Oxfam's
new report on trade, globalisation, and the fight
against poverty, Rigged Rules and Double Standards,
has provoked a debate with groups and individuals
campaigning to make globalisation work for the poor.
A summary of the report and links to those who have
joined the debate.
World trade is the key to addressing mass poverty
and the widening, already gaping, inequalities between
the rich and the poor, says Oxfam, the UK-based charity
which has launched a campaign to mobilise opinion
against the current rules that govern trade.
Well-managed international trade has the potential
to lift millions of people out of poverty. Instead,
governments in the rich countries, by using their
trade policy to keep out exports from developing countries,
have erected tariff walls that are four times higher
than those faced by developed countries, and sealed
an escape route from poverty for poor people.
It would be in the self-interest of the North to stimulate
growth in the South, Oxfam points out in a report
released in April 2002, Rigged Rules and Double Standards:
trade, globalisation, and the fight against poverty.
Otherwise, the growing enclaves of despair in parts
of the developing world, the result of increasing
marginalisation and the bottling up of frustration
over lack of access to rising global wealth, could
erupt and create such instability that it would threaten
people all across a world where national borders have
been breached by globalisation.
"If Africa, East Asia, South Asia, and Latin
America were each to increase their share of world
exports by one per cent, the resulting gains in income
could lift 128 million people out of poverty,"
the report states.
Oxfam, through its campaign 'Make Trade Fair' (www.maketradefair.com),
wants to work with organisations and individuals around
the world who are already campaigning to ensure that
trade makes a real difference in the fight against
global poverty. As economist Amartya Sen who is Honorary
President of Oxfam says in the Foreword: "The
great rewards of globalised trade have come to some,
but not to others. What is needed is to create conditions
for a fuller and fairer sharing of the enormous benefits
from trade."
- Oxfam prescribes eight
main institutional changes and policy reforms to
radically alter the prevalent levels of inequality
and poverty, without wrecking the globalised economy.
- Improve market access
for poor countries and end the cycle of subsidised
agricultural over-production and export dumping
by rich countries.
- End the IMF-World Bank's
use of conditions that force governments to open
their markets whatever its impact on poor people.
- Raise prices to levels
consistent with a reasonable standard of living
for producers.
- Establish new intellectual-property
rules to ensure that poor countries are able to
afford new technologies and basic medicines, and
that farmers are able to save, exchange and sell
seeds.
- Prohibit rules that force
governments to liberalise or privatise basic services
that are vital for poverty reduction.
Enhance the quality of private-sector
investment and employment standards.
Democratise the WTO to
give poor countries a stronger voice
Change national policies on health, education, and
governance so that poor people can develop their capabilities,
realise their potential, and participate in markets
on more equitable terms.
Change is possible, the charity asserts. "We
can choose to allow unfair trade rules to continue
causing poverty and distress … Or we can change
the rules." The way forward is neither that of
the "globaphiles" nor "globaphobes"
who argue for more of the same rules for trade and
against participation in trade, respectively. Oxfam
calls this a "false debate" not least because
of the "revolutionary changes that are transforming
the global trading system". The report diagnoses
the ills and prescribes the changes.
Trade and globalisation
in the 21st century
Part of the change is quantitative: exports have been
growing faster than global GDP and developing countries
have registered particularly rapid increases. While
many remain dependent on primary commodities, the
share of manufactured goods (from China, Mexico and
India) has been growing. TNCs are linking producers
in the South to consumers in the North. Globalisation
is generating forces which create major opportunities,
along with huge threats.
Trade as a force for poverty
reduction
Export success can play a key role in poverty reduction.
If developing countries increase their share of world
exports by just 5 per cent, this would generate $
350bn – seven times as much as they receive
in aid. Experience from East Asia shows a rapid growth
in exports has contributed to a wider process of economic
growth which has lifted more than 400 million people
out of poverty.
Left behind: poor countries
and poor people in the global trading system
The rising tide of wealth generated by trade has widened
inequalities, both within and between countries. For
every $ 1 generated through exports in the global
trading system, low-income countries account for only
3 cents. Even though developing countries have been
increasing their exports more rapidly, large inequalities
mean that the absolute gap between them is widening.
Exporters of primary commodities have seen their share
of world trade shrink.
Market access and agricultural
trade: the double standards of rich countries
The North reserves its most restrictive trade barriers
for the world's poorest. Trade restrictions in rich
countries cost developing countries around $ 100 billion
a year – twice as much as they receive in aid.
Oxfam has devised a double standards index to measure
the gap between the free-trade principles espoused
by rich countries and their actual protectionist policies.
The worst offenders are the EU followed closely by
the United States. In agriculture, both the EU and
the US are driving down prices for exports from developing
countries by subsidising their own exports, and damaging
the prospects of smallholder agriculture.
To improve market access, the North needs to provide
duty-free and quota-free access for all low-income
countries; reduce tariff peaks to keep them under
5 per cent; phase out the Multi-fibre Arrangement;
ban export subsidies; and respect the right of poor
countries to protect their farm systems for food-security
interests.
Trade liberalisation and the
poor
Oxfam challenges evidence presented by the World Bank
to prove that liberalisation is good for growth. Many
of the countries that are integrating most successfully
into world markets, like China, Thailand and Vietnam,
are not rapid import liberalisers. Conversely, many
who have taken World Bank-IMF policy advise on import
liberalisation have a weak record on poverty reduction.
Case studies from Peru show small farmers in the highland
areas operating at a disadvantage compared with big
landowners.
Oxfam recommends that the IMF-World Bank should not
impose further loan conditions requiring trade reforms;
and rich countries should reciprocate past liberalisation
undertaken by poor countries by making equivalent
reductions in their own import barriers.
Primary conditions: trading
into decline
There is a general problem of structural over-supply,
which is pulling prices down in the commodity markets.
For a more inclusive globalisation, and to reduce
the price volatility, governments need to create a
new institution to oversee commodity markets, and
a new system of commodity agreements. TNCs must adopt
a socially responsible purchasing arrangement which
factors in a fair price when world markets fall below
levels consistent with reasonable living standards
in exporting countries.
Transnational companies: investment,
employment, and marketing
Not all investment is good investment. Free-trade
zones appear to attract the worst FDI, for instance.
There, governments have dismantled employment protection
in order to attract FDI. The WTO's Trade Policy Reviews
should report on trade-related labour standards. The
ILO's capacity to monitor and enforce core labour
standards should also be strengthened. Northern governments
should establish better mechanisms to hold TNCs accountable
for their actions in developing countries.
International trade rules as
an obstacle to development
Many of the provisions of the WTO are bad rules. There
are grave consequences for public health, agriculture,
and essential utilities, which will damage the interests
of the poor. Oxfam calls for an end to the universal
application of the WTO intellectual-property blueprint:
developing countries should retain the right to maintain
more flexible systems of protection clear commitment
to put public-health priorities before the claims
of patent holders prohibit patent protection for genetic
resources for food and agriculture; and provide stronger
rights for poor countries to develop more appropriate
forms of plant-variety protection, and to protect
farmers' rights to save, sell and exchange seeds exclude
essential public services from liberalisation negotiations,
and strengthen WTO's provisions for the 'special and
differential treatment' of developing countries.
Making trade work for the poor
Rich and poor nations alike will have to take action
if trade is to work in favour of the poor. This requires
action – also beyond trade, in health and education
– at the national level, new forms of international
co-operation, and representational democracy at the
WTO.
Reforms in trade governance
should include the following:
- Changes in public-spending priorities, infrastructural
development and land redistribution linked to national
poverty-reduction strategies.
- Action to root out problems of corruption –
stronger auditing – and strict enforcement
of anti-bribery rules and guidelines.
- Increased financial assistance to build up negotiating
capacity among developing country members of the
WTO.
- Greater transparency and public sharing of information
by governments of all their activities at the WTO
- The development of a Global Anti-Trust Mechanism
which extends the principles of anti-monopoly legislation
beyond national borders to the international economy.
- The Oxfam report concludes that managed well,
the international trading system can lift millions
out of poverty. Managed badly, it will leave whole
economies even more marginalised.
Other links:
Walden Bello of Focus on the Global South has criticised
Oxfam for providing the wrong focus and wrong direction
for the movement against corporate-driven globalisation
by concentrating on the theme of Southern access to
Northern markets while circumventing the cardinal
issue – the WTO free trade paradigm. A debate
between Walden Bello and Oxfam about the trade report
(3 parts) www.focusweb.org
The European Commission issued a 32-page response.
It said in general Oxfam presents an analysis which
is remarkably similar to the EU's own. What it has
problems with is the "so-called" double
standards index, where Oxfam has used a "combination
of sloppy figures, double counting, and obscure methodology
to come to a conclusion which is completely contradictory
to recent serious studies." The European Commission's
comments on the Oxfam report, with Oxfam's response
www.maketradefair.com
Vandana Shiva critiques the report for creating a
"schizophrenic" analysis by putting together
two "incommensurate" paradigms – one,
which gives precedence to people's democracy, another
which gives precedence to tradition, commerce and
markets. www.maketradefair.org
June 12, 2002.
|