
SEE
ALSO:
press
releases
WTO news
archives
Supachai
Panitchpakdi's speeches
|

But trade growth, which was significantly above the 1.5% increase in
total world output, was uneven and masked the sluggish trade performance
in many regions including Latin America and Western Europe.
Considerable uncertainty clouds trade growth prospects for 2003. Early
indications suggest that at less than 3%, growth in trade volume for
2003 will be little or no better than 2002. This is well below half the
average rate of trade growth achieved in the 1990s (6.7%). The downside
risks on predictions for 2003 are large, bearing in mind continued
sluggishness in the world economy, the conflict in Iraq, and the
possibility of the continuing spread of the Severe Acute Respiratory
Syndrome (SARS).
“These trade figures reflect the growing economic and political
uncertainty in the world today. This uncertainty is detrimental to
economic growth and development and can give rise to greater instability
across the globe. Governments must send a signal that they are prepared
to address this problem. One very important contribution to this effort
would be to accelerate work on the negotiations in the Doha Development
Agenda,” said Director-General Supachai Panitchpakdi.
Launched in November 2001 by ministers meeting in Qatar, the Doha
Development Agenda comprises a wide range of negotiations on topics
including agriculture, development issues, trade in services, industrial
tariffs, WTO rules and trade and environment. Progress in these talks
has been uneven and with the talks due to conclude by 1 January 2005,
Director-General Supachai has urged the 146 member governments to summon
the political courage that is required to bridge differences across the
negotiations.
The WTO’s assessment of the 2002 trade figures is based on the first
preliminary compilation of statistics for the past year. Measured in
value terms, merchandise exports rose by 4% to $6,240 billion nearly
offsetting the decline of the preceding year. Commercial services trade
expanded a little faster than merchandise trade reaching a new record
level of $1,540 billion.
The trade recovery occurred amidst the weakness of the global
economy, greatly reduced investment flows, major movements in exchange
rates, dented business confidence, increased restrictions on
international trade transactions to reduce risks from terrorism and
rising geopolitical tensions.
The rise in trade in commercial services took place despite the
lingering fear of terrorism and higher fuel prices which limited growth
in international travel and transportation services. But this was more
than made up for by trade in other services which continued to expand
rapidly.
The weakness of fixed investment expenditure contributed
significantly to the sluggish overall growth in the industrial
countries. Worldwide expenditures on electronic equipment, IT hardware
and semi-conductor plants continued to shrink.
The global economic recovery proved uneven, with significant differences
in growth performance across regions. The driving forces of the
pick up in global economic activity were the United States, the advanced
economies in East Asia, China and the transition economies. In contrast,
Western Europe and Japan experienced stagnation or a decline in domestic
demand. In Latin America, crises in Argentina and Venezuela contributed
to the severe slump.
Trade performance largely mirrored the pattern of economic growth.
Trade expansion was strong in Asia and the transition economies. North
America’s imports recovered in line with stronger domestic demand
although exports decreased in 2002. Trade remained stagnant in Western
Europe and Japan. And it contracted in Latin America as a result of
economic turmoil in a number of countries in the region.
Some details of developments in specific countries or groups of
countries:
- Developing
Asia’s merchandise trade grew by about 12.5% in volume terms, driving
the entire continent’s exports and imports to grow by double digits.
The region also saw diverging growth paths between Japan, still Asia’s
largest economy, and China and India, the two most populous nations in
the world. In value terms, China’s merchandise exports and imports
increased by more than 20% while India’s also grew at double-digit
rates. China has overtaken the UK to become the fifth largest trader
in the world. Japan’s merchandise export growth was only 3% while
imports contracted.
- Transition
economies’ trade continued to show strong growth with merchandise
trade expanding by about 10% lifted by strong domestic demand growth
and by rising foreign direct investment (FDI) inflows into the region.
- Imports into
the US grew by 3% driven by continuing consumer spending and an
increasingly expansionary fiscal stance. But exports declined by
nearly 4% partly reflecting reduced demand from some key trading
partners whose economies were either hardly growing, such as Western
Europe and Japan, or in outright contraction, as in Latin America.
Lack of price competitiveness might have also played a major role as
US exports decreased even to those regions whose imports grew
strongly.
- Western
Europe’s trade stagnated in volume terms with merchandise exports
increasing by just 0.6% and imports declining by 0.5%.
- Latin America
saw one of its worst years with the crises in Argentina, Venezuela and
difficulties in Brazil in the run-up to the national elections. Latin
America’s merchandise imports declined by over 5% in 2002 although
merchandise exports rose by about 2% with the decline in
intra-regional trade (especially intra-MERCOSUR trade) being balanced
by increased shipment to other regions.
- LDC exports
and imports rose last year although it does not change their overall
situation as marginal participants in world trade.
- Oil exporting
LDCs saw a strong increase in the dollar value of their shipments as
they increased their production and volume of trade. Exports of the
non-fuel commodity exporting countries continued to rise after marked
gains in 2001. However, exporters of manufactured goods experienced
stagnation.
Prices
of crude oil, gold and agricultural commodities rose in 2002 providing
an important lift to commodity exporting developing countries. However
prices of minerals and metals continued to fall. Prices of manufactured
goods recovered somewhat but were still around 10% below their level in
1995.
In the course of 2002, the real effective exchange rate of the US
dollar depreciated while the euro and the yen appreciated. However, the
realignments did not seem to have materially affected the US trade
deficit, nor current account surpluses being accumulated by the euro
zone countries, Japan and developing Asia.
International capital flows had risen throughout the 1990s and
peaked in 2000. Since then they have experienced a drastic contraction.
Both developed and developing regions have been affected by the
reduction in FDI flows. Noteworthy exceptions were FDI inflows to China
and to Central/Eastern Europe which continued to increase very strongly.
These are the details:
Trade developments in 2002
The global economic situation in 2002
Chart1
Expansion of trade and output slows in fourth quarter 2002
(Percentage change on a quarter to quarter basis)

The global economic recovery was uneven and lost steam in the second
half of 2002 limiting full-year growth of world output to only 1.5%. The
driving forces of the pick up in global economic activity were the
strength of the domestic demand recovery in the United States and the
advanced economies in East Asia. The expansion of world GDP was also
sustained by both China and the transition economies which continued to
record much faster economic growth than the world economy. In sharp
contrast, Japan and Western Europe continued to experience stagnant or
declining domestic demand growth. And Latin America’s economy plunged
into a recession largely brought about by the crises in Argentina and
Venezuela. The per capita income in the region declined for the second
consecutive year.
In the industrial countries, the main expenditure categories of GDP
differed markedly in behaviour during the cyclical slowdown and
recovery. The run down in inventories and their replenishment in 2002
was the most outstanding factor in last year’s cyclical recovery.
Inventory changes in the OECD reduced GDP growth by 0.8% in 2001 but
added 0.2% to GDP growth in 2002. In the US, public consumption expanded
by 3% and was also the fastest growing component of demand in the
industrial countries. Private consumption in the OECD area continued to
rise by 2% in 2002 as the acceleration of consumer demand in the US was
balanced by the slowdown in both Japan and Western Europe. A major
element in the weakness of the recovery was the continuing contraction
of non-residential investment which was even more pronounced last year
than in 2001.
The threat of terrorism has led many governments and companies to take
various measures to enhance security and to limit the risks of future
terrorist attacks. Some of these measures have resulted in restrictions
on the movement of persons and goods. The cost not only involves the
direct expenditures for these security measures which governments and
companies must put in place but the indirect impact on trade in the form
of more cumbersome procedures and delays. The increase in geopolitical
risks and tensions has also taken its toll on international trade
through the recent run-up in oil prices.
The sluggishness of economic activity and the widespread excess capacity
prevailing in the manufacturing sector contributed to a further decline
in inflation rates (1). Inflation rates decreased slightly in Western
Europe, North America and Asia. While consumer prices in the transition
countries receded markedly, from what were sometimes double-digit rates,
they increased in South and Central America under the impact of currency
devaluations. As global economic growth lagged behind both productivity
and labour force growth, unemployment and underemployment
worsened in most regions. Recorded unemployment rates rose in North
America, Western Europe and Japan. In the latter country, the
unemployment rate reached an historic record level of 5.5%, more than
twice the level reported in the early 1990s. In Latin America, the steep
decline in output has led to a sharply worsened employment situation.
According to CEPAL the average urban unemployment rate in the region
increased to 9.1% , the highest rate observed in the 1990s. (2)
The marked differences in domestic demand growth between the United
States, developing Asia and the transition economies on the one hand and
Japan, Western Europe and Latin America on the other hand contributed to
major shifts in the trade and current account balances. Japan and
Western Europe recorded an expansion of their net exports. Consequently
(the trade and) current account surpluses of Japan and the EU widened
with increases equivalent to 1% and 0.7% of GDP respectively. Under the
impact of sharply lower capital inflows, Latin America had to cut its
imports which led to a trade surplus and reduced the region’s current
account deficit. The United States’ current account deficit widened to
more than $500 billion or 5% of GDP, which was an historic peak in
absolute and relative terms.
International capital flows had risen throughout the 1990s and
peaked in 2000. Since then they have experienced a drastic contraction.
This can be illustrated by the pronounced rise and fall in foreign
direct investment (FDI). Total FDI flows surged from about $200 billion
in the early 1990s to almost $1.2 trillion in 2000. In 2001, the value
of these flows collapsed by about 50%, and in 2002, by another 25%
falling back to about $500 billion, a level first reached five years
ago. Both developed and developing regions have been affected by the
reduction in FDI flows. Only FDI inflows to China and to Central/Eastern
Europe continued to increase.
In the course of 2002, the real effective exchange rate of the US
dollar depreciated while those of the euro and yen appreciated. In the
medium term, the depreciation of the US dollar, after its nearly 20%
rise between 1995 and 2001, could contribute to arresting the steady
increase in the US trade deficit. One aspect of the dollar decline
vis-à-vis the currency of major traders is the “inflationary” impact on
world trade prices measured in dollar terms. Although intra-EU trade
stagnated in 2002 in euro terms, it recorded an increase of nearly 5%
measured in dollar terms. The overall impact of exchange rate
developments on trade values in 2002 contrasts with the tendency
prevailing between 1995 and 2001 when the dollar’s appreciation had the
impact of “deflating” world trade prices measured in dollar terms.
Consequently, for the first time since 1995, the dollar prices of
internationally traded agricultural and manufactured goods showed an
annual increase. Oil prices recovered from their trough in early 2002
with annual average prices for 2002 marginally exceeding those of the
preceding year. Prices for metals continued to decline, particularly for
aluminium, the most heavily traded metal. The recovery in food prices
was the net outcome of higher prices for all types of cereals, soybeans
and vegetable oils, which outweighed the price reductions in meat,
seafood, sugar and tropical fruits. Prices for cereals, in particular
wheat, rose as droughts in four of the five traditional exporting
regions caused a decline in production for the second year in a row.
Trade recovery exceeds output recovery
The pick up in global economic activity went together with a rebound of
international trade flows. Based on preliminary estimates, world
merchandise exports rose in real terms by 2.5% in 2002 after the
contraction in the preceding year. Although global trade recovered
faster than output, the expansion was less than half the average rate
recorded in the 1990s. The annual average growth rates conceal the steep
decrease of global trade in the course of 2001 and its rapid recovery
between the last quarter of 2001 and the third quarter of 2002. In the
fourth quarter of 2002, there was a notable flattening of trade growth
for both the United States and Western Europe.
A major element in the more subdued expansion of trade in the last
quarter of 2002 was the continued sluggishness of investment in the
major developed markets and in Latin America. The continued contraction
of new investment in machinery and equipment in 2002 can be linked to
low capacity utilization rates in the manufacturing sector, and in
particular, in information technology and telecommunication equipment.
Worldwide expenditures on electronic equipment, IT hardware and
semi-conductor plants continued to shrink (3). The repercussions of the
decline in investment expenditure on trade flows can be illustrated by
the continuing decline in the volume of US imports of capital goods in
2002, while US imports of all other products recovered by 6%. (4)
Chart 2
Trade recovers more strongly than output in 2002
(Annual percentage change)

Largely due to sluggish investment expenditures, trade expansion
(average of exports plus imports) in both North America and the Western
Europe lagged behind their GDP growth. In Asia and the transition
economies, however, trade volume expanded at least two times faster than
output, which was in each case well above the global average. The
strength of these regions’ trade growth, which was around 10% in 2002,
stemmed largely from the vigorous expansion of domestic or
intra-regional demand. The performance of these two regions explains why
global trade expanded faster than output in 2002. In contrast, Latin
America’s output decline caused a contraction of its imports in the
order of 6% while exports continued to grow despite shrinking
intra-regional trade because of the expansion of trade with countries
outside the region. On the whole, both trade and output declined in
Latin America, with trade decreasing more than output.
The largest single element in the global trade recovery of last year was
North American, and in particular, US import growth. US merchandise
imports account for one fifth of world trade but the increase in 2002
was equivalent to one half of the global trade expansion. Relatively
buoyant private and public consumption growth continued to stoke US
import demand. Developing Asia and the transition economies, which were
the regions with the highest GDP growth, also contributed strongly to
the growth in imports. Developing Asia’s imports rebounded by 12.5%
following a contraction in the preceding year. Two factors can be
singled out for this dramatic reversal. First, the surge of FDI inflows
in the aftermath of China’s accession to the WTO resulted in a jump in
China’s real imports by nearly a quarter. And second was the recovery of
imports in the developing East Asian IT traders of nearly 9% (after a
decline of 8.5% in the preceding year). As regards the transition
economies, most of the strength was contributed by Russian demand
although import strength was broad-based with more than half of all
transition economies experiencing double-digit growth.
The recovery of global trade was retarded by the stagnation of Western
Europe’s imports and a contraction of Latin America’s imports. Among the
Western European countries, imports shrank or stagnated in France,
Germany, Spain and Switzerland. Some smaller Western European economies,
such as Belgium, Denmark, Ireland and Finland, however saw relatively
buoyant import expansion. A reduction of net-capital inflows into Latin
America forced the region to cut back its current account deficit. This
was achieved primarily by a fall in imports in the order of 5% and a
rise in extra-regional exports.
Chart 3
Large variations in trade volume growth by region in 2002
(Annual percentage change)

Price and exchange rate changes help raise global trade values
The recovery in the volume of trade combined with a moderate increase in
prices of internationally traded goods resulted in a rise in the value
of world trade. Merchandise and commercial services exports rose by 4%
and 5% respectively in 2002. However, these rates of nominal trade
expansion remained below the average recorded in the 1990s. For
merchandise trade, the expansion in 2002 offset the decrease reported in
the preceding year while commercial services trade reached a new peak
level. For world merchandise exports, available data point to an above
average rise in the exports of manufactured goods and a below average
increase for both mining and agricultural products. Among the categories
of commercial services, exports in the largest category, other
commercial services, expanded significantly faster than those of travel
and transportation services.
Table 1
World exports of merchandise and commercial services, 1990-2002
(Billion dollars and percentage)
| |
Value |
%
|
| |
2002 |
1990–2000 |
2001 |
2002 |
|
Merchandise |
6 240 |
6 |
–4 |
4 |
|
Commercial services |
1 540 |
7 |
–1 |
5 |
As inflation and exchange rates evolved quite differently by region,
developments in nominal merchandise trade differ from those in volume
terms. This is most evident in the case of Western Europe whose exports
in volume terms stagnated at 0.6% while its exports in value terms
increased by 5.5%. The difference can be attributed almost entirely to
the 5% depreciation of the dollar against the euro and other Western
European currencies. Asia and the transition economies had the strongest
export value growth of all regions followed by Western Europe. North
America reported the largest export contraction of regions while imports
recovered by 1.7%. The double-digit import growth of the transition
economies contrasts with the contraction in Latin American imports of
6.7%, the worst of all regions. Latin America’s exports rose moderately
despite a steep contraction of its intra-regional trade, which was
balanced by a rise of shipments to other areas. Africa’s exports and
imports achieved small positive gains. Middle East exports are estimated
to have decreased further in 2002 although at a smaller rate than in
2001. As the region’s imports continued to grow, the large trade surplus
of the Middle East eroded somewhat.
Trade developments by region
A notable feature of North America’s trade in 2002 was the poor
performance of its merchandise exports which decreased by 4%. A major
reason for this was the reduced demand from some of its key trading
partners because their economies were either hardly growing, such as
Western Europe and Japan, or in outright contraction, as in Latin
America. Lack of price competitiveness might have also played a major
role as US exports decreased even to those regions whose imports grew
strongly. US exports lost market share not only in developing Asia, the
transition economies, Western Europe and NAFTA but also in the
developing economies of Latin America, the Middle East and Africa.
However, imports continued to grow driven by continuing consumer
spending and an increasingly expansionary fiscal stance. Consumer
spending, particularly on durables, remained healthy because of low
inflation, tax relief and strength in the US housing market, which
partly offset stock market losses. North America’s export and import
prices decreased slightly in 2002 and contributed to sluggish growth in
merchandise trade in value terms. On the other hand, commercial services
trade recorded a better performance as exports rose by 3% and imports by
11% (5). Once again, there were big differences in the performance of the
three major services sectors. While travel and transportation services
shrank, that of other services saw double-digit import and export
growth.
Intra-North American trade declined marginally while exports to
crisis-ridden South America and stagnating Western European economies
decreased at double-digit rates. Imports from these regions, however,
increased slightly in 2002. Imports from Asia rose largely due to higher
shipments from China. United States imports from China increased by 22%
but those from Japan and the NICs(4) decreased. The steep decline of US
exports and imports from Japan, Hong Kong, China and Singapore point to
structural shifts in the US trade with Asian countries. For the first
time, China replaced Japan as the principal Asian supplier of
merchandise to the United States. Although US exports to China also rose
rapidly, the bilateral trade deficit widened sharply and reached almost
$103 billion, the largest with any country.
For the Latin American region, 2002 turned out to be one of the
most difficult years since the debt crisis of the 1980s. Private net
capital inflows to the region, which exceeded $60 billion in 1999 and
2000, had financed large current account deficits and supported economic
activity, investment and imports. But given the loss in confidence by
foreign investors in the sustainability of the economic policies of some
major countries in the region, there was a curtailment of net capital
inflows into the region. The reductions in inflows were first
compensated by a reduction in foreign exchange reserves and eventually
by devaluations ranging between 50% and 70% in the most affected
countries. (Early in January 2002, Argentina decided to abandon the
ten-year old parity link between the Argentinian peso and the US dollar
and devalued the peso by 30%. This decision triggered of a series of
further devaluations in the region.) Given that the level of many
commodity prices remained low in 2002, this limited the export earnings
of many countries in the region while the huge contraction in economic
activity significantly dampened imports.
The financial crisis in Argentina, the economic repercussions on its
MERCOSUR neighbours, and the civil unrest in Venezuela were the major
factors contributing to the contraction of Latin America’s merchandise
imports by nearly 7% in 2002. Argentina experienced a massive cut in
imports (55%), which exceeded even the worst import contractions during
the Asian financial crisis. The reduction in Latin America’s imports was
the largest of any of the seven major regions covered here and contrasts
with its trade performance in the 1990s when Latin America’s imports and
exports expanded much faster than the global average. Merchandise
exports rose slightly as falling intra-regional trade was offset by
rising exports to other regions. For the first time since 1991, Latin
America’s merchandise trade balance (as measured f.o.b.-f.o.b.) turned
positive again. Commercial services imports are estimated to have
decreased by more than 10% in 2002. In contrast to merchandise exports,
the region’s commercial services exports experienced a contraction of
about 6%.
Chart 4
Diverging developments in MERCOSUR merchandise trade in 2002
(Billion dollars)

MERCOSUR countries increased their overall exports by 1% as the dramatic
contraction of intra-regional trade by one third was offset by an
increase in shipments to all other destinations by 5%. Brazil, the
country least dependent on intra-MERCOSUR trade, increased its total
merchandise exports by 4%. Back in 2000, intra-MERCOSUR trade had
accounted for about one fifth of both total exports and imports. But
given the huge economic difficulties experienced by the region in the
last few years, these shares have fallen quite precipitously. The intra-MERCOSUR
share has now been cut almost by half (from 20% to 11%) in the case of
exports.
Latin America’s merchandise exports increased slightly as the decline in
intra-regional trade was balanced by increased shipment to other
regions. The recovery of commodity prices in the course of the year and
the upturn in the US economy contributed to this rise. While most Latin
American countries saw a reduction or stagnation in their imports, those
of Costa Rica increased by 9%. Mexico benefited from the recovery of the
US market while for Costa Rica, the recovery in semi-conductor shipments
boosted both imports and exports. Despite the continuation of low prices
for many primary commodities, exports of many Central American and
Caribbean countries recovered strongly.
Economic activity in Western Europe remained subdued as Germany,
the largest economy in the region, experienced declining domestic demand
and several other countries faced sluggish domestic demand. In the
euro-zone, public consumption was the most dynamic expenditure category
while private consumption slowed down and fixed investment of the
enterprise sector fell nearly 3%.
Given the depreciation by about 5% of the US dollar vis-à-vis the euro,
the pound and various other European currencies, Western European trade
performance, measured in dollar terms, concealed the stagnation in
volume terms. Western Europe’s merchandise exports in dollar terms
increased by 5.5% while the expansion of imports was limited to 3.5%. EU
imports from third countries languished while intra-regional trade rose
by 4.5%. The most dynamic part of EU trade was exports to third
countries which expanded by about 6%. Among the other Western European
countries, Switzerland’s merchandise exports rose by 7% largely due to
the appreciation of the Swiss franc. The stagnation of the Swiss economy
left its imports unchanged from the preceding year. Turkey’s imports
recovered strongly in 2002 from their contraction in the preceding year
while exports continued to expand at double-digit rates.
Commercial services exports of Western Europe, which account for nearly
one half of world services trade, increased by nearly 8%, somewhat
faster than imports, with exchange rate changes accounting for most of
this increase in dollar terms. Exports of transportation services
experienced the weakest growth while exports of other commercial
services had the most dynamic performance in 2002.
More than a decade after the fall of the Berlin Wall and the dissolution
of the Soviet Union, the transition economies are still
struggling with their transformation from planned to market-oriented
economies. One of the outstanding features of the transition process has
been the massive re-direction of trade flows from within the region to
trade with countries outside the region, and in particular, to Western
Europe. This shift in structure can be observed not only in the trade of
Central/Eastern Europe or the Baltic States but also in the Commonwealth
of Independent States (CIS) countries. Despite the relatively strong
economic growth in the region, the share of intra-regional trade in CIS
merchandise exports and imports declined to one third and one fifth
respectively.
Merchandise trade of transition economies was sustained by strong
domestic demand growth, above all in private consumption, and by rising
FDI inflows into Central/Eastern Europe. The region’s merchandise and
commercial services imports rose at double-digit rates. Export growth
was somewhat less dynamic than imports but it was still two times faster
than the growth in world merchandise and commercial services trade.
Merchandise exports of the transition economies expanded by 8%, reaching
a new record level of $310 billion in 2002. The Russian Federation, the
leading trader in the region, recorded merchandise export gains of 3.5%
while 14 other transition economies recorded import growth in excess of
10%. Preliminary data suggest that the transition economies’ commercial
services exports and imports rose by about 8% and 12% respectively in
2002.
The preliminary data available on Africa’s output and trade in
2002 do not indicate a reversal of past trends with respect to incomes
or participation in world trade. Average per-capita income levels
changed little and Africa’s trade growth lagged behind the global trade
expansion. Although various debt indicators improved and non-oil
commodity prices recovered somewhat from their depressed levels in 2001,
a broad-based expansion of output and trade has not yet occurred.
In 2002, Africa’s merchandise and commercial services trade lagged
behind the global trade expansion (6). Merchandise exports and imports
recorded only marginal gains. The African oil-exporters saw a further
decline in their exports (-3%) and a fall in their imports in the order
of 5 to 10%. South African exports and imports recovered by 2% to 3%
from the preceding year’s decline. Exports of the other non-oil
exporting African countries were probably much stronger and expanded by
about 6%. A strong rebound in exports in 2002 from the preceding year’s
decline in a number of countries (including Morocco, Egypt, Côte
d’Ivoire and Ghana) accounted for most of this strength in the export
growth of non-oil exporters in Africa. However, it is estimated that
only six out of 53 African countries achieved a sustained expansion of
their exports over the 1999-2002 period (7). Africa’s overall merchandise
import growth was held back by the import contraction in Nigeria and
Egypt, the third and second largest merchandise importers in Africa in
2001. In at least 15 other African countries however, there was
double-digit import growth.
Table 2
Growth in the value of merchandise trade by region, 1990-2002
(Billion dollars and percentage)
| |
Exports |
Imports |
| |
Value |
Annual percentage change |
Value |
Annual percentage change |
| |
2002 |
1990–2000 |
2001 |
2002 |
2002 |
1990–2000 |
2001 |
2002 |
|
World |
6 240 |
6 |
–4 |
4 |
6 501 |
6 |
–4 |
3 |
| |
|
North America |
946 |
7 |
–7 |
–4 |
1 431 |
9 |
–6 |
2 |
|
United States |
694 |
7 |
–7 |
–5 |
1 202 |
9 |
–6 |
2 |
| |
|
Latin America |
351 |
9 |
-3 |
1 |
355 |
12 |
-2 |
-7 |
|
Mexico |
161 |
15 |
-5 |
1 |
176 |
15 |
-4 |
0 |
|
MERCOSUR |
88 |
6 |
4 |
1 |
62 |
12 |
-6 |
-26 |
|
Other Latin
America |
102 |
6 |
-7 |
0 |
116 |
7 |
3 |
-3 |
| |
|
Western Europe |
2 648 |
4 |
0 |
5 |
2 644 |
4 |
-2 |
4 |
|
European Union (15) |
2 441 |
4 |
0 |
5 |
2 438 |
4 |
-2 |
3 |
|
Excl. intra-EU trade |
939 |
5 |
1 |
6 |
931 |
5 |
-4 |
1 |
|
Intra-EU trade |
1 502 |
4 |
-1 |
5 |
1 507 |
4 |
-1 |
5 |
| |
|
Transition economies |
309 |
10 |
5 |
8 |
297 |
8 |
11 |
10 |
|
Central/Eastern
Europe |
145 |
10 |
12 |
12 |
176 |
12 |
9 |
10 |
|
Russian Federation |
107 |
- |
-2 |
4 |
60 |
- |
20 |
12 |
|
|
|
Africa |
139 |
3 |
-6 |
1 |
133 |
3 |
2 |
1 |
|
|
|
Middle East |
236 |
6 |
-7 |
-2 |
183 |
5 |
4 |
2 |
|
|
|
Asia |
1 610 |
8 |
-9 |
8 |
1 457 |
8 |
-7 |
6 |
|
Japan |
416 |
5 |
-16 |
3 |
336 |
5 |
-8 |
-4 |
|
Developing Asia |
1 114 |
11 |
-7 |
10 |
1 033 |
9 |
-7 |
9 |
|
China |
326 |
15 |
7 |
22 |
295 |
16 |
8 |
21 |
|
IT traders (6) a |
618 |
10 |
-13 |
7 |
561 |
9 |
-13 |
6 |
|
|
|
Memorandum
item: |
1 841 |
9 |
-7 |
6 |
1 704 |
9 |
-4 |
4 |
|
Developing economies |
1 841 |
9 |
-7 |
6 |
1 704 |
9 |
-4 |
4 |
|
LDCs |
38 |
7 |
1 |
4 |
45 |
5 |
4 |
3 |
a Chinese Taipei, the Rep. of
Korea, Malaysia, Philippines, Singapore and Thailand.
In 2002, the Middle East’s trade and output growth was curbed by
a fall in the region’s oil production and growing political tensions. As
fuels account for more than three quarters of the region’s merchandise
exports, a decline in oil output has immediate repercussions on export
revenues. One notable feature of Middle East trade in recent years is
the increased orientation of its exports to Asia, to which more than one
half of the region’s fuels exports are shipped.
Merchandise and commercial services trade of the Middle East lagged
behind world trade growth in 2002. Merchandise exports of the region are
estimated to have decreased only slightly despite lower exports from
various large oil exporters in the region. This is due to a number of
smaller traders who reported double-digit export growth. Given the
rising tensions in the region, earnings from tourism suffered, leading
to an overall decline in the commercial exports of the region estimated
at about 4%. In Israel both exports and imports continued to be at
depressed levels.
In 2002, trade developments in Asia were shaped by the diverging
growth paths between Japan, still Asia’s largest economy, and China and
India, the two most populous nations in the world. While Japanese
domestic demand stagnated, China and India continued to grow rapidly.
ASEAN countries and other East Asian economies also experienced stronger
economic growth in 2002 compared to the preceding year, but for most of
them, the expansion was less than the rates of growth achieved in the
early nineties.
Table 3
Growth in the value of commercial services trade by region, 1990-2002
(Billion dollars and percentage)
|
|
Exports |
Imports |
|
|
Value |
Annual percentage change |
Value |
Annual percentage change |
|
|
2002 |
1990–2000 |
2001 |
2002 |
2002 |
1990–2000 |
2001 |
2002 |
|
World |
1538 |
7 |
–1 |
5 |
1522 |
6 |
–1 |
5 |
|
|
|
North America |
304 |
7 |
–4 |
3 |
260 |
7 |
–5 |
11 |
|
United States |
268 |
7 |
–4 |
3 |
218 |
8 |
–5 |
13 |
|
|
|
Latin America |
55 |
7 |
–2 |
–6 |
63 |
7 |
0 |
–12 |
|
Mexico |
13 |
7 |
–7 |
0 |
16 |
5 |
–1 |
–1 |
|
MERCOSUR |
13 |
8 |
–5 |
–13 |
19 |
10 |
–3 |
–26 |
|
Other Latin America |
30 |
7 |
1 |
–5 |
28 |
7 |
3 |
–6 |
| |
|
Western Europe |
744 |
5 |
1 |
7 |
695 |
5 |
2 |
6 |
|
European Union (15) |
673 |
5 |
2 |
8 |
651 |
6 |
3 |
6 |
|
|
|
Transition economies |
58 |
… |
7 |
8 |
63 |
… |
11 |
12 |
|
Central/Eastern Europe |
33 |
… |
6 |
3 |
29 |
… |
7 |
12 |
|
Russian Federation |
| |