Post 2015: Global Action for an Inclusive and Sustainable Future

CHApTER EIgHT
The new GSPs
will come into
effect in 2014 and
so will run
parallel to any
post-2015 global
development
framework, acting
as a backdrop to
whatever global
partnership
arrangements it
agrees.
158
sustainable development and good governance 110
(com, 2012c). there is evidence of the beneficial
impact of the Eu’s GSp on stimulating developing
countries’ trade and investment patterns.
preferences can help to increase lDc exports,
their adoption rates are typically high, and lDc
exporters tend to benefit from the preference
margins (carIS, 2010). the growth of trade and
investment with the Eu in recent years has been
higher for preference-receiving countries than for
non-beneficiary countries, ranging from just over
10% for the acp countries to nearly 30% for the
GSp+ group (Stevens, 2012).
as the current 10-year cycle of Eu’s trade
preferences is due to end in 2013, the preferences
are being reformed in order to benefit the countries
most in need of them. the recent reform of the Eu’s
GSp will also focus on such countries, reducing
the number of beneficiaries from 176 to 89 (com,
2011a): 49 lDcs and 40 lIcs that have no other
preferential arrangements (typically Ftas) to access
the Eu market. although 87 countries will no longer
benefit from the scheme, 67 of these are not affected
since they already enjoy alternative arrangements. 111
the negative impacts on these countries’ exports
are expected to be typically marginal (total exports
fall by less than 1%) (com, 2011b). these countries
remain ‘eligible’, which means that should they no
longer be classified as HIcs or umIcs they will again
be beneficiaries of the scheme.
the new GSps will come into effect in 2014 and so
will run parallel to any post-2015 global development
framework, acting as a backdrop to whatever global
partnership arrangements it agrees. the reforms
will expand market opportunities for countries still
EuropEan rEport on DEvElopmEnt 2013
benefiting from the GSp. 112 the roo provide new
opportunities and regional cumulation has also been
enhanced. Derogation from roo has been simplified,
including the possibility of swift decisions in the
event of, for example, natural disasters. Important
practical changes include simplifying the process
for acquiring certificates of origin and establishing
a helpdesk for exporters in developing countries.
the aim to focus preferences on those countries
most in need is a step in the right direction. 113 but
for it to be effective in influencing their structural
economic transformation, the GSps will need to
be complemented with measures to increase their
productive capacities by improving the supply-side
capacity and competitiveness. the latter is likely to
make all the difference to which countries benefit
from the reforms, and by how much.
there is also scope for enabling policies for
demand-side measures (e.g. GSps) and supply-side
measures (aft). For example, many of the goods
on which there will be new graduation are ones that
poor and uncompetitive countries cannot supply
(Stevens et al., 2011). moreover, it is possible that
most of the growth in exports from lIcs and lDcs
due to GSp reform could be in natural resources. a
preliminary analysis undertaken by carIS (2011)
concluded that for the lDcs that benefit from the
Eba regime that already offers DFQF market access,
the evidence is mixed. there is a need for more
creative policies to tackle the structural problems
that lock-in lDcs’ export capacities, for example
in primary commodities, rather than incentivising
structural economic transformation.
there is evidence of some changes to the Eu’s
preferential regime that incentivise building
110 these are extended to vulnerable economies in their effort to implement the International convention on Human rights and Sustainable
Development (com, 2012c).
111 In practice, preferences will no longer be available for 20 partners: eight HIcs (bahrain, brunei Darussalam, Kuwait, macao, oman, Qatar,
Saudi arabia and united arab Emirates), and 12 umIcs (argentina, belarus, brazil, cuba, Gabon, Kazakhstan, libya, malaysia, palau, russia,
uruguay and venezuela).
112 Despite the potentially significant effect of this reform on existing trading patterns and the lDcs in particular, there are relatively few impact
evaluation studies in this area.
113 See also bilal et al. (2011) for further commentary on coherence between the GSp and the Eu’s overall trade and development objectives.