Showing posts with label RCEP. Show all posts
Showing posts with label RCEP. Show all posts

Thursday, November 7, 2019

Trade can make everyone better off

One of the key principles of economics which underpins the very concept of globalization is that "trade can make everyone better off".
As per the famous economist Gregory Mankiw, "Trade allows each person to specialize at what he or she does best, whether it’s farming, sewing, or home building. In the same way, nations can specialize in what they do best. In both cases, people get a wider range of choices at lower prices."
Conceptually therefore no one should have a problem as such with trans border trade, so long it benefits the people at large in both the producer and consumer jurisdictions.
If we want to understand it in the context of India's decision to withdraw from the RCEP agreement (see here) consider this. One of the examples cited for this decision was the threat of New Zealand dairy product flooding Indian markets and harming poor Indian milk producers.
It is pertinent to note that India is the largest producer of milk in the world. However, the largest amount of production is not large enough to provide affordable milk to a large section of the population. The average rate for a liter of milk in India ranges between Rs40-55. At constant prices, the consumption of milk and milk products has grown at a meager 1.6% CAGR between FY12 and FY18, while at current prices it has recorded a growth rate of ~9% over the same period. The inflation rate of daily products is thus quite high for a country that has a vast population of malnutritioned and undernutritioned, especially children and women.
Now, if a trade agreement allows import of milk at much lower rate, i.e., Rs15-20, why should it be a matter of concern?
A balanced approach, in my view, would include - (a) All the state governments should be allowed to import cheaper milk to be provided to the children in schools, the pregnant and lactating mother registered with government health centers, registered MNREGA workers and BPL card holders; (b) Intensive programs may be run for local dairy farmers to increase the productivity of their livestock through breed improvement; (c) Fully integrated dairy farms may be established in each block of the country to maximize the productivity through modernized production & processing of milk, production of bio gas and organic fertilizers from the dung.
But this is the ideal situation, which rarely exists. In the modern day complex world, the economic considerations are heavily influenced by geo-political, domestic political and "other" considerations.
To understand the full context of RCEP in relation to India, it may be pertinent to note the following:
The current economic model being pursued since economic liberalization started in 1991 is largely a distortion of the classical Keynesian model that advocates a larger role for the private enterprise with active state intervention during extremities of business cycle and argues against higher savings in both private and public sector. The Keynesian model has its genesis in the great depression and mostly found useful during larger economic crisis.
As Chief Minister of Gujarat, the incumbent prime minister appeared an advocate of laissez-faire or free market which entails minimal state intervention even during crisis. He had implemented the model in Gujarat albeit with limited success.
However, as he must have realized by now, considering the present state of socio-economic development of various parts of the country, it is perhaps 10-15years too early to test the laissez-faire model at the pan-India level.
The major challenge before the government therefore is to find a balance between the desirable laissez-faire model and the current variant of Nehruvian socialism model.
From whatever I have deciphered from the incumbent government's policy, it is planning to achieve the balance through (a) reforming institutional framework to promote ease of doing business; (b) materially enhancing physical infrastructure through public investment to improve logistic support for the businesses; and (c) encouraging entrepreneurs to invest in business ventures that will create productive jobs for the burgeoning Indian workforce and improve trade balance of India through export promotion and import substitution.
For executing the plan it has proposed to (a) rationalize social sector spending to save public resources for investment; and (b) liberalize capital controls (FDI rules) to encourage foreign investors to invest in manufacturing facilities and services like insurance, banking, retailing etc.
This strategy has faced opposition from both political class and civil society. Moreover, the government has thus far not been able to make a convincing case about its strategy. It is creating doubts in minds of investors and entrepreneurs with regard to the capabilities of the government in successfully achieving the desired balance.
The withdrawal from RCEP, in my view, is also part of this balancing exercise.
Insofar as geopolitical angle in this step is concerned, I find the following article of Sanjay Baru (media advisor to the former PM Dr. Manmohan Singh) interesting.
The suggestions of Karan Bhasin in the following article are also worth taking a note:

Wednesday, November 6, 2019

RCEP - politics, geo politics and trade

India has reportedly decided not to join the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP). The decision, as per the External affairs ministry’s secretary (East), Vijay Singh Thakur, reflects both the government’s assessment of current global situation and of the fairness and balance of the agreement.
The Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP) is a proposed free trade agreement (FTA) between the ten member states of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) (Brunei, Cambodia, Indonesia, Laos, Malaysia, Myanmar, the Philippines, Singapore, Thailand, Vietnam) and its FTA partners (China, Japan, South Korea, Australia and New Zealand).
The process of forming RCEP was initiated in the August 2011 ASEAN meeting. The formal negotiations were launched in 44th ASEAN summit in August 2012. Since then 27 rounds of negotiations between officials and three summits of the leaders of the proposed participants have taken place. In December 2014 on the sidelines of the 6th round of negotiations held in New Delhi, the Government of India had held an outreach event with their business community to educate them on the goals of RCEP, showing keenness to join the partnership.
Had India joined RCEP, it would have been the largest trade agreement in the global economy, involving over one third of world's GDP and more than half the world's population.
In his speech at the 3rd RCEP Summit, PM Modi said “The present form of the RCEP Agreement does not fully reflect the basic spirit and the agreed guiding principles of RCEP”, adding that "India’s farmers, traders, professionals and industries have stakes in such decisions." Citing the economic principles of Gandhi Ji, the PM said, "When I measure the RCEP Agreement with respect to the interests of all Indians, I do not get a positive answer. Therefore, neither the Talisman of Gandhiji nor my own conscience permits me to join RCEP."
The present format of RCEP agreement, required India to abolish tariffs on 74% of goods from China, Australia and New Zealand, and 90% goods from Japan, South Korea and ASEAN.
Apparently, the decision to withdraw has been taken in the interest of India's poor, farmers and to give an advantage to India’s service sector, as the Indian negotiators felt that India may become a dumping ground for cheap Chinese goods, devastating millions of small and medium Indian enterprises, especially in the manufacturing sector.
As the things stand today, the RCEP agreement is likely to be finalized and signed in 2020. Chinese officials have been quoted as saying that India is welcome to join the RCEP later.
The right wing ideologues of the ruling BJP, like Swadeshi Jagran Manch, RSS etc have welcomed the decision. The principal opposition party the Indian national Congress (INC) has also welcomed the decision (though they claim that the government was forced by them to withdraw from RCEP). The reactions of the economists, business analysts and political observers have been rather ambivalent.
In my view the decision has to be viewed from the domestic politics, geo-political and economic angles.
The domestic political establishment was vertically divided on the issue of joining WTO in 1995. There were widespread farmers' protests and even violent demonstrations. Regardless, the minority government led by PVN Rao took the decision to become full member of WTO. There is little evidence to indicate that Indian agriculture, manufacturing and trade would have performed better had India not joined WTO in 1995 full member.
Geo politically, the decision to withdraw from RCEP might be viewed as India siding with the USA in Sino-US trade conflict.
More on this tomorrow.