryptic” Globalisation.

What is certain is that those interested in such themes will face no shortage of material, given the media coverage of the round, and given how contemporaneous examination of India’s role is the subject of seminars and discussion all over the world and perhaps, more importantly, within the country. I keep wanting to archive all this material, but just don’t have the time. However, I am sure someone’s doing this. In any case, the reason for this post was more such media coverage. Here are some extracts and headlines from the last few weeks.

Moneycontrol has this today:

GK Pillai, Commerce Secretary, said, “The next 30 days are going to be crucial, because of the considerable differences, there has to be a considerable hardening of stand on our part.”

But it’s not just the government who will be talking. This time Indian negotiators at the WTO want states and corporates to lobby directly just as industry bodies do in the United States and the European Union.

The Commerce Secretary said, “We will be appealing to industry as well as agriculture to support us in our negotiations. We will try to get all states sensitised to our agri position and will try and get the agri ministry on board.”

The Hindu wrote Lamy’s prognosis on food crisis finds support in India 

The Economic Times wrote India ask US, EU to show leadership in Doha talks and Nath to tour Indonesia, New York to sort differences in trade deals and India needn’t rush for an unfair Doha deal

This could go on and on … An article could be written just on the media coverage of the Doha round in India. A list of quotable quotes from this round would also make interesting reading and mark the important milestones and turning points. Remember Susan Schwab’s teen driver quote to describe India and Brazil.

The Budget on trade policy

Business Standard reports on the trade policy changes introduced in the Union Budget (see here) yesterday.

CUSTOMS: Peak rate remains at 10% to protect the Re-hit industry; a few anomalies removed.

Breaking a three-year trend, Finance Minister P Chidambaram kept the peak Customs duty for non-agricultural products unchanged at 10 per cent, a key demand of the domestic industry, which has been facing the brunt of the rupee appreciation.

“The collection rate is the closest approximation to the level of protection to domestic industry, and that rate for all imports stood at 10 per cent in 2006-07. Since April 2007, the rupee has appreciated against the dollar by 9.8 per cent. Consequently, the case for reducing the peak rate at this stage is very weak,” Chidambaram said in his Budget speech.

The government had set a target to bring down the peak Customs duty on non-agricultural products to around 5 per cent by 2010.

However, Chidambaram reduced the Customs duty on some items to “provide a fillip to that industry or to promote value addition or to remove inversion or any other anomaly”.

Trade policy experts said the move could have a positive impact on the country’s trade relations.

“India will have greater bargaining power in negotiations for various free trade agreements. Thus, on non-tariff issues like trade rules, Indian negotiators can ask for more concessions,” said Ram Upendra Das, fellow, Research and Information System for Developing Countries.

The commerce ministry had asked the finance ministry not to reduce the peak Customs duty on all non-agricultural products, but to reduce it on certain items to address the issue of inverted duties (when raw materials attract more duties than finished products).

“This reduction of Customs duties will have a positive impact on export-oriented industries in gems and jewellery as well as sports goods sectors,” said Ajay Sahai, director general, Federation of Indian Export Organisations.

As imports are expected to remain buoyant, Customs collections for 2008-09 have been fixed at Rs 1,18,930 crore, up 18 per cent from the current fiscal’s revised estimate of Rs 1,00,766 crore.

Moreover, the revised estimate of Customs collections for the current financial year is 2 per cent higher than the Budget estimate of Rs 98,770 crore.

There has been a continuous annual reduction in Customs duties since 2004-05 when they were reduced from 20 per cent to 15 per cent. In 2005-06, Chidambaram cut the peak Customs duty on non-agricultural products from 15 per cent to 12.5 per cent and to the current level of 10 per cent in 2006-07.

Chidambaram proposed to do away with import duties on steel melting and aluminium scrap, some components of set-top boxes, specified raw materials used by the IT/electronic hardware industry and the sports goods sector, bactofuges used by the dairy industry, and helicopter simulators.

The items on which Customs duty has been reduced to 5 per cent include specified life-saving drugs and bulk drugs used to make such drugs, phosphoric acid for use as poultry- and cattle-feed ingredient, IT-convergence products, certain machinery used by the sports goods sector, gems and jewellery inputs like rough cubic zirconia, polished cubic, and rough coral.

Chidambaram did away with the 4 per cent additional Customs duty exemption enjoyed by power generation projects (other than mega power projects), transmission, sub-transmission and distribution projects, as well as goods for high-voltage transmission projects. Customs duty exemption on naptha for manufacture of some polymers has also been withdrawn.

research paper on linkages between industrial and trade policies in India

Sharma, Gunjan, “Competing or Collaborating Siblings? Industrial and Trade Policies in India” . Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=964740

SSRN Abstract:
This paper investigates the link between economic de-regulation – domestic as well as trade de-regulation – and firm-level productivity using two unique data sets. We use the industrial licensing regime in India (operating from the 1950s onwards) and its gradual relaxation during the 1980s and 1990s to test whether industrial de-regulation that leads to more competition domestically, affects firm-level productivity. To our knowledge, ours is the only detailed, disaggregated data set on Indian industrial policy at the four-digit level. Our firm-level data for the period 1980-94 is a census of firms in India and has been rarely used in literature. We also use the interesting chronology of reforms in India (industrial de-regulation in the 1980s and trade reforms in 1991) to test whether industries that faced more competition domestically tend to perform better when facing foreign competition. Our identification strategy uses an important institutional feature of Indian policy. Firms with assets below a certain defined rupee threshold were exempt from licensing requirements. This institutional feature provides us within-industry variation that allows us to identify the interaction between de-licensing and exemption status. We find that industrial de-regulation during the 1980s led to a significant rise in firm productivity. Further preliminary results suggest that there exists a strategic complementarity relationship between industrial and trade policies – industries and firms that were de-licensed tend to perform better vis productivity after trade liberalization. Our results are robust to the inclusion of a wide variety of firm and industry fixed effects and controls for policies other than de-licensing that may affect productivity. This paper contributes to the literature by being the only detailed empirical analysis of the industrial licensing regime in India, especially the de-licensing that took place during the 1980s and by providing evidence of the crucial link between trade and industrial de-regulation.

There is an interesting passage in the concluding section:

“Our results have interesting policy implications. An important one is that domestic competitive environment can be used to prepare firms in the economy for trade reforms. Under competition from high-productivity foreign firms, domestic firms that are not productive may want to cut their losses and not invest in productivity-enhancing technology. However a rise in the level of domestic competition can spur these firms to make investments in technology prior to facing competition from abroad and hence prepare them for an even more competitive environment.”

The author suggests that the chronology of reforms was important, in that industrial de-licencing preceded liberalization of trade policy.

Should India walk down the multilateral road or the bilaterals road?

There haven’t been many detailed studies on comparative gains to India in adopting a multilateral versus a bilaterals focussed trade policy. With the Doha round still stuck, India has been aggressively open to offers for bilateral trade pacts. The Carnegie Endowment for International Peace has published a report (January 2008) titled “India’s Trade Policy Choices: Managing Diverse Challenges” which suggests that the multilateral route would be preferable for India. The key conclusions of the report available here are:

• India’s economy would grow most under a Doha agreement, although the gains would add a very modest 0.25 percent to the economy. Free trade pacts with China or the United States would produce even smaller gains. An agreement with the EU, India’s largest trading partner, would have a slightly negative overall impact on India’s economy.
• Dramatic swings in world agricultural prices—a common occurrence—could have much larger impacts on India if the country lowers its agricultural tariffs. A decrease of even 25 percent in the world price of rice, which has happened repeatedly, would negatively impact all but the top 10 percent of Indian households, with the poorest households losing the most.
• The EU, the United States, and China would each gain more from free trade agreements with India than would India itself, but in all cases, gains would be a modest and would represent a very small percentage of the affected economies. While China would gain more overall than India from a bilateral agreement, India would see a greater increase in exports than China.
• All of the proposed trade agreements would reduce India’s tariff revenue, which accounts for about 11 percent of the government’s total revenue. This would force the Indian government to either reduce spending or increase taxes at the expense of Indian households. An EU-India trade agreement would reduce revenue the most.
• The trade agreements would have a positive but very modest impact for India’s unemployed, currently estimated at 40.4 million. A Doha agreement, which has the most sizeable impact of the simulated agreements, would increase the demand for unskilled labor by 0.9 percent, about 4 million jobs. Job gains would be spread across a number of sectors, including transport, construction, apparel, textiles and a few agricultural commodities. Under free trade agreements with the EU and the United States, job creation would be concentrated in the apparel and textile sectors, with other manufacturing sectors actually shedding some workers.

While this report seems well-timed to “help” the Doha round on its way, an assessment of its findings would be a worthwhile exercise. It would be interesting to read other studies on the same issue.

A gender sensitive foreign trade policy for India

According to the Economic Times:

The government is considering sops for exporters who train women in skilled activities for their units. Some incentives could also be in store for women entrepreneurs engaged in foreign trade, commerce secretary G K Pillai has said.
Addressing a conference on gender sensitisation in trade policy organised by United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (Unctad) and the department of commerce, Mr Pillai said there has been no mention of gender sensitisation in the FTPs announced so far.
“This time, we are looking at specific gender issues in the FTP. Specific facilities to increase the capabilities of women engaged in the sector will be encouraged,” he said.
Speaking to the media on the sidelines of the event, Mr Pillai said certain incentives could be given to women engaged in export and import activities. Exporters helping women take on high-skill activities in their units could also be given sops, he said. The FTP is likely to be announced in the first week of April.

This might be a good example of how international ideas affect domestic trade policy. Gender sensitization in trade policy has been long championed in international discourse. And now it is starting to filter into India’s domestic trade regulation.

Mr Pillai also commented on how foreign buyers are affecting labour standards in India:

Mr Pillai pointed out that globalisation, in some ways, was bringing about positive changes in working conditions for women in India. He said foreign buyers laid down minimum standards of working condition, which units they sourced their goods from had to follow.
“The minimum standards prescribed are often higher than the domestic standards,” he said, adding that it led to a more favourable working environment for women.

Bringing American and Indian business together to discuss "Doha, India and the Issues"

This should be an interesting event:

 

DOHA, INDIA AND THE ISSUES:
An Indian Business View of the Doha Round Issues
with Responses from Key U.S. Sectors

A GBD COLLOQUIUM

Tuesday, February 26, 2008
9:00 – 10:30 A.M.
(Registration opens at 8:30 a.m.)
The St. Regis Hotel (Magnolia Room)
16th & K Streets,
Washington, D.C.

India, like the United States, is a country with big interests in each of the three sectors being negotiated in the Doha Round: it is a powerhouse in services, has 700 million people tied to agriculture, and is increasingly competitive in manufacturing.  India’s ability to make the Doha Round work for India will be important for India and for the global economy and quite possibly decisive for Doha Round.    And now, like every other WTO member, India must move quickly if the Round is to be completed this year.   The views of Indian business on the Round and Indian trade policy will be our focus on February 26….

Speakers

T.S. Vishwanath
Confederation of Indian Industry (CII)

Bob Vastine
Coalition of Service Industries

David Salmonsen
American Farm Bureau Federation

John Meakem
National Electrical Manufacturers Assoc. (NEMA)

Moderator

Susan Esserman
Steptoe & Johnson

 

Here’s more on what the event aims to achieve:

Indian Business Spokesman on the WTO and Trade: 9 A.M. Tomorrow, Feb. 26, at the St. Regis Hotel

    WASHINGTON, Feb. 25 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- CII's T.S. Vishwanath
will lead off the discussion at tomorrow's GBD colloquium on Doha, India,
and the Issues. Mr. Vishwanath, head of international trade policy for the
Confederation of Indian Industry, CII, will talk about the trade policy
objectives of Indian business. The program will also include comments from
three key U.S. sectors: services, agriculture and manufacturing. The Doha
Round, the global trade talks that began in Doha, Qatar, in November 2001,
is now at a critical juncture, and India's assessment of those negotiations
will be critical to the outcome. So too will the assessment of the United
States, and tomorrow's colloquium will include key private sector experts
from both countries.

 

 

Fifth ministerial meeting of the US – India trade policy forum in Chicago

The Economic Times reports:

 

WASHINGTON: India and the US have discussed key trade issues including a potential bilateral investment treaty, market access for items of interest to both and fostering private sector collaboration between professions.
Trade and investment ties were discussed by Indian commerce and industry minister Kamal Nath and US Trade Representative (USTR) Susan C Schwab February 19 at the fifth ministerial-level meeting of the US-India Trade Policy Forum (TPF) in Chicago.
Kamal Nath and Schwab also “discussed the Doha negotiations, agreeing that the US and India share a commitment to conclude a successful Doha Round in 2008,” a statement issued by the USTR and Indian embassy in Washington Friday said.
“The intensity of interaction within the different focus groups demonstrates the importance of this dialogue to both governments. Consequently, the TPF has been able to address a wide range of issues, at policy as well as operational levels, leading to a number of initiatives which have expanded and deepened ties,” it said.
“The US-India Trade Policy Forum offers an essential venue to move the dialogue forward on trade matters of importance to both countries,” said Schwab.
“The Trade Policy Forum has advanced discussions on a potential bilateral investment treaty and facilitated agreements to provide market access for items of interest to both sides,” she added.
Kamal Nath said: “We have been able to resolve a variety of issues and find mutually acceptable solutions through a dialogue under this forum.”
“This milestone by milestone approach should be maintained to ensure continued progress, including in our bilateral discussions on social security totalisation which were initiated in December 2007 and in our efforts to foster private sector collaboration between professions,” he said.
The US-India Private Sector Advisory Group (PSAG) to the TPF presented its vision statement on key policy areas on which the governments of India and the US could enhance their engagement and further bolster the US-India economic partnership. The PSAG held its first meeting in New York September 24, 2007.