|
|
| Knowledge Base |
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
Relevance of “policy space” for development: implications for multilateral trade negotiations
What policies will help facilitate the diversification and development process without conflicting with trade rules or jeopardizing the needs of future generations?
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Overview
|
|
|
|
Read This Document
|
|
|
|
Meet The Authors
|
|
|
|
Papers by Same Organization
|
|
|
|
|
| |
This paper makes a compelling case for public intervention for fostering industrial development. The authors have also summarized evidence that suggests that present day developed countries have extensively employed infant industry protection, industrial policy and performance requirements, soft intellectual property protection regimes, subsidies, government procurement and regional economic integration among other policies in their process of industrialization.
Many of these policies have also been effectively and successfully emulated by the newly industrializing economies in East Asia to build internationally competitive modern industries despite the lack of the apparent comparative advantage. A development-friendly outcome of the Doha Round would provide flexibility from the TRIPs and TRIMs obligations for facilitating transfer of technology and building up local capabilities in developing countries besides allowing them adequate space for pursuing infant industry protection in the tariff reduction commitments.
GDNet originated |
Download Full Text
This URL might direct you to other sources that GDN is not responsible for |
|
|
|
|
USA
Research Associate, Global Development and Environment Institute (G-DAE), Tufts University
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
