
|

TRADE
POLICY REVIEW BODY: REVIEW OF MALAWI
TPRB'S EVALUATION Back
to topThe
review enables the TPRB to conduct a collective examination of the
full range of trade policies and practices of each WTO member
countries at regular periodic intervals to monitor significant trends
and developments which may have an impact on the global trading
system.
The
review is based on two reports which are prepared respectively by the
WTO Secretariat and the government under review and which cover all
aspects of the country's trade policies, including its domestic laws
and regulations, the institutional framework, bilateral, regional and
other preferential agreements, the wider economic needs and the
external environment. A record of the discussion and the Chairperson's
summing-up together with these two reports will be published in due
course at the complete trade policy review of Malawi and will be
available from the WTO Secretariat, Centre William Rappard, 154 rue de
Lausanne, 1211 Geneva 21.
Since
December 1989, the following reports have been completed: Argentina
(1992 and 1999), Australia (1989, 1994 and 1998), Austria (1992),
Bahrain (2000) Bangladesh (1992 and 2000), Benin (1997), Bolivia (1993
and 1999), Botswana (1998), Brazil (1992, 1996 and 2000), Brunei
Darussalam (2001), Burkina Faso (1998), Cameroon (1995 and 2001),
Canada (1990, 1992, 1994, 1996, 1998 and 2000), Chile (1991 and 1997),
Colombia (1990 and 1996), Costa Rica (1995 and 2001), Côte d’Ivoire
(1995), Cyprus (1997), the Czech Republic (1996 and 2001), the
Dominican Republic (1996), Egypt (1992 and 1999), El Salvador (1996),
the European Communities (1991, 1993, 1995, 1997 and 2000), Fiji
(1997), Finland (1992), Gabon (2001), Ghana (1992 and 2001), Guatemala
(2002), Guinea (1999), Hong Kong (1990, 1994 and 1998), Hungary (1991
and 1998), Iceland (1994 and 2000), India (1993 and 1998), Indonesia
(1991, 1994 and 1998), Israel (1994 and 1999), Jamaica (1998), Japan
(1990, 1992, 1995,1998 and 2000), Kenya (1993 and 2000), Korea, Rep.
of (1992, 1996 and 2000), Lesotho (1998), Macao (1994 and 2001),
Madagascar (2001), Malawi (2002), Malaysia (1993, 1997 and 2001), Mali
(1998), Mauritius (1995 and 2001), Mexico (1993 and 1997), Morocco
(1989 and 1996), Mozambique (2001), New Zealand (1990 and 1996),
Namibia (1998), Nicaragua (1999), Nigeria (1991 and 1998), Norway
(1991, 1996 and 2000), OECS (2001), Pakistan (1995 and 2002), Papua
New Guinea (1999), Paraguay (1997), Peru (1994 and 2000), the
Philippines (1993 and 1999), Poland (1993 and 2000), Romania (1992 and
1999), Senegal (1994), Singapore (1992, 1996 and 2000), Slovak
Republic (1995 and 2001), the Solomon Islands (1998), South Africa
(1993 and 1998), Sri Lanka (1995), Swaziland (1998), Sweden (1990 and
1994), Switzerland (1991, 1996 and 2000 (jointly with Liechtenstein)),
Tanzania (2000), Thailand (1991, 1995 and 1999), Togo (1999), Trinidad
and Tobago (1998), Tunisia (1994), Turkey (1994 and 1998), the United
States (1989, 1992, 1994, 1996, 1999 and 2001), Uganda (1995 and
2001), Uruguay (1992 and 1998), Venezuela (1996), Zambia (1996) and
Zimbabwe (1994).
TRADE
POLICY REVIEW BODY: REVIEW OF MALAWI
CONCLUDING
REMARKS
BY THE CHAIRPERSON Back
to top
This first
trade policy review of Malawi has provided the opportunity for an open
and very useful discussion of its trade-related policies at a critical
time for the economy. This discussion, and the fact that we all learned
a lot about Malawi, was greatly helped by the active and frank
involvement of Minister Kaleso and his delegation.
Members
welcomed Malawi's commitment to the multilateral trading system and
appreciated the substantial effort this requires from Malawi, a small
landlocked least developed country with no representation in Geneva.
They were encouraged by the Government's economic reforms, including
trade and investment liberalization efforts to foster increased
efficiency and private sector development. Members welcomed the
resumption of Malawi's privatization programme. Greater private sector
involvement in key infrastructural services combined with regulatory
arrangements to safeguard competition was seen as highly desirable.
Further efforts were needed to improve Malawi's institutional
framework and business environment, and to restore macroeconomic
stability, including fiscal balance.
Members
encouraged Malawi to further mainstream trade policy reforms into its
national development policy through the Poverty Reduction Strategy
which involved principal stakeholders. Referring to the increased
opportunities for providing technical assistance under the Doha
initiatives, such as the Development Agenda Global Trust Fund, and
within the Integrated Framework, Members supported the need to extend
trade-related technical assistance to Malawi, including in areas of
intellectual property protection and trade-remedy measures. Some
Members commented on the need for greater policy coherence among the
WTO and other multilateral institutions in providing this technical
assistance and trade-related policy advice. Members pointed out
Malawi's active participation in regional agreements, such as COMESA
and SADC, and in various bilateral arrangements. Noting that
cross-membership of these agreements was complicating Malawi's trade
regime, Members urged it to adopt a more harmonized approach when
negotiating such agreements in order to ensure consistency in related
obligations.
Members
appreciated Malawi's on-going efforts to refrain from using non-tariff
measures and its reliance on relatively low average tariffs as the
main trade instrument. They urged Malawi to continue with these
efforts, but also to further simplify its tariff structure, reduce
maximum rates, raise the coverage of its bindings on non-agricultural
items and to lower bound levels closer to applied rates. Removal of
widespread tariff concessions was also encouraged to reduce the scope
for providing “tailor made” protection to inefficient industries.
Members also sought clarification on Malawi's use of “guide
prices” in the light of its adoption of the customs valuation method
based on the transaction value, and on its plans to phase out
pre-shipment inspection by early 2003.
Noting
that export diversification was of considerable importance to the
health of Malawi's economy, particularly in agriculture and textiles,
Members expressed some concern about Malawi's dependence on tobacco,
which was subject to international price fluctuations and to the
adverse effects of the anti-smoking campaigns in major developed
markets. Members pointed out that Malawi's agricultural policies aimed
at food security and rural development. They questioned the impact of
communal land ownership on agricultural development and planned
reforms in the sector, mainly in land tenure. Members encouraged
Malawi to further liberalize key services, including
telecommunications, transport and tourism, and to improve its GATS
commitments. Such steps would improve Malawi's performance in other
sectors, mainly agriculture and manufacturing, and attract investment.
Additional
details were sought on a number of other issues, including:
-
external
debt and its constraint on economic development;
-
operations
of the one-stop shop Investment Promotion Agency;
-
experience
with preferential access to developed markets;
-
plans
to establish a Geneva mission to facilitate WTO participation;
-
trade
facilitation measures;
-
incentive
schemes and export processing zones;
-
technical
barriers to trade; and
-
government
procurement regime.
Members
appreciated the replies provided by the Malawi delegation and looked
forward to receiving additional material.
I
believe that Malawi's Trade Policy Review has successfully contributed
to a very much improved understanding by Members of its trade and
other economic policies. I welcome assurances expressed by Members to
provide greater technical assistance through bilateral and
multilateral initiatives, and I urge that we follow through on this,
particularly in the context of the Integrated Framework. Malawi needs
such support to mainstream its trade-related policy into its
development strategy, address its supply-side constraints and
diversify its economy. Greater market access by major trading partners
will also be necessary if Malawi is to meet its development potential
and fully integrate into the multilateral trading system.
|
|