Trade Liberalization And Increased Transparency Essay

Globalization is the process by which the markets of different countries become integrated due to the exchange of goods, services, technology, and capital. Globalization depends on social, economic, and political factors, and continuously alters the way that the world works. All the vital components of the evolving global, political, economic and social institutions being examined seem to constantly converge and to perpetually intertwine during the day to day administration of global affairs. Diplomacy is employed to keep a measured balance between conflict and cooperation. The global guarantees of international law are placed in sharp contrast to the grim reality of human rights on daily basis and policy is dictated by the scales of political power and the urgent priorities of economic necessity. To understand how the globe functioned in the past and how it wishes to function in the future, we must study each factor separately and observe its inevitable interactivity with the other factors that occur. It is important to note that none of the dynamics can be given greater weight in comparison to the other crucial instrumentalities.

There is a general consensus (Rodrik, 1997; Frankel, 2000; Hemmer, 2001) that the driving forces behind economic globalisation are a reduction in transport and communication costs in the private sector, reduced policy barriers to trade and investment by the public sector, an increase in the availability of and access to information and technology and the speed with which information and technology can be transmitted across national boundaries. The most important aspects of economic globalisation therefore include the breaking down of national economic boundaries, the liberalisation of international trade, finance and production activities and the growing power of transnational corporations and international financial institutions (Khor, 2000:3). Economic globalisation therefore manifests itself in various forms such as an increase in international trade, financial flows and foreign direct

WTO function To join WTO is an international status for smooth trade. Even though WTO judge fairly to solve the dispute, it does not well function to provide entire solution. The most critical point is that WTO can do nothing to impose their ruling to the disputed countries even if those countries never agree or accept it. Only thing is that under ruling the country has a right to make a sanction to another on one-on-one level. However the contemporary international organizations have a common problem. WTO only replies on each country’s political decision in the end. WTO should have more effective function to force their ruling to the country, such as administrative litigation. 4. Segment analysis

     International trade is defined as trade between two or more partners from different countries in the exchange of goods and services. In order to understand International trade, we need to first know and understand what trade is, which is the buying and selling of products between different countries. International Trade simply is globalization of the world and enables countries to obtain products and services from other countries effortlessly and expediently.

Free trade has long be seen by economists as being essential in promoting effective use of natural resources, employment, reduction of poverty and diversity of products for consumers. But the concept of free trade has had many barriers to over come. Including government practices by developed countries, under public and corporate pressures, to protect domestic firms from cheap foreign products. But as history has shown us time and time again is that protectionist measures imposed by governments has almost always had negative effects on the local and world economies. These protectionist measures also hurt developing countries trying to inter into the international trade markets.

In the words of one Thomas Friedman, “The global competitive playing field was being leveled. The world is being flattened”. The world in his eyes was becoming “flat”, the playing field on which many global companies compete, was becoming level. Friedman refers to this explanation as “Globalization 3.0”, a globalization caused by new technology. The internet was the main contributor, allowing for companies in India and China to compete for business in the United States. Friedman wants the reader to understand how the world has become “flat” and the implications of the effect.

The voice of the smaller, developing countries is not being heard, and is being stifled by the developed. The WTO needs reorganization before it can begin benefiting developing countries the way it should as an international governing body.

Trade Liberalization, is defined as “the removal of or reduction in the trade practices that thwart free flow of goods and services from one nation to another”. The liberalization of trade would allow for states to freely trade amongst one another without restrictions. This is different from current trade as states have restrictions and limitations such as only trading with states they have made negotiations which are most likely states that they benefit trading with. Typically, developed states tend to trade with other developed states who can provided resources they do not have access to within their own state. Due to this form of trade, underdeveloped states continue to struggle as they don’t have as much imports and exports as other states. If trade liberalization were to occur, both underdeveloped states and developed states are likely to benefit for different reasonings. Although they are likely to benefit, both underdeveloped states and developed face the chance of not benefiting from free trade.

As quoted by Koffi Annan- "We must ensure that the global market is embedded in broadly shared values and practices that reflect global social needs, and that all the world's people share the benefits of globalization", Globalization has made a huge revolution in today's world. Now-a-days, no business is limited to a single country/continent. Companies no more shy away from exploring different countries and culture, they are adapting to different challenging situations to increase their presence felt on the global map. This attitude leads to a high competition among the national firms trying to bring out their markets into the world. Different techno cultural differences lead to multiple need of tackling the situations whilst globalization.

Developing countries have asserted themselves, particularly over the past 2 decades. The formulation of the G20 and the first public flexing of their muscles at the WTO conference, 2003, resulted in the breakdown of negotiations. “Most observers interpreted events at Cancun as a fiasco and a multilateral failure, but when we look a bit deeper we see developing countries forming an alliance that effectively represented their interests” (Crump, Larry & Javed, 2007, 17), this is a direct example of LDCs using international practices to their advantage and resisting DCs attempts at pushing them around. Unfortunately most developing countries have small assemblies at the WTO and therefore are often overcome by the sheer extent and the gruelling schedule while negotiating. Although LDCs are increasingly influential on the world stage, they are still often disadvantaged by the nature of international practices.

The Commonwealth of Independent States Free Trade Agreement (CISFTA) is an agreement between Russia, Ukraine, Belarus, Uzbekistan, Armenia, Kyrgyzstan, Kazakhstan and Moldova. Five of the CISFTA participants, all except Ukraine, Uzbekistan and Moldova are also members of the Eurasian Economic Union comprising a single economic market. The agreement was signed on October 18, 2011, by eight Commonwealth of Independent States nations. The 2011 CISFTA comes into effect after the ratification of three participants and will be comprehensive across agricultural, fishery, and forestry goods, except for maintaining import and export rules and regulations on sugar and several other products.

Group 1: WTO membership opens the market of developing countries to exploitation by big firms from the industrialised countries.

Adam Smith outlined that the price mechanism in international trade is like an ‘invisible hand’ that coordinates the consumption and production decisions in a well-functioning market economy (Kerr and Gaisford 2007). However, there is need for the government to intervene in free market economies in order to implement trade regulations and avoid market failure that is associated with negative externalities. International trade is affected by government’s interventions that include direct participation in supply and purchase of essential goods and services, through regulation, taxation and other indirect participation influences. The free markets enhance market efficiency through ensuring that prices are determined by the

The concept of globalization has become a prevalent phenomenon in the past two decades because of the changes it has brought and the adoption of its strategies by multinational corporations or companies. The economic changes of globalization include the strengthening of economic inter-dependence, internationalization of production, and enhanced mobility of transnational corporations. On the other hand, trade liberalization, privatization, and deregulation are the ideological changes emanating from this concept.

This paper sought to evaluate the concept of Trade Liberalization and Development in Nigeria especially from 1999 to 2010. It was discovered that Trade liberalization theory is a branch of international trade as popularized by Adam Smith, which promotes free trade between states. It stipulates that free trade will lead to an increase the wealth on nations. The purpose of the paper is to investigate the role of trade liberalization in the economic development of Nigeria. The study was carried out using the world systems theory, which believes that there is a world economic system in which some countries benefit while others are exploited. Secondary sources of data were used in the study. Our findings however reveal that trade liberalization quite contrary to what its proponents have postulated has not resulted to any economic growth in Nigeria. From the data we have presented it has been shown that Nigerian economy was doing relatively well in the 1960s, but started declining when she started opening up her economy to the outside world buying all manners of goods from the