COMMITTING TO GROW:
THE FULL IMPACT OF WTO ACCESSIONS
Adam Jakubik
IMF
André Brotto
University of St. Gallen
Roberta Piermartini
WTO
Prepared for the IMF-WB-WTO Conference 4-5 October 2021
Disclaimer: This is a working paper, and hence it represents research in progress. The views expressed in this paper are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the views of the WTO or its members, or the views of the IMF, its Executive Board, or IMF management, and are without prejudice to members' rights and obligations under the WTO.
1
MOTIVATION
2
WHAT DO WE DO?
3
BACKGROUND: THE ACCESSION PROCESS
4
EMPIRICAL SPECIFICATION
5
RESULTS
6
ENDOGENEITY ISSUES
Subramanian and Wei (2007), Tomz et. al (2007); Dutt (2020)
2
1
MOTIVATION
T&W Redux: Heterogeneity by mode of accession and over time
3
Significant effect
before accession
A map by accession modes
Article XII Members
Article XXVI Members
Article XXXIII/Founding Members
Question: Do commitments taken to enter the WTO have an impact on growth?
5
2
WHAT DO WE DO?
6
2
WHAT DO WE FIND?
An heterogeneous processes
The length between application and accession varies a lot.
LDC status, timing and representativeness only explain some of the variation.
Accession Length
Distance in years between application and accession dates
Others
LDC’s
Big economies
3
BACKGROUND: THE ACCESSION PROCESS for Art. XII economies
THE ACCESSION PROCESS
Length and important milestones
After the release of the MFTR countries negotiate their structural commitments through questions and answers.
Parallel to WP meetings, countries negotiate, bilaterally, concessions on market access.
Tariff bindings have an implementation period after accession.
Application
MFTR Release
2,1 y
WP Meetings
WP Report
Goods Schedule
Accession
Final Bindings Implemented
7,7 y
6,3 y
1,1 y
0,6 y
9,3 y
Average Length
THE ACCESSION PROCESS
Questions Examples | Croatia
Application
MFTR Release
2,1 y
WP Meetings
WP Report
Goods Schedule
Accession
Final Bindings Implemented
7,7 y
6,3 y
1,1 y
0,6 y
9,3 y
….prior to accession to the WTO, Croatia will bring the existing legislation to conform with WTO principles.
Could Croatia elaborate on the two systems in place, for domestic and imported goods ?
WT/ACC/HRV/11 - Question 48 | 1996
WT/ACC/HRV/11 - Answer to Question 48
Croatia applies an excise tax differently with respect to domestic and foreign products. When will Croatia definitely bring the existing legislation in conformity with Article III?
WT/ACC/HRV/30 - Question 39 |1997
The existing legislation on excise taxes will be brought into conformity with Art. II of GATT on 1 January 1998.
WT/ACC/HRV/30 - Answer to Question 39
According to the reply to question 39 of WT/ACC/HRV/ 30, Croatia states that changes […] is to enter into force on 1 January 1998. Please give a status report on the implementation of these revised taxes.
WT/ACC/HRV/39 - Question 11 | 1998
Pre-ACCESSION INDEX: the numerator
Viet Nam’s Example
Publication of Q&A Docs.
WP Meetings
ACCESSION�Jan/2007
Jul/1998
Dec/1998
Jul/1999
Nov/2000
Apr/2002
May/2003
Dec/2003
Jun/2004
Dec/2004
Sep/2005
Mar/2006
Jul/2006
Oct/2006
Oct/2006
MFTR Release�Sep/1996
Mar/1998
Apr/1999
Jul/1999
Jun/2000
Ago/2001
Mar/2003
Oct/2003
Apr/2004
May/2004
Oct/2004
Apr/2005
Jul/2005
Sep/2005
Dec/2005
Jun/2006
Sep/2006
Oct/2006
Oct/2006
Pre-ACCESSION INDEX
Significant variations across Article XII economies
Assumption: the number of commitments undertaken can be proxied by the number of questions asked during the WP meetings. Evidence: 65% correlation
POST-ACCESSION INDEX
Tariff Commitments and Schedules
The post-accession index varies on average across 26% of tariff lines that are not immediately implemented
Country | Implementation of Final Bound |
| Country | Implementation of Final Bound | ||
| ||||||
| Max years | Immediate |
|
| Max years | Immediate |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Afghanistan | 3 | 99.8% |
| Lithuania | 8 | 94.5% |
Albania | 9 | 63.6% |
| Republic of Moldova | 4 | 64.5% |
Armenia | 4 | 98.1% |
| Mongolia | 8 | 83.6% |
Bulgaria | 14 | 41.0% |
| Montenegro | 10 | 82.8% |
Cabo Verde | 10 | 38.4% |
| Nepal | 10 | 7.5% |
Cambodia | 10 | 99.4% |
| Oman | 9 | 64.2% |
China | 9 | 45.3% |
| Panama | 14 | 51.1% |
Chinese Taipei | 9 | 55.3% |
| Russian Federation | 8 | 42.7% |
Croatia | 7 | 79.4% |
| Samoa | 10 | 99.2% |
Ecuador | 11 | 98.2% |
| Saudi Arabia | 10 | 88.7% |
Estonia | 6 | 91.8% |
| Seychelles | 8 | 99.9% |
Georgia | 6 | 53.1% |
| Tajikistan | 7 | 46.6% |
Jordan | 10 | 69.5% |
| North Macedonia | 9 | 63.2% |
Kazakhstan | 5 | 63.5% |
| Tonga | 1 | 100% |
Kyrgyzstan | 7 | 43.7% |
| Ukraine | 5 | 97.2% |
Lao People's DR | 10 | 99.6% |
| Vanuatu | 3 | 99.1% |
Latvia | 9 | 82.3% |
| Viet Nam | 12 | 59.4% |
Liberia | 3 | 95.8% |
| Yemen | 0 | 100.0% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Article XII members | 7.7 | 73.9% | | | | |
of which LDCs | 6.8 | 69.2% | of which accession year <= 2000 | 9.0 | 63.2% | |
of which non-LDCs | 8.5 | 75.0% | of which accession year > 2000 | 12.0 | 59.4% | |
POST-ACCESSION INDEX
Significant variations across Article XII economies
DATA AND SPECIFICATION
4
25% larger after 5 years
Heckman procedure
DATA AND SPECIFICATION
ff
4
(1)
(2)
(3)
RESULTS
5
(within)
6
Robustness and Endogeneity
Selection/pro-reform government effect: long and variable lag between application and accession (Tang and Wei, 2009). Accession date decided by Working Party, depends on existing members. Speed not correlated with chief executive power.
12/34 Article XII members had same “chief executive party” in power at application & accession. 6/12 very stable, in power >10 years before application
IV: accession index of nearest neighbours’ accessions by geography and/or time. Results robust.
Driven by time-trend? Falsification test: IV using randomized member’s index produces insignificant results.
Future Research
Further research needed to identify the specific types of reforms undertaken during WTO accession with the greatest impact on growth. Requires typology of Article XII accession commitments, mapping to legislation, and the dates of implementation.
Thank you!
Comments, questions and critics are more than welcome.
6
Appendix 1
2SLS Results
6
Appendix 2
Falsification test - 2SLS Results with randomized instrument country
DESCRIPTIVE ANALYSIS
2
Catching up wealthier peers