
|

TRADE
POLICY REVIEW BODY: REVIEW OF BARBADOS
TPRB'S EVALUATION back
to topTrade
boosts Barbados' standard of living
The
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 as the complete trade policy review of Barbados 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), Barbados (2002), 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,
1998 and 2002), 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, 1997 and 2002), 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), Slovenia (2002), 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 BARBADOS
CONCLUDING
REMARKS
BY THE CHAIRPERSON back
to top
In this, our
first Review of Barbados, we have gained what I believe to be a very
constructive insight into Barbados' trade policies and practices. Our
very much improved understanding of Barbados is due in no small measure
to the whole hearted cooperation and frankness of the Barbados
delegation, led superbly by the Deputy Prime Minister, and by the active
involvement of Members. Barbados has brought to our attention the
special characteristics of countries with small sizes and populations,
and hence limited diversification capacity, and high infrastructure and
social costs. These factors can result in considerable vulnerability to
external shocks, as witnessed by the depth of past recessions
experienced by Barbados. Members noted that, despite such challenges,
Barbados has achieved high standards of living. They attributed this in
good part to the country's remarkable social and institutional stability
and its intensive participation in international trade despite its
peculiar economic circumstances.
Despite
the small size of the Barbadian bureaucracy and the consequent strain
on trade policy and negotiating resources, Members appreciated
Barbados' active and productive engagement in the WTO, as well as in
regional trade liberalization initiatives. Some were clear that
Barbados was an example that the WTO can be a true instrument of
development if the Member involved knows how to approach and use it.
Members expressed support for additional technical assistance,
especially for capacity building, in implementing WTO commitments. It
is my view that Barbados has been successful in balancing difficult
and often competing interests and objectives.
The
Government of Barbados has made clear that its future economic
prosperity rests upon a successful integration into the world economy,
but that this success was conditional on specific measures designed to
avoid marginalization of small countries. Several Members were
understanding of the request by Barbados for special consideration,
anchored in the principle of special and differential treatment
granted in the WTO to developing countries.
We
have all recognized the concrete steps made by Barbados to reform its
economy and further liberalize its trade regime during the 1990s,
particularly through tariff reductions in the framework of CARICOM.
Concerns were expressed, however, with respect to the recent increase
in tariffs on certain food and other manufactured products, and the
resurgence of non-automatic import licensing on sensitive agri-food
imports. Members also noted that, although reduced, tariffs remained
relatively high at over 16%, with several peaks at or above 60%. Such
high tariffs and taxes may not complement efforts to stimulate growth
in services, the most important sector of the economy. The adoption of
a Value-Added Tax was welcome as an alternative revenue source to
tariffs. Barbados was urged to lower tariff bindings to rates closer
to the currently applied rates, and thus improve the predictability of
its import regime.
The
announced liberalization of the telecommunications services market was
welcome, and Members noted the generally liberal market access and
national treatment conditions in most of Barbados' services
industries. Several Members encouraged Barbados to make further
commitments under the GATS, as this would better reflect their
current, relatively liberal practices.
Specific
questions were also asked on:
-
WTO-consistency
of anti-dumping legislation;
-
use
of quantitative restrictions on sensitive agricultural products;
-
prospects
for customs modernization and trade facilitation;
-
assistance
and promotion activities and their budgetary cost;
-
government
procurement procedures;
-
new
legislation on the protection of IPRs; and
-
market
access conditions and incentives in specific service sectors.
We
appreciate the oral and written responses and explanations provided by
the Barbados delegation, and look forward to receiving answers on
outstanding questions.
In
conclusion, it is my sense that this Review has amply fulfilled its
main objective of understanding Barbados' trade regime in the
framework of its development needs and objectives as well as of the
external environment. Barbados has once again reaffirmed its full
commitment to the multilateral trading system, and the presence of Her
Excellency the Deputy Prime Minister is a strong testimony to this.
But we have also been made aware of the problems and difficulties
hindering the fuller participation of Barbados in the system. In this
respect, I am convinced that small and open economies like Barbados
can only benefit from predictable, transparent and fair multilateral
trade rules, and I congratulate Barbados for their performance and for
a successful Trade Policy Review.
|
|