Exploring intra-commonwealth goods and services trade

A background paper for the Commonwealth Secretariat by Anirudh Shingal and Mohammad Razzaque: Existing work examining the trade effect of commonwealth membership does not account for sample selection, unobserved heterogeneity and multilateral resistance in estimation, leading to biased estimates. Our analyses improve on all these fronts. Unlike earlier work, we also consider services trade and assemble a much larger sample of trading partners (242 x 242, over 1995-2010). Commonwealth membership is found to increase goods exports by 18.5-33.2% and services exports by 42.8% in our results, ceteris paribus and on average. Our analyses on the determinants of intra-commonwealth trade suggest the positive role of common language (only for goods trade) and colonial relationships as well as the negative impact of geography, thereby confirming that commonwealth member states are not natural trading partners for each other. Finally, being one of Australia, Canada or the UK is associated with 98.2% greater merchandise trade than the commonwealth average; however, a similar effect is not observed for services trade.

Tomorrow’s Silk Road: Assessing an EU-China Free Trade Agreement

This book provides an independent and in-depth contribution on the status of bilateral economic exchanges and persistent trade barriers between the European Union and China. A second objective is to encourage a frank and open dialogue, based on a scientific evaluation and without prejudice, of the possibility of a preferential trade agreement between the two sides. The study, commissioned by the Foreign Trade Association, was carried out by CEPS, in cooperation with the World Trade Institute (WTI) at the University of Bern. Jacques Pelkmans, CEPS Senior Research Fellow, served as overall study leader and Joseph Francois, Managing Director and Professor of Economics at the World Trade Institute, led the WTI team.

Strengthening the Migration-Development Nexus through Improved Policy and Institutional Coherence

The complexity of migration issues is clearly reflected by states diverging national migration policy interests that exists within one state. In line with the Swiss Report on International Cooperation on Migration of the Swiss Federal Council , this complexity requires close coordination and cooperation between the governmental institutions and all offices. Only through a close and coherent cooperation between all governmental actors involved in migration issues the migration-development nexus can be strength. The present paper will suggest how intergovernmental cooperation can lead to better policy coherence in migration by interlinking all actors involved.

Swiss Migration Partnerships

Workshop "Fostering the nexus of migration, human rights, trade and investment for development" Introductory note on Swiss Migrations Partnerships and the possibilities for fostering the nexus of migration, human rights, trade and investment for more development This presentation was held during a workshop "Fostering the nexus of migration, human rights, trade and investment for development".

Reflections on the Nature of Preferentialism in Services Trade

The Graduate Institute organized an academic workshop and roundtable on the occasion of EFTA's 50th Anniversary in Geneva under the chairmanship of H.E. Doris Leuthard, President of the Swiss Confederation. Pierre Sauve, Deputy Managing Director and Director of Studies, WTI and Co-leader, NCCR-Trade work programme on preferentialism and Anirudh Shingal, Senior Research Fellow, WTI and Co-leader, NCCR-Trade work programme on impact assessment of trade, co-authored a paper on the nature of preferentialism in services trade, which Anirudh presented at the workshop. The event was extremely well-attended by high profile dignitaries and academics including President Leuthard; Director General of the WTO, Pascal Lamy; trade ministers of Brazil and Finland; Jan Kubis, Executive Secretary of the UNECE and several current and former ambassadors. The academic workshop, moderated by Theresa Carpenter (Graduate Institute, Geneva), began in the morning with Prof. Victor Norman's (Norwegian School of Economics & Business Administration) presentation on the future of EFTA. Other presentations included those by Prof. Peter Egger (ETH Zurich) on the structural estimation of gravity models with market entry dynamics and by Prof. Richard Baldwin (Graduate Institute, Geneva) on 21st century regionalism. The high-profile Panel in the afternoon, moderated by Prof. Richard Baldwin, was led by President Leuthard who spoke on free trade agreements and the multilateral trading system in 2020. The keynote address at the Panel was delivered by Prof. Jagdish Bhagwati (Coulmbia University), who spoke on strengthening defences against protectionism and liberalizing trade.

The role of the G20 in WTO governance

Report by Professor Sungjoon Cho, Associate Professor of Law, Chicago-Kent College of Law (Chair), and Charlotte Sieber-Gasser, Doctoral Research Fellow, World Trade Institute, University of Bern, Session 27, WTO Public Forum 2010: The Forces Shapping World Trade, pp.29-33. In the course of the financial crisis, the global geography of power has shifted from G8 to G20. The latter, although representing roughly two thirds of global trade, consists of relatively a small number of global players and is consequently excluding many others from decision-making at the international stage. Nevertheless, the G20 has been successful in its reaction to the financial crisis and became therewith an important new player within the international community. When highlighting how the G20 might interfere with the WTO, the panel voiced concerns over the political legitimacy of the G20, given the limited number of members and the global impact of its decisions. It agreed on the impression that although the G20 intends to extend its debates from the financial sector to world economy in general, it has so far little achieved in this direction, particularly when it comes to moving the Doha agenda forward. It remains, thus, open how the G20 will evolve in the coming few years, and what mandates it will shed or adopt. So far, the G20 has complemented the WTO and international financial institutions in handling the financial crisis. Yet, even if there is little evidence pointing towards a less cooperative role in the future, the desirability of a G20 commitment in WTO trade negotiations has yet to be debated. The panel concluded by providing ideas on how the potential of the G20 might be used to serve global interests even better in the future. In their concluding remarks, the panellists agreed that it remains to be seen whether or not the G20 will further broaden its agenda. Given the ebbing away of the financial crisis there is even the question whether the G20 will remain an important international forum for financial collaboration, or whether it has already served its cause and will eventually disappear from the international stage. The Chair concluded the well attended and lively panel with voicing the hope that the two international bodies – the G20 and the WTO – will work in a positive way together in the future and face the challenges and opportunities in their collaboration to the benefit of everyone.