Tab 1
IB ECONOMICS (TRADE)
#1 Comparative Advantage:Countries often specialise and trade according to the theory of comparative advantage. Explain the limitations of this approach. [10] The theory of comparative advantage suggests that countries can benefit from trade if they specialize in the production of goods and services they can produce at the lowest opportunity cost. However, while this theory provides a strong rationale for international trade, there are several limitations to this approach: Assumptions of the Theory: The theory of comparative advantage relies on several key assumptions that may not hold in the real world. For example, it assumes that factors of production (labor, capital) are immobile between countries but perfectly mobile within a country. In reality, labor and capital may not be easily transferable between industries within a country, leading to structural unemployment when countries shift production patterns. Transport Costs: Comparative advantage assumes negligible or zero transportation costs. In practice, shipping goods between countries involves costs, which can negate the benefits of specialization. High transport costs can reduce or even eliminate the gains from trade. Externalities and Environmental Impact: Specialization can lead to over-exploitation of resources and environmental degradation. For instance, a country specializing in agriculture may overuse land and water resources, leading to soil degradation and water shortages. The theory does not account for negative externalities like pollution, which can result from intensified production. Dynamic Changes in Comparative Advantage: Comparative advantage is not static. Technological changes, shifts in consumer preferences, and changes in resource endowments can alter comparative advantages over time. For example, a country may lose its comparative advantage in manufacturing as other countries develop more advanced technologies. Income Distribution Effects: The theory of comparative advantage may lead to uneven income distribution within a country. While the country as a whole may benefit from trade, certain groups, such as workers in industries that lose out to foreign competition, may face unemployment and reduced incomes, leading to social and economic inequality. Terms of Trade: The theory assumes that the terms of trade (the ratio at which goods are exchanged) will be favorable. However, in reality, terms of trade can fluctuate, sometimes disadvantaging countries, particularly those exporting primary commodities. A decline in terms of trade can result in lower national income and reduced gains from trade. Dependence on Foreign Markets: Over-specialization can make a country overly dependent on foreign markets for certain goods. If global demand for these goods falls or if there are global economic shocks, the country may experience significant economic instability. Diversification and Risk: The theory of comparative advantage suggests countries should focus on a limited range of goods. However, countries that diversify their economies may be more resilient to economic shocks. Relying too heavily on a narrow set of industries can expose a country to risks such as price volatility and demand fluctuations. Trade Barriers and Protectionism: Comparative advantage assumes free trade without barriers. In practice, countries may impose tariffs, quotas, and other trade restrictions to protect domestic industries, limiting the effectiveness of specialization and trade based on comparative advantage. Political and Strategic Concerns: Nations may not specialize strictly according to comparative advantage due to political or strategic reasons. For example, a country may choose to maintain a domestic agricultural sector for food security, even if it does not have a comparative advantage in agriculture. In conclusion, while the theory of comparative advantage provides a foundational argument for the benefits of trade, its application in the real world is limited by various practical considerations, including market imperfections, environmental concerns, and socio-economic factors. |
#2 Ghana fails to deliver on comparative advantage:
According to the theory, Ghana should benefit by specializing in cocoa production, where it has a comparative advantage. However, the limitations of this theory are evident in Ghana's case. The country's experience illustrates how dependence on primary commodities, price volatility, and external market conditions can undermine the theoretical gains from specialization and trade. Additionally, Ghana's situation highlights the importance of economic diversification and the challenges posed by trade barriers, both of which are not adequately addressed by the traditional comparative advantage framework. |
#3 Do all countries benefit from trade?Vietnam Vietnam is a less obvious example of a country that has significantly benefited from trade. Over the past few decades, Vietnam has transformed into a major global exporter, especially in textiles, electronics, and agriculture (notably coffee and rice). By leveraging low labor costs, improving infrastructure, and signing numerous trade agreements (such as with the EU and participation in the CPTPP), Vietnam has attracted foreign investment and boosted its export capacity. This export-driven growth has helped the country reduce poverty, increase wages, and rapidly industrialize. Venezuela Issue: Venezuela has vast oil reserves and was once a major oil exporter, but severe economic mismanagement and political instability have devastated its economy. Despite having valuable exports, the government’s nationalization of the oil industry, lack of maintenance, corruption, and sanctions have crippled production. As a result, Venezuela is unable to get its oil to the market efficiently, leading to a collapse in foreign exchange earnings and hyperinflation. Democratic Republic of the Congo The DRC is rich in minerals, especially cobalt and copper, which are critical for global industries like electronics and electric vehicles. However, poor infrastructure, political instability, and corruption make it difficult for the country to fully capitalize on these resources. Despite high demand, the DRC struggles to transport its goods efficiently to global markets, limiting its trade potential and economic benefits. North Korea Issue: North Korea has significant mineral resources and even has the potential to engage in some light manufacturing exports. However, international sanctions, political isolation, and government-controlled trade severely limit its ability to engage in global markets. The country’s self-imposed isolation, coupled with sanctions, prevents it from benefiting from international trade. Question:
|
#4 When is free trade not so free?Countries often promote the idea of free trade (highly market orientated countries) but also simultaneously engage in protectionism 1) United States Market Orientation: The U.S. promotes free markets and is a leader in advocating for global trade liberalization. Protectionist Measures:
2) Singapore Market Orientation: Singapore is known for being an open, trade-focused economy with minimal barriers. Protectionist Measures:
3) Germany Market Orientation: Germany is highly integrated into global markets, promoting free trade within the EU and globally. Protectionist Measures:
4) Japan Market Orientation: Japan promotes global trade liberalization through agreements like the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership (CPTPP). Protectionist Measures:
5. Australia Market Orientation: Australia is a key advocate for free trade, with major trade agreements across Asia and with the U.S. Protectionist Measures:
Questions:
|
#5 Who Wins When Comparative Advantage Is Only Slight? A Look at the Solar Panel IndustryIn recent years, the global solar panel market has seen one clear winner: China. But it wasn’t always this way. In the early 2000s, both Germany and China were major players in solar panel production, with similar opportunity costs for manufacturing. Both countries had the technology and resources to produce solar panels efficiently. So, why did China emerge as the dominant force? The answer lies in several non-comparative advantage factors that helped tip the scales in China’s favor. While Germany had a strong technological lead, China quickly ramped up production capacity, benefiting from economies of scale. Chinese companies, backed by government subsidies, could produce panels more cheaply, lowering the average cost of production. Furthermore, China’s lower labor costs and favorable trade policies allowed it to mass-produce and export solar panels at prices Germany couldn’t match. Despite having similar production capabilities, China’s ability to scale up and drive down costs saw it capture around 70% of the global solar panel market. In the end, this case shows that when two countries have only a slight comparative advantage, non-economic factors like production scale, government support, and trade conditions can determine who dominates the market. China’s strategic investments and cost efficiencies gave it the winning edge, even though Germany remained a leader in solar innovation. Questions:
|
#6 Tariffs again?What happened to free trade? Biden announces new tariffs on imports of Chinese goods, including electric vehicles By Asma Khalid May 14, 2024 President Biden slapped tariffs on $18 billion of imports of goods from China including electric vehicles, semiconductors and medical products to protect U.S. workers and companies in the strategic sectors and punish China for unfair trade practices. Biden is also keeping in place the tariffs that former President Donald Trump had placed on more than $300 billion of imports from China. Biden said the move would keep heavily subsidized Chinese products from rolling over domestic industries he is hoping to foster. The new tariffs come as Biden pushes forward to implement three pieces of legislation that contain hundreds of billions of subsidies to boost the domestic manufacturing and clean energy sectors — and ahead of a presidential election where trade and jobs will again be an issue. "We know China's unfair practices have harmed communities in Michigan and Pennsylvania and around the country that are now having the opportunity to come back due to President Biden's investment agenda," Lael Brainard, Biden's top economic adviser, told reporters. Here’s a list of the new tariffs U.S. Trade Representative Katherine Tai told Morning Edition that China heavily subsidizes its electric vehicle industry, leading to prices so low that American manufacturers could "really be crushed by what has been produced by these anti-competitive practices in Beijing." Some increases will take place this year. They include tariffs of: 100% on electric vehicles, up from 25% 50% on solar cells, up from 25% 50% on syringes and needles, up from zero 25% on lithium-ion batteries for electric vehicles, and battery parts, up from 7.5% 25% on certain critical minerals, up from zero 25% on steel and aluminum products, up from a range of zero to 7.5% 25% on respirators and face masks, up from zero to 7.5% 25% on cranes used to unload container ships, up from 0% Other hikes will be phased in over 2025 / 2026 The White House says this is different from Trump’s approach Trump had made tariffs on China one of his signature policy moves when he was in the White House. At first, some Democrats warned this could really hurt the economy — and that American consumers would pay the price. Biden's team began reviewing those tariffs when he took office, and now has decided to keep them in place — though it is working on an exclusion process for machinery used by domestic manufacturers, particular in the solar industry. "One of the challenges is once tariffs have been imposed, it is quite difficult politically to reduce them — because the affected industry tends to get used to them, like them, operate with them as baked into their plans," said Michael Froman, president of the Council on Foreign Relations, who was U.S. trade representative during the Obama administration. "They are designed to be strategic and not chaotic. They are designed to be effective and not emotional," she told White House reporters. China expresses ‘strong dissatisfaction’ The White House has downplayed the risk that the new tariffs could spark retaliation from China, saying that the issues have been discussed during meetings of top U.S. and Chinese officials, and were unlikely to come as a surprise. But in an interview with Yahoo Finance, Biden said he expected some retaliation. "I'm sure China will talk a lot about it, but the fact is China already is, what you might say is, way over, way over their skis on this," Biden said in the interview. "I think they'll probably try to figure out how they can raise tariffs, maybe on products that are unrelated." China's commerce ministry said Beijing "firmly opposes" the decision, and said the review process had been "abused" for domestic political reasons. "China expresses its strong dissatisfaction," it said. The decision to raise tariffs is a violation of Biden's promises "not to seek to suppress China or curb its development" or decouple from China, the ministry said. It said the action was out of step with the spirit of consensus reached between Biden and Chinese leader Xi Jinping, and "will seriously affect the atmosphere around bilateral cooperation." |
#7 QuotasQuotas on Australian wool China raises 2024 import quota for Australian wool, in line with FTA terms China on Monday announced the 2024 import quotas for zero-tariff wool products from New Zealand and Australia, with a 5 percent rise in Australia's quota, in line with the terms of their bilateral free trade agreement (FTA). "Chinese companies prefer Australian wool because of its high quality. Australia typically breeds merino sheep, which produce superior quality wool”
Countervailing duties are tariffs imposed by a country on imported goods that have been subsidised by the government of the exporting country. These duties aim to counterbalance or "offset" the negative effects of such subsidies, which can give the foreign exporters an unfair competitive advantage in international trade. By imposing countervailing duties, the importing country seeks to level the playing field for its domestic industries, protecting them from the distortive effects of foreign subsidies. |
#8 SubsidiesSubsidies A ramping up of subsidies has contributed to a significant increase in global trade tensions. New subsidies, countervailing duties, and legislation such as the US Inflation Reduction Act, the EU Green Deal Industrial Plan, and the Made in China 2025 strategy have raised concerns about the potential for subsidy wars. This concern has been bolstered by the way subsidies adopted by one major trading bloc have spurred others to enact their own subsidies within just six months! Why do governments subsidize? Subsidies are a transfer of resources from a government to a domestic entity without an equivalent contribution in return and can take many forms, including direct grants to domestic companies, tax incentives, or favorable terms for financing. Governments use subsidies for several reasons, and their terms are shaped by the goal the government hopes to accomplish. Governments might want to achieve a national strategic objective or to gain a competitive edge in international markets. Think of production subsidies in high-tech industries such as aerospace and telecommunications. Some subsidies might be motivated by understandable public policy objectives, such as the need to correct market failures or to respond to national emergencies, from health to climate change. Subsidies for COVID vaccines, when governments intervened to address capacity constraints, are a recent example. Regardless of the rationale, poorly designed subsidies that have a negative effect on other countries can invite retaliatory countermeasures. What’s wrong with subsidies? The classic economic argument against the use of subsidies is that they cause a misalignment between prices and production costs. In doing so, they can distort markets, prevent efficient outcomes, and divert resources to less productive uses. If subsidies benefit some firms over others, they can snuff out innovation and force efficient firms to contract out work or exit the market altogether. This, in turn, can reduce overall productivity. They also create opportunities for rent-seeking behavior—activities that manipulate the distribution of economic resources to bring positive returns to individuals, not to society—and harm smaller economies that cannot afford to subsidize. Subsidies can also prop up practices that are harmful to the public interest and have negative environmental and health effects. For example, the world could have cut global carbon emissions by 28 percent and air pollution deaths by 46 percent had policymakers agreed to replace fossil fuel subsidies with an efficient carbon price! But the impact of subsidies on trading relationships has been particularly fraught. This is particularly true when they include discriminatory provisions such as a requirement that manufactured goods use components made exclusively or primarily within the country. Second, subsidies undermine the benefits of past tariff and market-access negotiations that were undertaken in regional and multilateral agreements. Third, subsidies may lead trading partners to believe that a government promoted unfair competition and could compel them to react in kind. Can international rules help? The World Trade Organization (WTO) Agreement on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures (SCM agreement, for short) and its Agreement on Agriculture provide a good foundation for rules governing subsidies that affect trade in goods. The SCM agreement, for example, defines what constitutes subsidies, including those that are prohibited (such as export subsidies and local-content subsidies) and those that can be challenged because they have adverse effects on another country. But the SCM agreement has some important shortcomings. A chief concern is that some forms of state intervention, including subsidies to and provided by state-owned enterprises, are not automatically counted as “subsidies” in the current WTO definition. Such intervention might include providing favorable financing for land or equipment to state enterprises that produce goods for export. Some countries are concerned about how subsidy rules apply to state enterprises and have incorporated into recent trade agreements measures to limit their market-distorting behavior. Can a subsidy war be stopped? The current landscape is challenging. Subsidy disputes and countervailing duty investigations at the WTO have increased steadily since 2010. Questions 1. What are the following terms and ideas 1.1. Countervailing Duties (or measures) 1.2. Made in China 2025 Strategy 1.3. Rent-Seeking Behavior 2. List the disadvantages of subsidies from the article 3. Can vaccine indemnification be categorized as rent seeking behaviour?
Definition of 'Rent-Seeking Behavior': Rent-seeking behavior refers to activities where individuals or companies try to gain additional wealth without contributing to productivity or creating new wealth. Instead, they manipulate economic or political conditions to obtain advantages like subsidies or special regulations. This behavior diverts resources from productive uses and can lead to inefficiencies in the economy. Examples:
|
#9 Who complains the most (WTO)The United States has filed the most complaints with the World Trade Organization (WTO) since its establishment in 1995. As of recent data:
|
#10 Import licencesImport licenses are often used in conjunction with quotas or other forms of trade restrictions, and they control the amount of certain goods that can be imported into a country. 1. How Are Import Licenses Allocated? A. First-Come, First-Served:
B. Pro-Rata Allocation:
C. Auction:
D. Discretionary Allocation:
E. Bilateral or Multilateral Agreements:
2. How Much Are Import Licenses Sold For? A. Auction-Based Pricing:
B. Fixed Fees:
C. Market-Driven Pricing:
D. Implicit Costs:
3. Key Considerations:
|
#11 Trade distortion and protectionismThe return of quotas Holly Smith Published 04 July 2023 Quotas and tariffs are both used to protect domestic industries by artificially raising import prices in the domestic market. Their administration and effects, however, differ in specific ways. Although quotas are less discussed than tariffs, they can be much more complicated and costly to implement. After a long era of trade liberalization, US trade policy under the Trump and Biden administrations has returned to “managed trade” measures, including tariffs, and a less discussed but no less interesting tool: quotas. In 2018, the Trump administration imposed 25% tariffs on specified steel imports and 10% tariffs on specified aluminum imports under Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962. South Korea1 and Brazil agreed to apply absolute quotas to their steel exports in lieu of the Section 232 tariffs while Argentina2 agreed to absolute quotas on steel and aluminum exports.3 Although the US has not imposed absolute quotas since then, US negotiators have pursued other managed trade measures to reduce quantities of imports, including tariff-rate quotas (TRQs). In 2021 and 2022, the Biden administration negotiated agreements with the EU4, Japan5, and the UK6 granting exemptions from the tariffs in favor of TRQs. Unlike the absolute quotas, under the TRQs, steel, and aluminum imports can enter the US over the quota amount subject to Section 232 tariff rates, while in-quota imports enter duty-free. The difference between quotas and tariffs Quotas and tariffs are both used to protect domestic industries by artificially raising prices in the domestic market. Their administration and effects, however, differ in specific ways. Quotas restrict the quantity of a good imported from another country, with absolute quotas setting hard limits on imports. Tariffs, or duties, are taxes or charges levied on goods imported from another country. TRQs, or tariff quotas, are a combination of tariffs and quotas, in which imports under the quota enjoy a lower tariff rate than imports over the quota, with no absolute quantitative restriction. Under TRQs, if the over-quota tariff rate is high enough, the TRQ may be a de facto quantitative import restriction much like absolute quotas.7 Quotas can be much more complicated to administer than tariffs. Tariffs are collected by a customs authority as goods enter a country. With quotas, customs authorities must either monitor imports directly to ensure that no goods above the quota amount are imported, or for TRQs, that duties are applied to goods imported over the quota. Alternatively, customs authorities can award licenses to specific companies, giving them the right to import the amount allowed under the quota. Quotas can also take the form of a voluntary export restraint (VER), where the exporting country administers the quota. While tariffs generate revenue that is paid to the importing country’s treasury, the value of a quota (quota rents) generally goes to foreign exporters, who can sell goods subject to the quota at higher prices and collect higher per-unit revenue. In both cases, domestic consumers in the importing country pay the costs of tariffs and quota rents. But with quotas, the importing country’s government receives no revenue. The cost of quotas Costs and pricing under tariffs are more transparent and predictable than quotas. For example, if a good is subject to a 10% tariff, then the good should cost about 10% more. With a quota, the price of that same good can increase as long as demand for the good continues and supply remains constrained. This means that quota rents are ultimately more costly to domestic consumers than tariffs. Quotas may incentivize foreign producers to upgrade the quality of their exports, leading to more direct competition with domestic producers and a higher-price product mix for consumers. However, if foreign producers export low-quality goods under a quota regime, prices, and profits for both foreign and domestic producers of low-quality goods will increase because of quotas, while domestic consumers will pay more for the lower-quality goods. World Trade Organization (WTO) consistency General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) Article XI prohibits quotas and other quantitative restrictions as are overly distortive compared to duties, taxes, and TRQs. In fact, on December 9, 2022, a WTO dispute panel decided against the US, holding that its imposition of quotas on South Korea, Brazil, and Argentina is inconsistent with Article XI and that Section 232 tariffs and quotas on steel and aluminum do not fall under the “security exception”.8 Tricky to administer South Korea, Brazil, and Argentina each agreed to product-specific absolute quotas on 54 separate steel articles based on each country’s average annual import volumes from 2015 through 2017. Argentina also accepted product-specific absolute quotas on two aluminum product categories. These quotas are administered to give exporters the least possible flexibility and demonstrate how complicated quota regimes can be. Some of the quotas are absolute. Once the quota is reached, no additional amount can enter the US for any price unless an exclusion is granted. Some quotas apply to the full calendar year but in practice may fill the minute the quota takes effect, while others are subject to quarterly limitations. Once a quota is filled in each quarter, importers must wait until the next quarter to bring the product into the United States. Moreover, imports count against the quota even if later granted an exclusion. This rule also applies to the TRQ regimes for the UK and Japan. Under the EU TRQs, duty-free imports are subject to quotas allocated amongst all EU member states to goods that also must be melted and poured into the member state. Unused quotas can be rolled over to subsequent quarters to a limited degree. The true cost in practice For South Korea, Brazil, and Argentina, quotas have reduced export volumes to the US, particularly due to the reduction in South Korea’s exports in line with the limitations imposed by the quota regime. According to US Department of Commerce data, the overall quantity of steel South Korea, Brazil, and Argentina exported to the United States from 2018 to 2022 has dropped compared to the annual level of imports during the previous five-year period.9 |
#12 Maduro must goWith the war in Ukraine and a ban on Russian oil sales, the Biden administration has been seeking alternative sources of crude to try to ease prices at the gas pump. But a recent overture to oil-rich Venezuela was met with an immediate backlash from both Republicans and Democrats, who condemned the White House for negotiating with the country’s authoritarian president, Nicolás Maduro. And last month, when the White House said that it would let Chevron begin talks with the Maduro government that could possibly lead to an expansion of its very limited activities in the country, there was a similar outraged response. For all the noise generated by the outreach to Caracas, there has been virtually no discussion of why the US has an oil embargo against Venezuela in the first place or why, in the face of the failure of economic sanctions to alter political realities in the country, US politicians are so intent on keeping them in place. The sanction against Venezuela oil sales was enacted three years ago at the insistence of President Donald Trump’s national security adviser, John Bolton, who prevailed over fierce objections by the state and treasury departments. In my recent book on Venezuela, I show how the national security council, under Bolton’s predecessor, HR McMaster, had laid out a roadmap of escalating sanctions designed to gradually increase pressure on Maduro. At the end of the roadmap they placed the ultimate sanction that would strike at the heart of Venezuela’s economy: an oil embargo. McMaster’s team believed that the embargo was to be used only if it was clear that Maduro was about to fall and needed one last push. The embargo would be enacted, Maduro would go away, and then the US would lift the embargo. They feared that maintaining the embargo over the long term would devastate Venezuela’s already crippled economy and multiply the suffering of ordinary Venezuelans. But Bolton favored a maximum pressure approach. In January 2019, in a long-shot bid to evict Maduro, the US (followed by dozens of other countries) recognized the opposition legislator Juan Guaidó as the legitimate president of Venezuela. Bolton immediately called for enacting the oil embargo, saying, “Why don’t we go for a win here?” Kimberly Breier, at the time the assistant secretary of state for western hemisphere affairs, told me that the measure was pushed through without any serious evaluation of the consequences. That included how likely it was to work and what effect it would have on living conditions in Venezuela. (Another question was where the US would get the oil to replace Venezuela’s crude – a portion of it would come from Russia.) “There was absolutely no evidence,” Breier told me, that the oil sanction would bring about Maduro’s removal and yet Bolton “set the expectation that somehow this was magically going to occur”. And of course, it did not. With help from Iran and Russia, Venezuela has continued to sell its oil to refineries in China. Maduro is more secure in power today than he was three years ago when the sanction was enacted and the Venezuelan opposition is weaker and in greater disarray. Question: What is the motivation for the US to engage in a trade embargo with Venezuela? With who was Venezuela selling oil to instead of the USA? What were the economic effects on average Venezuelans? |
#13 There’s no money (FX controls)Foreign exchange controls are government-imposed restrictions on the purchase and sale of foreign currencies. These controls act as a trade barrier by limiting the ability of individuals and businesses to obtain foreign currency necessary for importing goods and services or paying for foreign investments. How Foreign Exchange Controls Work as a Trade Barrier:
Example of Foreign Exchange Controls as a Trade Barrier: Argentina has used foreign exchange controls in recent years to prevent capital flight and manage its dwindling foreign reserves. Businesses and individuals faced strict limits on how much foreign currency they could purchase. As a result, companies looking to import goods had difficulty obtaining enough US dollars or euros to pay for those imports, limiting their ability to trade and leading to shortages of foreign products. Making it challenging to purchase items slows down the process and makes buyers consider carefully whether the financial penalties or time required are worth it! |
#14 I can’t push the button - Greeks debt crisisGreece’s membership in the Economic and Monetary Union (EMU) significantly limited its options during the Eurozone crisis of 2009-2015. As part of the Eurozone, Greece lost its ability to implement independent monetary policies, leading to severe economic consequences. One major restriction was the loss of exchange rate flexibility. Unlike countries with their own currency, Greece couldn't devalue its currency to boost competitiveness. A devaluation could have made Greek exports cheaper, improving demand in international markets and helping to stimulate economic activity. Without this option, Greece’s economy struggled to recover, and exports remained stagnant. Another key issue was the lack of control over interest rates. In times of recession, reducing interest rates can encourage borrowing, investment, and consumer spending. However, Greece had to rely on the European Central Bank (ECB) for monetary policy, which sets interest rates suitable for all member countries. The ECB's policies were aligned with the needs of stronger economies like Germany, which had different economic conditions. As a result, the interest rates in Greece remained higher than optimal, further restricting economic growth when stimulus was urgently needed. Greece was also forced into fiscal austerity without the support of monetary easing tools. In exchange for financial assistance from the "Troika" (IMF, European Commission, and ECB), Greece had to implement strict austerity measures—raising taxes and cutting public spending—aimed at reducing its deficit. However, these measures led to a deepening recession, rising unemployment, and reduced public services, exacerbating the country’s economic woes. The divergence from core Eurozone economies meant that Greece’s needs were often out of sync with the broader Eurozone. This crisis highlights how being in a monetary union, without independent control over monetary policy, can lead to negative consequences, especially when facing an economic downturn that requires a tailored response. Student Questions:
|
#15 Winners and losers at the WTOThe World Trade Organization (WTO) plays a vital role in managing international trade through several key functions. One major aspect is trade negotiations. An example is the Doha Round, which aimed to reduce global trade barriers and benefit developing countries. However, these negotiations have been contentious, with developing countries pushing for agricultural subsidies reduction, while developed countries, including the U.S. and EU, resisted. Ultimately, progress stalled, and many viewed developed nations as "winners" due to their ability to maintain some protective measures, while developing countries did not get the access they hoped for. Implementing and monitoring trade agreements is another critical WTO function. For example, the WTO has overseen China's accession since 2001, ensuring that China adheres to its commitments on tariffs and market access. However, challenges arose, as other WTO members raised concerns about non-tariff barriers and state-owned enterprises in China that may distort competition, highlighting the complexity of effectively monitoring a major economy. The WTO also plays a significant role in dispute settlement. A notable case involved the long-standing conflict over Airbus and Boeing subsidies between the U.S. and the EU. The WTO's ruling on this case allowed both sides to impose retaliatory tariffs. Despite providing a resolution mechanism, the process left ambiguity, as both sides claimed partial victory and retaliations escalated, showing that avoiding controversy in declaring winners isn’t always straightforward. Supporting developing countries to build trade capacity is a cornerstone of WTO activities. Through the Aid for Trade initiative, the WTO has helped nations like Bangladesh enhance infrastructure and expand trade opportunities in textiles, allowing for greater integration into global markets. Such initiatives are critical in ensuring that developing countries can compete on an international level. Lastly, the WTO’s outreach aims to raise awareness about the benefits of free trade. Initiatives like the World Trade Report and workshops with stakeholders are designed to explain how trade liberalization supports economic growth and poverty reduction, fostering a broader understanding and support for international cooperation. By making information accessible, the WTO strengthens global engagement with its principles. Student Questions:
|
#16 Argentina’s Currency woes!Argentina has implemented strict currency controls to stabilize its economy and prevent the outflow of valuable foreign reserves. These controls have created a complicated system for accessing foreign currency, particularly US dollars, which are in high demand as citizens seek to protect their savings from inflation and economic uncertainty. As a result, a parallel market for dollars, known as the "blue dollar" market, has emerged, offering an unofficial exchange rate far higher than the government's official rate. Argentina’s currency restrictions, often referred to as “cepo cambiario,” are designed to limit the amount of foreign currency that citizens and businesses can access. These controls aim to curb capital flight, protect the country’s dwindling reserves, and stabilize the peso, which has experienced significant devaluation. One of the key measures involves limiting the purchase of US dollars (with a limit on buying a maximum of $200 USD per month through official channels, subject to several taxes on of which is known as the solidarity tax). Additionally, Argentine businesses face restrictions on capital outflows, limiting how much they can invest abroad and reduce the sales of Argentinian pesos. The Rise of the "Blue Dollar" The restrictions on dollar purchases have given rise to a parallel currency market, where individuals and businesses trade US dollars at significantly higher rates than the official exchange rate. This market, referred to as the "blue dollar" market, operates outside government regulations and reflects the true demand for dollars in the country. The "blue dollar" rate is often double or even triple the official exchange rate. This discrepancy is largely driven by the limited supply of dollars through legal means and the public's distrust in the peso. Many Argentinians, especially those travelling abroad or purchasing imported goods, rely on the blue dollar market to obtain US dollars Economic Consequences The gap between the official and unofficial rates, known as the exchange rate spread, is a key indicator of economic instability. As the gap widens, it fuels inflation, since businesses that depend on imports often have to pay the higher blue dollar rate for goods, leading to cost-push inflation. Additionally, Argentina has developed a dual pricing system in some sectors, where businesses offer different prices for goods and services depending on whether payment is made in pesos or dollars. This system exacerbates economic inequality and further erodes confidence in the government’s ability to manage the economy. The blue dollar market has become a necessary but problematic feature of the Argentine economy. While it offers an alternative for those looking to protect their savings from inflation or engage in foreign transactions, it also undermines the government’s currency controls. Questions 1. What are currency controls? 2. What has been the problem with Argentinian currency? 3. What is the ‘blue dollar’? 4. What is a parallel currency market? 5. What is an exchange rate spread? 6. What is a dual pricing system and how has it arisen in Argentia? |
# 17 NAFTA vs. USMCA DifferencesThe United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA), which came into effect on July 1, 2020, replaced the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), which had been in place since 1994. While the two agreements share many similarities in terms of promoting free trade across North America, USMCA introduces several important updates and changes to reflect modern economic realities. Here are the key differences: 1. Automotive Industry Rules
2. Labor and Workers’ Rights
3. Intellectual Property (IP) and Digital Trade
4. Environmental Standards
5. Sunset Clause
6. Dairy Market Access
7. Dispute Resolution
8. Currency Manipulation
9. E-commerce
10. Pharmaceuticals
11. Government Procurement
Conclusion: In summary, the USMCA is an updated version of NAFTA that modernizes trade rules to better reflect changes in the global economy, particularly in areas like digital trade, labor rights, environmental standards, and the automotive industry. While it maintains the basic framework of free trade across North America, it introduces several key improvements, especially in terms of labor rights, IP protections, and dispute resolution mechanisms, making it more aligned with 21st-century economic realities. |
#18 Steady as she goesFloating exchange rates are generally considered flexible but subject to volatility. Their stability depends on Supply and Demand Dynamics, which are affected by Economic Fundamentals. Prospering countries (low inflation, balanced current account, and positive growth tend to have more stable exchange rates. Global shocks like a rise in oil or change in investor sentiment affect rates. Canada's currency has recently been affected by changes in oil prices, highlighting the country's reliance on oil exports. In 2022, for example, the Canadian dollar weakened significantly when oil prices dropped unexpectedly, especially toward the end of the year! In 2023, Japan’s yen experienced substantial depreciation under its floating exchange rate regime. The value of the yen fell to over 150 per U.S. dollar, its lowest in decades, primarily due to the significant interest rate differential between the Bank of Japan’s ultra-low rates and the U.S. Federal Reserve’s aggressive rate hikes. Despite pressure on the currency, Japan refrained from large-scale interventions to support the yen, relying on the flexibility of the floating system to adjust to market forces. Despite occasional instability, floating exchange rates can help automatically adjust imbalances in the economy. For example, if a country runs a trade deficit, its currency might depreciate, making its exports cheaper and imports more expensive, thereby correcting the imbalance over time. In countries with strong institutions, sound economic policies, and low inflation, floating exchange rates often show long-term stability! For example, the currencies of advanced economies like the U.S. dollar, euro, or yen float relatively smoothly with some short-term volatility. By contrast, developing countries (non-reserve currency countries) One of the largest swings in the value of the U.S. dollar in recent history occurred during 2022 where the U.S. dollar surged by approximately 8% against a basket of major currencies, reaching a two-decade high. This sharp appreciation was driven by a combination of factors, including the U.S. Federal Reserve's aggressive interest rate hikes to combat inflation and global instability caused by geopolitical tensions like the war in Ukraine! In contrast, a significant depreciation of the dollar happened in 2020, when the currency declined by about 7.1% due to record low interest rates and the economic disruptions caused by the COVID-19 pandemic |
#19 BBC Investigates Asia:CRACKING THE CODE OF ASIA’S ECONOMIC MIRACLE By Eleanor Clark, BBC Economics Correspondent In the latter half of the 20th century, a remarkable transformation swept across East and Southeast Asia. Countries that had struggled with poverty and instability emerged as global powerhouses, boasting rapid industrial growth and significant improvements in living standards. This phenomenon, often dubbed the “Asian Miracle,” has fascinated economists and policymakers worldwide, sparking debates about its replicability and long-term sustainability. A central pillar of Asia’s success was its focus on producing goods for international markets. By prioritizing exports over domestic consumption, countries like South Korea, Vietnam, and Taiwan rapidly integrated into global trade networks. They initially concentrated on labor-intensive industries such as textiles before transitioning to more advanced sectors, including electronics and heavy machinery. This export-driven approach was key to building competitive economies and driving growth. Yet this wasn’t purely a market-driven story. Governments in the region played a critical role in shaping their economic trajectories. Policymakers guided development through targeted investments in infrastructure, technology, and education. In many cases, emerging industries were protected with tariffs or quotas, allowing them to grow strong enough to compete internationally. These state-led initiatives were paired with efforts to encourage domestic savings, creating funds for investment and reducing reliance on foreign capital. Political stability was another striking feature of the region’s development, although it came with trade-offs. In nations like South Korea and Singapore, centralized, sometimes authoritarian leadership ensured consistency in economic planning, which was vital for long-term industrial growth. However, these governance structures also raised concerns about political freedoms and human rights. Cultural factors played their part too. High levels of savings, often rooted in societal norms, provided resources for investment. Meanwhile, a strong emphasis on education created skilled workforces that could adapt to the changing demands of industrialization. Notably, equity was also embedded in the model, with reforms aimed at reducing income inequality and fostering a robust middle class. South Korea and Taiwan, for example, implemented land redistribution policies that not only promoted fairness but also fueled economic participation. Despite its successes, the Asian model was not without its costs. Rapid industrialization took a heavy toll on the environment, with pollution and resource depletion becoming significant concerns. Over-reliance on exports made these economies vulnerable to external shocks, as evidenced during the 1997 Asian Financial Crisis. The model’s authoritarian underpinnings, while enabling swift action, also limited democratic processes in several countries. As Africa seeks to accelerate its economic development, many have wondered whether the Asian approach could serve as a blueprint. The continent’s rich natural resources and youthful population offer significant potential. However, its diverse political landscapes, infrastructural gaps, and unique historical contexts present challenges. While some aspects of the Asian model—such as prioritizing education and fostering export industries—may hold promise, wholesale replication seems unlikely. The story of Asia’s rise is a testament to the power of deliberate, coordinated strategies in transforming economies. It also serves as a reminder that success is rarely without compromise. As the global focus shifts toward sustainability and inclusivity, the world will be watching to see how this model evolves—and whether its lessons can inspire growth in other corners of the globe. Editor’s Note: This report is part of our ongoing series investigating global economic transformations. For more insights, stay tuned to BBC Investigates. |
#20 Activity Title: Breaking Dependency: Development Strategies for Struggling EconomiesObjective: Select a country heavily dependent on one or two key products (e.g., oil, cocoa, or tourism). Investigate its economic challenges and propose a development strategy Country Selection and Research:
Applying Development Strategies Pairs will explore how their selected country could address its dependency through specific development strategies, such as: 1. Trade strategies: E.g., shifting to exports with added value (e.g., producing chocolate instead of exporting raw cocoa). 2. Diversification: Identifying sectors where growth potential exists (e.g., renewable energy, tourism). 3. Social enterprises: How community-driven businesses might contribute to sustainable growth. 4. Market-based policies vs. Interventionist policies: Debating the role of the free market versus government programs. 5. Provision of merit goods: Investing in education, healthcare, or infrastructure to empower workforce productivity. 6. Inward foreign direct investment (FDI): Attracting investment in sectors other than the key product. 7. Foreign aid 8. Multilateral development assistance 9. Institutional change: Proposing the role of multilateral development aid or reforms in governance.
MAIN TASK: You are looking to identify the current problems and propose solutions that seem ‘most appropriate’. For example, it is unlikely you will choose a path that is identical to the Asian development model because of the nature of your country selected! Each pair presents their proposed development strategy to the class (3-5 minutes each), including: A summary of their country’s dependency issue. The selected development strategies and how they address the problem. Potential challenges in implementing the strategies. |
#21 Nigeria’s Transition Away from Oil: A Struggle for Diversification |
#22 The unlucky countryIf Australia is regarded as the ‘lucky country’ then Brazil must surely be the opposite! Famous for being one of the most successful countries (in GDP terms) between 1968 and 1973, averaging 11% growth! Brazil's economic trajectory has been marked by periods of significant growth followed by downturns, leading to its current classification as a developing nation. While Brazil has never officially been categorized as a developed country, it has experienced phases of rapid economic expansion that brought it closer to developed status. Economic Growth and Challenges:
Current Status: As of 2024, Brazil is classified as an upper-middle-income developing mixed economy. Despite its large GDP, the country continues to face challenges such as high levels of corruption, crime, and social inequality. In summary, while Brazil has approached developed status during periods of economic prosperity, various internal and external challenges have impeded its ability to maintain this status, resulting in its current classification as a developing nation. Questions
|
#23 The Middle-Income Trap (MIT):A Development Dilemma The term "middle-income trap" has become a key concept in development economics, describing the issue faced by countries that achieve middle-income status but struggle to break through to high-income levels. The MIT isn't strictly defined in terms of fixed dollar thresholds, as it is more of a conceptual idea, however, organizations like the World Bank offer the following guidelines:
Countries experiencing the middle-income trap typically find themselves within the upper-middle-income range ($4,466 to $13,845). This economic stagnation is often rooted in structural and developmental hurdles, where nations find themselves caught between resource-driven growth models reliant on cheap labor and the more complex demands of a high-productivity, innovation-led economy. What Is the Middle-Income Trap? For many developing nations, initial economic growth is driven by exports of commodities or low-cost manufacturing. These activities generate substantial momentum, lifting millions out of poverty and into the middle-income bracket. However, maintaining that trajectory requires a shift toward advanced industries, technological innovation, and skilled labor—something that can be a struggle if there is already a regional ‘winner’! Instead of progressing, such countries find themselves outcompeted by low-wage economies in basic manufacturing while simultaneously unable to rival the technological and capital-intensive industries of wealthier nations. The result? Stagnating growth, unfulfilled potential, and the looming shadow of the middle-income trap. Key Features of the Trap Growth Slowdown At the heart of the middle-income trap is a sudden deceleration in growth. Countries that once enjoyed rapid economic expansion encounter barriers like stagnant productivity and insufficient diversification, leaving them stuck in economic limbo. Structural Challenges Many middle-income countries rely heavily on low-value-added manufacturing or commodities for growth. Without significant investment in research and development (R&D), innovation remains weak, and these nations struggle to compete in global markets. Compounding this is an educational system that fails to produce the high-skilled workforce needed to thrive in advanced industries. Economic and Institutional Constraints Weak governance and pervasive corruption often hinder the effective implementation of policies needed to foster sustainable growth. Inadequate infrastructure and financial systems further stifle entrepreneurship and industrial upgrading, leaving economies ill-equipped to transition to high-income status. Global Competition Middle-income nations face a double-edged sword. On one hand, they are undercut by low-wage economies like Vietnam and Bangladesh in cost-sensitive industries. On the other hand, they cannot match the technological prowess and productivity of high-income nations, such as Germany or the United States. Questions
|
