A comparative analysis of EU and US trade policies towards least developed countries and the African Growth and Opportunity Act beneficiaries

Elwyn Davies and Lars Nilsson

Development Policy Review, 2020, vol. 38, issue 5, 613-629

Abstract: Motivation The European Union (EU) and the US have specific trade preference programmes in place directed towards developing countries in general and, primarily in the case of the EU, towards least developed countries (LDCs) in particular. This article examines the relative merits of these programmes. Purpose The article compares the trade policies of the EU and the US with respect to LDCs and the countries eligible for the US African Growth and Opportunity Act (AGOA) and examines the relative success of the two donors’ trade policies vis‐à‐vis these two groups of beneficiaries in terms of increasing imports from them. Approach and methods Econometric evidence from a gravity model is used to compare the effects of EU and US preferential trade policy on imports from the beneficiary countries. First, regressions are carried out using total EU and US imports as dependent variables and, second, EU and US duty‐free imports are used. Findings The descriptive part of the article shows that (a) a larger share of EU imports benefits from duty‐free MFN tariffs; (b) the EU offers preferences on all imports from the LDCs (except arms and ammunition), while the US extends preferences to three quarters of all imports; (c) EU preferences are better utilized; and (d) the EU imports more goods duty free. The econometric analysis shows that EU trade policy towards the LDCs and the AGOA beneficiaries has generated approximately twice as much in imports as US policy, when imports of mineral fuels are excluded from the analysis. Policy implications EU trade policy is found to outperform US trade policy in terms of generating imports from the LDCs and the AGOA beneficiaries. Hence, if any trade policy ought to be copied by other countries, as suggested by some observers, it should be EU trade policy rather than US trade policy.

Date: 2020
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://doi.org/10.1111/dpr.12434

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:bla:devpol:v:38:y:2020:i:5:p:613-629

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
http://www.blackwell ... bs.asp?ref=0950-6764

Access Statistics for this article

Development Policy Review is currently edited by David Booth

More articles in Development Policy Review from Overseas Development Institute Contact information at EDIRC.
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Wiley Content Delivery ().