WTO agrees global trade deal worth $1tn

By Andrew WalkerBBC Economics correspondent

The deal was finally agreed after marathon talks in Bali Continue reading the main story

Related Stories

Timeline: World Trade Organization WTO timeline WTO cuts 2013 trade forecast

Ministers from 159 countries have reached a deal intended to boost global trade at a meeting in Bali, Indonesia. The World Trade Organization's first comprehensive agreement involves an effort to simplify the procedures for doing business across borders. There will also be improved duty-free access for goods sold by the world's poorest countries. The deal, which could add about $1tn to world trade, gives developing nations more scope to increase farm subsidies. "For the first time in our history, the WTO has truly delivered," said WTO chief Roberto Azevedo, as the organisation reached its first comprehensive agreement since it was founded in 1995.
Continue reading the main story

Analysis
Bureaucratic barriers to commerce can be a big problem. Africa, for example, has the longest customs delays in the world. The African Development Bank says it can take 36 hours to get goods through the customs post at the Victoria Falls crossing from Zambia into Zimbabwe. And there are often more barriers to negotiate once goods are over the border. The highway between Lagos and Abuja in Nigeria has 69 official checkpoints. It takes time and costs money dealing with these delays. It can be disastrous for a cargo of perishable goods. These are exactly the kind of barriers that the WTO deal is intended to tackle. Dealing with them would certainly make it cheaper for business to move goods across borders. And if it's cheaper, they will do more of it.

"This time the entire membership came together. We have put the 'world' back in World Trade Organization," he said. Indonesian Trade Minister Gita Wirjawan said the deal would "benefit all WTO members". UK Prime Minister David Cameron said the "historic" agreement could be a "lifeline" for the world's poorest people, as well as benefiting British businesses to the tune of more than $1bn (600m). However, the "Bali package", as the WTO calls the agreement, was criticised by some development campaigners who said it was not going far enough.

Rich and poor

It is worth spelling out what is not covered by this: tariffs or taxes on imported goods. Dealing with them has been the bread and butter of past trade rounds - but not for this deal. The core of this agreement is what is called trade facilitation. This is about reducing the costs and delays involved in international trade. It is often described as "cutting red tape". Some analysts suggest the benefits could be large. An influential Washington think tank has put the potential gains to the world economy at close to $1tn and 20m million jobs.
Continue reading the main story

The negotiations have failed to secure permanent protection for countries to safeguard the food rights of their peoples
John HilaryWar on Want

It also estimates the cost of administrative barriers as double the cost of tariffs. The rich countries have agreed to help the poorer WTO members with implementing this agreement.

Another important aspect of the Bali package deals with enabling poor countries to sell their goods more easily. This part is about tariffs, and also quota limits on imports. Rich countries and the more advanced developing countries have agreed to cut tariffs on products from the poorest nations. EU trade commissioner Karel De Gucht told the BBC that if the poorest nations "have more trading capacity it will also result in more investment in logistics and infrastructure". But campaigners describe the plan as weak. Nick Dearden of the World Development Movement said: "If the US and EU really wanted to tackle global poverty, they would have made the leastdeveloped-countries package much stronger."

WTO chief Roberto Azevedo: "For the first time in our history, the WTO has truly delivered"

Credibility test
Getting this deal has involved introducing some extra flexibility into the existing WTO rules on farm subsidies. India led the campaign, by insisting that it should be allowed to subsidise grain under its new food security law. There is a strong possibility that India's policy would break WTO rules that limit farm subsidies. A "peace clause" has been agreed, under which members agree not to initiate WTO disputes against those breaching the subsidy limits as part of a foodsecurity programme. But it only lasts four years and there is criticism from campaigners. John Hilary of War on Want, a UK-based group, said: "The negotiations have failed to secure permanent protection for countries to safeguard the food rights of their peoples, exposing hundreds of millions to the prospect of hunger and starvation simply in order to satisfy the dogma of free trade."

Traditional dancing was performed at the WTO meeting in Bali

The Bali meeting was an important one for the WTO's credibility. The deal includes a rather small part of the negotiating programme that was launched 12 years ago, known as the Doha Round. Repeated delays have made the WTO seem irrelevant as a forum for negotiating trade liberalisation agreements. It was one of the main reasons so many countries have sought to make deals bilaterally or among small groups. The agreement will help repair the WTO's damaged image. Nonetheless, the rest of the Doha Round will be very difficult to conclude. The deal seeks further reductions in farm subsidies, tariffs on industrial goods, barriers to international trade in services and more. All are very difficult to conclude and are entwined with domestic political factors in many of the WTO's 159 member countries. So don't hold your breath waiting for the final deal.

http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/international/economic-growth-in-us-to-quicken-nextyear-imfs-christine-lagarde/articleshow/27811158.cms
The WTO describes itself as "a rules-based, member-driven organization all decisions are made by the member governments, and the rules are the outcome of negotiations among members". process of decision-making.

[53]

The WTO Agreement foresees votes where consensus cannot be reached, but the practice of consensus dominates the

[54]

The euros hellhound It is time to reform the troika that handles euro zone bail-outs Feb 1st 2014 | From the print edition

IN GREEK mythology, Cerberus is the three-headed dog guarding the gates to Hades. In modern Greek politics, the troika is the three-headed monster that traps the country in an economic underworld. At the finance ministry in Athens, even the cleaning ladies shout murderers at visiting members of the troika. In Lisbon protest banners declare Fuck the troika. There is now a popular Portuguese neologism, entroikado, roughly meaning economically screwed. As guardian of the creditors, the troika was never going to be loved. The trio of the International Monetary Fund, the European Commission and the European Central Bank was improvised at the time of the first Greek bail-out in May 2010. It has since been at the heart of other rescues, of Ireland, Portugal and, most recently, Cyprus. Increasingly, its role is being questioned. Is the monster ripping too much living flesh from the countries it is supposed to be saving? And who controls the beast anyway? In this section
Praying for peace Statue of limitations Madness on the Bosphorus Hail, the Swabian housewife An all-female race The euros hellhound Correction: Milagros Morago
Reprints

Related topics
EU economy Central banking Public finance European Union Ireland

The European Parliament has begun an inquiry into the troikas workings. MEPs have been visiting bailed-out countries and have summoned troika officials for a grilling. Socialists accuse the troika of incompetence, even of breaching social rights in the European Union treaties, and want it abolished. Conservatives say the troika was a necessary expedient that has proven its worth, but should be replaced over time. Both sides agree that it rests on a dubious legal base and is alarmingly unaccountable. The troika is most bitterly criticised in Greece, and with some reason. Output there has fallen by a quarter since the start of the euro crisis and 27% of the population is out of work. Though Greece has, remarkably, achieved a primary budget surplus (ie, before interest payments) it is once again at odds with its creditors, who are holding back the next tranche of loans. The timing of the dispute is awkward. Greece holds the rotating EU presidency, and its weakened government risks being humiliated in Mays European elections by anti-troika parties. Antonis Samaras, the conservative prime minister, claims the problem is caused by a fight between the IMF and the commission; Greece, he says, risks being trampled by the two elephants. Indeed, the heads of the troika have often disagreed. The IMF only grudgingly accepted the ECBs insistence that senior bondholders of Irish banks should be spared, increasing the burden on Irish taxpayers. The fund consistently argued, privately at first and then publicly, that the Europeans were pushing austerity too hard. Though it fudged the first Greek bail-out, it has become more hard-nosed in its reckoning of the sustainability of Greeces huge debt. At first this suited Germany, supporting demands that private bondholders take losses to reduce the cost of a second bail-out (the idea horrified the ECB). Now the fund is inconvenient: reducing Greeces debt credibly requires a write-off of official loans. Germany would rather stretch out maturities. But extend and pretend leaves a large overhang of debt and political uncertainty that deters investors. Mr Samaras privately believes the IMF is taking a pessimistic view of its public finances to force Germanys hand. He is telling the troika not to push too hard lest its demands boost the radical leftwing Syriza party, which leads the opinion polls. Germany, and by extension the commission, are sympathetic, even though Greece still has some way to go before running the big surpluses it needs to pay down the debt. For the IMF, the more serious deficit is the long list of unfulfilled structural reforms. If the Europeans really want to keep Syriza out of power, the best answer would be quickly to forgive a big chunk of debt.

The three heads of the troika have worked more or less amicably, but reform is overdue. To some extent the troika is already fading away. Ireland and Spain (which received a partial rescue for its banks) have ended their bail-out programmes and returned to the markets. Portugal might do the same this spring, perhaps helped by a precautionary line of credit. That leaves the original problem, Greece, and to a lesser extent Cyprus. The euros dog days Europhiles hope that a fully fledged European Monetary Fund, built around their rescue fund, the European Stability Mechanism, will one day take over from the IMF, and be subject to scrutiny by the European Parliament. But this would require treaty change to turn the ESM, now an intergovernmental body, into an EU institution. Germany (and other creditors) would have to agree to surrender control of their money. And getting the European Parliament involved in setting macroeconomic conditions is a recipe for paralysis. An alternative option might be to leave the problem entirely, or principally, in the hands of the IMF. It has greater expertise and independence than the commission. True, it might not always have had enough money to finance the biggest European bail-outs. But in Greece it would have reduced the bill by cutting the debt sooner and more decisively, while in Ireland it would have bailed in senior bank creditors. The losses would thus have been imposed on those who deserved to bear them: the banks that lent cheap money to reckless borrowers. Perhaps co-operation between the Europeans and the IMF will always be needed to deal with the unique problems of highly integrated countries locked in a single-currency zone, with a single interest rate. But the presence of the third head, the ECB, is clearly an anomaly. The central banks mandate does not stretch to bargaining over budget cuts and reforms to labour markets, or threatening to cut off liquidity if a country does not comply with its wishes. Now that the ECB is becoming the euro zones main bank supervisor, the conflict of interest is glaring. Its head should surely be the first to be lopped off.

http://www.economist.com/news/europe/21595432-it-time-reform-troika-handles-euro-zone-bailouts-euros-hellhound?zid=301&ah=e8eb01e57f7c9b43a3c864613973b57f

India received $28bn FDI in 2013: UNCTAD

Jan 29, 2014, 11.20AM IST PTI

UNITED NATIONS: FDI flows into India grew 17 per cent in 2013 to USD 28 billion despite unexpected capital outflows in the middle of the year, according to a United Nations report. It also said foreign direct investment across the world rose to levels not seen since the start of the global economic crisis in 2008.

India ranked 16th among the top 20 global economies receiving the most FDI, witnessing a 17 per cent growth to USD 28 billion. Global FDI increased by 11 per cent in 2013 to an estimated USD 1.46 trillion, with the lion's share going to developing countries, according to the UN Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD) report. UNCTAD forecasts that FDI flows will rise gradually in 2014 and 2015, to USD 1.6 trillion and USD 1.8 trillion, respectively. As global economic growth gains momentum, this may prompt investors to turn their cash holdings into new investments, it said. However, uneven levels of growth, fragility and unpredictability in a number of economies and risks related to the tapering of quantitative easing could dampen the FDI recovery. FDI flows to developing economies reached a new high of 759 billion dollars, accounting for 52 per cent, during the year. Developed countries, however, remained at an historical low (39 per cent) for the second consecutive year. FDI inflows to developed countries increased by 12 per cent to USD 576 billion, with such investment to the European Union increasing, while flows to the United States continued their decline. The US received USD 159 billion in FDI flows last year. The BRICS - Brazil, Russian Federation, India, China and South Africa - continued to be strong performers in attracting FDI. Their current share of global FDI flows at 22 per cent is twice that of their pre-crisis level. Total inflows to the five leading emerging economies reached 322 billion dollars in 2013, 21 per cent higher than in 2012. South Africa outperformed other countries within the group, with FDI inflows rising by 126 per cent. Although inflows to developed countries appear to be recovering over 2012, the picture is mixed. Despite positive signs of recovery in some developed country regions such as parts of the EU, flows to the United States failed to reverse their decline, contrary to other signs of economic recovery over the past year. The increase for developing economies was mainly driven by Latin America, the Caribbean and Africa; while developing Asia, the world's largest recipient region for FDI, saw flows at a level similar to 2012. Total inflows to developing Asia, comprising East Asia, South Asia, South-East Asia and West Asia, amounted to an estimated USD 406 billion in 2013, a level similar to 2012. With inflows to China at an estimated USD 127 billion, including both financial and non-financial sectors, the country again ranked second in the world.

IMF Executive Board Concludes 2013 Article IV Consultation with Bulgaria

Press Release No. 14/30 January 30, 2014

On January 24, 2014, the Executive Board of the International Monetary Fund (IMF) concluded the Article IV consultation with Bulgaria.1 In the aftermath of the global financial crisis growth has remained low and unemployment high. Real GDP growth is projected at about 0.5 percent in 2013 as domestic uncertainties undermined demand but exports are performing well. Domestic demand is projected to recover gradually, and exports and foreign direct investment (FDI) will benefit from recovery in Europe, allowing real GDP growth to rise to about 1.6 percent in 2014. The current account of the balance of payments is expected to be in surplus in 2013 but return to a modest deficit in the medium term, financed by FDI. Inflation is projected to be subdued in the short term, rising only from 0.4 percent in 2013 to 0.8 percent in 2014. With employment beginning to grow, unemployment is projected to decline slightly in 2014 but remain high. Strong macroeconomic and financial sector policies have mitigated vulnerabilities arising from the difficult external and domestic environment. The fiscal deficit fell to 0.5 percent of GDP in 2012 and public debt remained the second lowest in the EU. The reduction in banks foreign liabilities has been gradual and is largely driven by plentiful bank liquidity, resulting in a positive net foreign asset position for the first time since 2006, and capitalization of the financial sector is high. Although nonperforming loans (NPLs)a legacy from the boom period and subsequent crisisamounted to 17.2 percent of loans in September, coverage by provisions is comfortable at 72.7 percent. Convergence to EU income levels over the coming decades will require accelerated growth. Bulgaria ranks favorably versus comparators on macro-policy outcomes but less so on other dimensions critical to the well functioning of the economy. Bulgaria is comparable to good performers in central Europe and the Baltics on fiscal and country risk, and the income tax system is also seen as favorable in competitiveness rankings. However, Bulgaria ranks much lower on measures such as enforcing contracts, resolving insolvencies, and some areas of red tape. More generally, the judicial system is viewed as problematic, and corruption and cronyism as widespread. These shortcomings will need to be addressed for Bulgaria to unlock its growth potential. Executive Board Assessment2 Executive Directors commended the authorities for maintaining macroeconomic and financial stability despite external and internal challenges. Nevertheless, growth remains weak and unemployment is high. Directors emphasized the need to complement continued prudent policies with accelerated and decisive efforts to address structural impediments to higher growth, job creation, and a faster pace of income convergence with the European Union. Directors generally agreed that the structural fiscal stance under the 2014 budget, which sets the deficit close to national limits under the fiscal rule, strikes an appropriate balance. While the strong fiscal position provides some room to support growth, they underscored the importance of maintaining credibility in the context of the currency board by observing national and EU deficit rules. Fiscal buffers should be rebuilt over time by targeting a balanced structural budget. In the event revenues fall short in the coming year, the authorities should be prepared to adjust spending to achieve the deficit target. While welcoming the intended increase in capital spending, Directors stressed the importance of appropriate project selection and monitoring procedures under the new public investment fund. They encouraged the authorities to improve the targeting and efficiency of social spending, including on healthcare; to reinstate the needed pension reforms; and to address risks associated with some state-owned enterprises.

Directors noted that the financial system is stable, well capitalized, and liquid, but that profitability is low. They encouraged further steps to reduce nonperforming loans through asset disposal in order to reduce asset price uncertainty in the market and support future investment. Directors supported the efforts to preserve the conservative supervisory approach under the new European framework. Directors emphasized that bold structural reforms are needed to lift growth, create jobs, and enhance productivity. Policies should focus on improving the business climate and the judicial system as well as anti-corruption and anti-monopoly regimes. Active labor market policies, including further improvements in education and training will be important to reduce labor market rigidities. Directors also encouraged continued efforts to ensure the rapid and efficient absorption of EU funds.

http://www.imf.org/external/news/default.aspx http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/feb/10/switzerland-talks-eu-immigration-referendum http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-26116648

IMF: Pakistan Economy Improving, Reform on Track

DUBAI, United Arab Emirates February 9, 2014 (AP) By AYA BATRAWY Associated Press

The International Monetary Fund said Sunday that Pakistan has met nearly all of its quantitative performance markers, that its economy is showing signs of improvement and that its reform program remains broadly on track. The nuclear-armed nation of 180 million people faces a host of obstacles as it tries to restructure its economy and buoy its dangerously low foreign currency reserves, which stand at $8.3 billion. While trying to reel back expenditures and reorganize steep subsidy bills, officials say it is essential that economic reforms do not hurt the millions of Pakistanis who live in poverty on less that $2 a day. Pakistan signed a $6.7 billion loan with the IMF in September to rebuild its reserves after more than two years of depletions and support structural changes aimed at boosting investment and growth. The IMF loan to Pakistan came less than six years after the country's last IMF bailout, and the driving need for the money this time was to repay the institution the billions Islamabad still owes.

As part of that agreement, the IMF conducts periodic reviews in order for its executive board to approve installments of $550 million spread out over three years. Pakistan has already undergone one economic review and received two installments totaling nearly $1.1 billion. The third installment is up for consideration in late March. To secure the loan, Pakistan had to commit to changes in the economy designed to increase growth and improve financial stability. The measures aim to bring down the deficit, reduce pervasive electricity shortages and increase the country's poor rate of tax collection. "The current trends of the last few months have been very positive in Pakistan and prices have been stable," Pakistan's Finance Minister Mohammad Ishaq Dar told reporters in Dubai. Dar said the government is following "very strict austerity measures" that have not been easy to make. "I think we have taken very painful measures, which were partially politically unpopular, but I think they were needed by the country and it has not only changed the direction of the economy... it has put us on the road of recovery and stability," he said. Despite overall progress in implementing reforms, IMF's mission chief to Pakistan Jeffrey Franks said in a joint news conference with Dar that pressures on balance of payments are likely to remain in place. The IMF is also concerned that inflation will rebound in the coming months. Franks said the IMF encourages the State Bank of Pakistan to be "vigilant" in its monetary policy to keep inflation at a reasonable level. The IMF forecasts that inflation in Pakistan will hit 10 percent this year. Dar says the government expects inflation to rise above its current 7.9 percent but that it will not hit double digits. Alongside Pakistan's economic challenges are constant risks to its security. The periodic review and press conference were not held in Pakistan, but in the United Arab Emirates' city of Dubai, because IMF officials were not permitted to travel to Pakistan after the body's representative in neighboring Afghanistan was among 21 people killed in a suicide attack in Kabul last month. The IMF expects growth to reach around 3.1 percent for the current fiscal year, still less than half the rate needed to supply jobs to Pakistan's growing population. The deficit, which was roughly 9 percent of gross domestic product in 2012, needs to be brought down to around 3.5 to 4 percent by the end of the three-year program. Dar said the deficit for the first half of the fiscal year stands at 2.2 percent.

E.U. Calls for New Government and Elections in Ukraine

President Viktor Yanukovych's crackdown against ongoing protests alarms the organization
By Michelle Arrouas @MichelleArrouasFeb. 11, 20140

o o o o o o
Read Later
Reuters

The protests continue in Kiev, the Ukrainian capital, and the crackdown on them have now caused the European Union to call for a new government

Email

Print Share

Comment Follow @TIMEWorld

The E.U. is toughening its stance on Ukraine, rebuking President Viktor Yanukovych and calling for a new government to be formed.

In a joint statement by the 28 foreign ministers of member states, the bloc urged Yanukovych to allow for a new and inclusive government, constitutional reform bringing more balance of powers, and preparations for free and fair presidential elections. Signatories expressed concern regarding recent violence, cases of missing persons, torture and intimidation and continuous cases of deliberate targeting of organizers and participants of peaceful protests as well as of journalists. Anti-government protests broke out in Ukraine around three months ago after Yanukovych announced that he would sign a loan package from Russia instead of a free-trade agreement with the E.U. [AP]

http://www.tradefinancemagazine.com/Article/2138009/Search/Results/London-Countertrade-setsdates.html?Keywords=COUNTERTRADE

Hipcricket Maintains Competitive Advantage With Industry Leading 400,000 Mobile Campaigns
Mobile Engagement and Analytics Leader Completes Record 150,000 Campaigns in Calendar 2013 BELLEVUE, WA--(Marketwired - Feb 11, 2014) - Hipcricket, Inc. (OTCBB: HIPP) (OTCQB: HIPP), the leader in mobile engagement and analytics, reported that it has executed more than 400,000 mobile advertising and marketing campaigns through its industry-leading AD LIFE platform to date. This milestone marks the most campaigns completed in the industry since

its founding in 2004, reflecting Hipcricket's industry leadership and unparalleled technology platform. These campaigns service hundreds of unique clients. Among these are 26 Fortune 100 companies including Ford Motors, Google, Mondelz International and Costco. Recent campaign highlights include:

Working with Mondelz and Google to design and build a series of consumer-focused, mobile optimized websites for multiple Mondelz brands. Developed and implemented a mobile checkout system for MGM Resorts International that reduced checkout times. Expanded penetration in lottery sector by powering interactive mobile component of Virginia Lottery's successful Z-VA game.

"We continue to be the mobile advertising and marketing company the industry turns to for inspiration and guidance," said Ivan Braiker, Hipcricket CEO. "Our cutting edge mobile

engagement and analytics platform AD LIFE, provides customers a better and more complete picture of their return on investment. We're constantly challenging clients to do more because we can show them how well mobile works. This is the Hipcricket advantage we will continue to leverage throughout 2014 and beyond."
About Hipcricket

Hipcricket, Inc. (OTCBB: HIPP) & (OTCQB: HIPP) provides a unified mobile engagement platform that drives awareness, sales and loyalty. ItsAD LIFE platform has been used by internationally recognized brands and agencies to power more than 400,000 campaigns across SMS, 2D/QR codes, mobile websites, advertising networks, social media and branded apps. For additional Hipcricket news and information, visitwww.hipcricket.com or text "NEWS" to 24474. Hipcricket, AD LIFE and the Hipcricket logo are trademarks of Hipcricket, Inc. All rights reserved. 2009-14.
Important Cautions Regarding Forward-Looking Statements

This press release contains forward-looking statements regarding future events and our future financial performance. All statements other than present and historical facts contained in this release, including any statements regarding our plans for future operations, anticipated future financial position, anticipated results of operations, financing plans, business strategy, competitive position, opportunities for growth and industry trends, are forward-looking statements. All forward-looking statements involve risks, uncertainties and contingencies, many of which are beyond our control. Our actual results, performance, or achievements may differ materially from those projected or assumed in any of the forward-looking statements. Factors that could cause actual results to differ materially from the forward-looking statements include, among others: overall economic and business conditions; the demand for our products and services; competitive factors in our industry; the emergence of new technologies; our cash position; the availability of funding sources; the strength of our intellectual property portfolio; and changes in government regulations in our industry. A more detailed discussion of these factors is set forth in our annual report on Form 10-K for the year ended February 28, 2013 and other reports filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission. The Company does not intend, and undertakes no duty, to update any forward-looking statement to reflect future events or circumstances.

Successfully implemented strategies will lift a firm to superior performance by facilitating the firm with competitive advantage to outperform current or potential players (Passemard and Calantone 2000, p. 18).

[4]

To gain competitive advantage a business

strategy of a firm manipulates the various resources over which it has direct control and these resources have the ability to generate competitive advantage

India, Iran call for regional common market

PTI Dec 14, 2003, 04.35pm IST

DUBAI: India and Iran have called for the establishment of a regional common market Pakistan to promote friendly relations and commerce in the region.

along with

Chairman of Iran's Expediency Council Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani agreed with the proposal made by the visiting External Affairs Minister Yashwant Sinha at the Joint Commission meeting in Tehran yesterday.

Through good and cordial relations, three regional powers Iran, Pakistan and India could establish a joint regional market , Rafsanjani said. He termed as "of prime importance" the good relations among the regional states, adding that this would tremendously contribute to the prosperity of the regional countries. Sinha expressed pleasure over the developing relations between Tehran and New Delhi and said the economic relations between the two states need to reach an ideal level. Referring to the situation in the region, he said fortunately the tension between India and Pakistan has diminished, the official Iranian news agency IRNA reported. Incidentally Sinha's visit comes at a time when a high-level Iranian trade delegation headed by Ghulam Hassam Haleemi is in Islamabad to promote bilateral trade by transforming their border cities into trade markets on permanent basis. Rafsanjani said Tehran and New Delhi should not lose any opportunity to expand the bilateral ties as they have always had good historical, political, economic and cultural links. He also said both Iran and India have huge potentials that could be developed and used in the areas of transportation, private and public sectors, ports and industries. He touched on the situation in Afghanistan and Iraq and said the US should take lessons from behavior of the Afghans and Iraqis toward the forces from outside.. Earlier in the day, Sinha met Iran's judiciary chief Ayatollah Mahmoud Hashemi Shahroudi and discussed the need for fighting terrorism. Shahroudi said Iran and India are among the victims of terrorism in the region and have made efforts to fight it and to free themselves from imperialism and despotism . Transition to a single market can have short term
negative impact on some sectors of a national economy due to increased international competition. Enterprises that previously enjoyed national market protection and national subsidy (and could therefore continue in business despite falling short of international performance benchmarks) may struggle to survive against their more efficient peers, even for its traditional markets. Ultimately, if the enterprise fails to improve its organization and methods, it will fail. The consequence may be unemployment or migration.

http://articles.economictimes.indiatimes.com/2003-12-14/news/27538758_1_tehran-iran-and-indiabilateral-ties

how social media influences market segmentation

Market segmentation is a marketing strategy that involves dividing a broad target market into subsets of consumers who have common needs and priorities and then designing and implementing strategies to target them. Companies create product differentiation strategies to target market segments.

Segmentation, the cornerstone of marketing Few would disagree with the view that since the 1950s, when the practice of market

segmentation began, it has been the

cornerstone of any marketing strategy. If you define your market segments accurately, then the follow on activities of targeting and positioning are much more effective.

Have online social media networks and their ability to engage with individuals interactively and in real-time made the practice of categorising people into groups redundant? The answer has to be a resounding no! But it is changing.

Changing emphasis

Consumers are considerably more socially mobile and transient than when demographic segmentation was first being adopted by marketers. Also, as result of the web and social media, consumers are much more informed and influenced (think Tripadviser), they have access to greater choice and their smartphones are doing all of this for them wherever they are.

Therefore, the basic strategy of demographic segmentation and pigeon holing people into presumed and fixed characteristics is less relevant today. Grouping people into segments by geography, age, gender, profession and income and assuming they are never changing is not a great way to relate to your online audiences.

Therefore, the emphasis is towards the previously less used technique of psychographic segmentation. Simply put, psychographics is about classifying people by their attitude and behaviour. Using monitoring tools its possible to gain deep insight into user sentiment towards a product or service, whether it is positive, negative or neutral. You can also track consumers interests, opinions and interests. This form of social network psychographic segmentation is becoming known as socialgraphics.

Go where your segments are hanging out segments are hanging out online and engage

Using social networks, brands are able to find where their traditional market

with them. These are self segmenting groups brought together through a common interest such as hobbies, sport, health, jobs etc. These are very fertile forums for brands to promote themselves to their exact target segments that are conveniently congregating in one place.

These communities of interest are intentionally being fostered by social network platforms who can charge brands to participate in them and include Google+ Circles and LinkedIn Groups. But there are scores of other online communities that brands can a join in with. However, when entering social networks brands are participating in peoples social spaces and they have to earn the right to be there. These are places where users go to be informed, educated, supported and entertained, not to be sold to. Therefore, the golden rule of social media marketing is not to overtly advertise in the traditional sense. All my research has found that when organisations do this their fans and followers leave in droves.

Pull- in your market

segments

Some socially savvy organisations are using a strategy that I have termed segmentation pull. This involves setting up your own hosted online community and pulling in your market segments. For example, one of Viapoints team master-minded Open Forum, an online community for SMEs hosted by American Express. The community serves itself as well as Amex, offering support and guidance to all facets of running a small business. Rather than advertising to the SME segment Amex has pulled or drawn in this segment.

Britmums is another example of segmentation pull. Britmums host an on online community of mothers and has fostered a community of 3000 bloggers. Each blogger gets on average 4000 page views per month creating an aggregated audience of 12 million. Mums are an ideal segment for many brands. Influencing the influencers About 10% of social network users generate 90% of the content. These are referred to as Creators or e -Influencers. In fact they are bloggers. These people are highly influential and could be classified as a newmarket segment.

Influencers are often brand advocates and should be discovered and very carefully nurtured in order to help exert their influence. But dont ask them to transparently talk about your product or gratuitously give them something for nothing, you will alienat e them. Give them something new and really interesting to talk about or review, thats what motivates them. This te chnique is known as Social Influence Marketing. There are also detractors or trolls. These are also influencers, but will vehemently give brands a bad press and their wo rds can be contagious like no other. There are plenty of examples where they have damaged brand reputation, so they need to be treated with kid gloves. No corporate or official responses to their posts. segments, albeit ones that come and go. But then again thats how people

Creators and detractors are arguably new market

behave and thats what marketers can now tap into, behaviour. Conversation marketing the panacea

Unless you only have handful of customers, one to one marketing is not practical. Yes marketers need to and can influence their few influencers, but it is not practical to try and have individual online conversations with your whole customer base as some self professed social media gurus will preach.

However, conversation marketing is still possible if you go back to the principle of segmenting your customers. You can have group conversations with communities of interest once you have found where they are han ging, out or youve pulled them into your own online community.

Segmentation strategies are here to stay and are in fact becoming increasingly important, so ensure your social media marketing team is fully trained on the concept and working hand-in-hand with your customer insight ormarket segmentation teams.

Paul Fennemore is appearing in the MarketingTech track at Social Media World Forum, runnning at London Olympia on 27-28 of March, where he'll be discussing in more detail how to go about applying segmentation strategy to social media marketing and what considerations are required. For more information on how to register for SMWF, click here.

About 1 year, 11 months ago - 0 comments Categories: Community, Social Media, Strategy

The Indian Shrimp Industry Organizes to Fight the Threat of Anti-Dumping Action
B. Bhattarcharyya*
Disclaimer: Opinions expressed in the case studies and any errors or omissions therein are the responsibility of their authors and not of the editors of this volume or of the institutions with which they are affiliated. The authors of the case studies wish to disassociate the institutions with which they are associated from opinions expressed in the case studies and from any errors or omission therein. > Case Studies main page > Introduction

This case study deals with the way in which the Indian shrimp industry responded when faced with an anti-dumping action in the United States. It also indicates the potential impact of the anti-dumping action on the fragmented, small-producers-dominated industry.

I. The case history

back to top

ON THIS PAGE: > I. The case history > II. The national and international context > III. The Indian shrimp industry and its response > WTO-related issues > IV. Lessons learnt

On 31 December 2003, the Ad Hoc Shrimp Trade Action Committee (ASTAC), an association of shrimp farmers in eight southern states of the United States, filed an anti-dumping petition against six countries Brazil, China, Ecuador, India, Thailand and Vietnam. The petition alleged that these countries had dumped their shrimps in the US market . Though the actual petition was made by the Ad Hoc Shrimp Trade Action Committee, whose members are located in Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Louisiana, Mississippi, North Carolina, South Carolina and Texas, the Southern Shrimp Alliance (SSA) had been organizing the process of seeking redress. The petition meeting statutory requirements, on 21 January 2004 the US Department of Commerce (DOC) announced the initiation of antidumping investigations against the six countries. Products covered include warm water shrimp, whether frozen or canned, wild caught (ocean harvested) or farm-raised (produced by aqua-culture), head-on or

head-off, shell-on or peeled, tail-on or tail-off, deveined or not deveined, cooked or raw, or otherwise processed in frozen or canned form. The Department notified the International Trade Commission (ITC) of its decision on initiation. On 17 February 2004 the International Trade Commission announced its decision that there was a reasonable indication that the US shrimp industry is materially injured or threatened with material injury by imports, allegedly at less than fair value, from the six identified countries. As a result, the Department of Commerce continued with its investigations and gave its preliminary determination on 28 July 2004. The ratio of preliminary duty varies between 3.56% and 27.49% for three mandatory respondents selected by the DOC. The weighted arranged rate for India is 14.2%, and the average rate for China is 49.09%, for Brazil 36.91%, for Vietnam 16.01%, for Ecuador 7.3% and for Thailand 6.39%.

II. The national and international context

back to top

The trouble had started much earlier than December 2003. On 26 February 2002, Reggie Dupre, a Louisiana state senator, alleged that tainted farm-raised Asian shrimp was being diverted from Europe and dumped on the USmarket . Dupre was calling for a congressional investigation into food safety and unfair pricing, as local fishermen voiced concern that imports had depressed the prices they got for the locally harvested shrimp. By September 2002, shrimp industry representatives from eight southern states had got together to fight the case against imported shrimp from certain countries. We stand a better chance of success when all shrimp-producing states come on board, as George Barisich, president of the United Commercial Fishermans Association, observed. On 22 October 2002, representatives of the shrimp industry from the eight southern states voted to form the Southern Shrimp Alliance to fight unfair competition from imported farm-raised shrimp from certain countries. There was, however, a basic problem. It was estimated that it might cost more than US$3 million in terms of legal expenses to go for an anti-dumping petition. There were also problems associated with divergent trade interests. Shrimp importers and distributors were afraid that a long-drawn-out battle would affect the supply of imported shrimp and adversely affect their business. Wally Stevens, president of the American Seafood Distributors Association, described how the salmon industry in Maine had filed an anti-dumping petition against Norway in 1990, hoping to stabilize prices. Twelve years after winning and spending up to $10 million, salmon was selling at half the price prevailing at the time of the beginning of the dispute. This is definitely not the right way to go. It consumes an immense amount of money and is not a long-term solution in terms of maintaining viability. In a statement in Ja nuary 2003,

Stevens said that his organization, in support of free and fair trade, would oppose any anti-dumping action by the SSA. In the meantime, countries threatened with the prospective action started reacting. Vietnam, one of the countries identified almost at the beginning of the SSA exercises and also highly dependent on the US market for shrimp exports, was the first to protest. Foreign Ministry spokeperson Phan Thuy Thanh said in a statement on 12 September 2002 that I can say with certainty that Vietnam has never dumped its shrimp, and its shrimp have been sold at market prices. Thailand was another country to lodge a protest. Kenneth Pierce, of Willkie Farr & Gallagher, representing the Thai Frozen Foods Association, condemned the move to consider anti-dumping action against Thai shrimp exports. Thailands shrimps have never been dumped in the United States, nor have they caused material damage to US shrimp, he said in a statement on 25 November 2002. As evidence mounted of the SSAs determination to go ahead with the petition on anti-dumping, other threatened countries also started taking preventive actions. Rokhmin Dahiri, the Indonesian Maritime and Fisheries Minister, denied allegations that the Indonesian government subsidized its shrimp farmers. He said in a statement on 25 August 2003 that the price of shrimp on the domestic market was much lower than the export price. The dumping charge was baseless and, therefore, the United States should exclude Indonesia from the proposed anti-dumping investigations. The government of Bangladesh took similar action, and Vietnam also started working out alliances. Nguyen Thi Hong Minh, Vietnamese Deputy Fisheries Minister, said in a statement on 4 August 2003 that the Vietnamese shrimp businesses and their counterparts in south-east Asia, India and China as well as US shrimp importers were considering measures including lobbying to prevent a lawsuit. The Indian government and the Indian shrimp industry were aware of the threat. Arun Jaitley, the then Minister for Commerce, made a statement in June 2003 after his official visit to the United States: We are anticipating an action against our shrimp exports because our share in the US market is on the rise. During the whole of 2003, the SSA went through the process of raising the required resources and trimming the number of countries against which dumping action was to be brought, as the cost of the legal battle increased with the number of countries. After a compromise with the Mexican shrimp industry, the number of countries was ultimately brought down to six. The main contentions of the petitioners were as follows. The six named countries accounted for 74% of shrimp imports in the US market . Imports from the six countries increased from 466 million lb. in 2000 to 650 million lb in 2002. Import prices of the targeted countries had dropped by 28% in the previous three years. The average unit value of the targeted countries in 2000 was $3.54; this had fallen to $2.55 in 2002, on

a headless, shell-on equivalent basis. The average dockside price for one count size of gulf shrimp dropped from $6.08 to $3.30 per pound from 2000 to 2002. The United States was the most open market in the world. High tariff rates in other large importing countries provided a powerful incentive for exporters to increase shrimp shipments to the United States. Likewise, the US market also served as the market of last resort when shrimp shipments were denied entry to other markets such as the European Union due to the discovery of unacceptable levels of contaminants.

III. The Indian shrimp industry and its response

back to top

The first concrete signal that India might be included in the US industrys anti-dumping petition was received by the Indian government in June 2003. That anti-dumping investigations against Indian shrimp imports might be initiated was hinted at during bilateral talks when the then Commerce and Industry Minister Arun Jaitley had met his counterpart in Washington at that time. The reason given was that Indias shrimp exports to the United States had been rising rapidly during the previous three years, from $255.93 million during 2000-1 to $299.05 million during 2002-3. Indias marine products industry has been one of the major export success stories. From an export base of just Rs. 450 million in 1971-2, it increased to Rs. 68,810 million in 2002-3. Shrimp is the mainstay of Indias marine product exports. Japan has traditionally been the biggest export market for Indias marine products, followed by the United States, China and several EU countries. There was an over-dependence on the Japanese market, as shrimp is the major export item which Japan imports in huge volume. However, in the recent past, there has been a gradual decline in the intake from Japan with an increasing absorption in the United States, as well as some other countries. The United States, traditionally a buyer of small-sized shrimp from India, has now started buying many other varieties, including black tiger shrimp, resulting in its occupying the top slot in Indias export markets of marine products, replacing Japan in 2002-3. Success in Indias shrimp export is directly attributable to the development of shrimp culture. Assisted by the Marine Products Export Development Authority (MPEDA), shrimp culture has developed as a major industry in several coastal states. It is mostly an enterprise of small and medium farmers, and has led to the utilization of otherwise unproductive areas in the coastal region, contributing to improvements in the socio-economic conditions of the rural poor in the shrimp farming

areas. It has created direct employment of about 300, 000 people and indirect employment to over 700, 000. The Indian government has played an important role in the promotion of marine product exports, including the development of shrimp farming. The MPEDA is a government-sponsored body whose mandate covers the development of the industry as a whole, including export promotion. It is under the administrative control of the Department of Commerce and is headed by a senior officer of the Indian Administrative Service. Its governing council comprises senior officials of the central and state governments as well as representatives of the marine products industry. The Seafoods Exporters Association of India (SEAI) is the nodal body of the exporters community and is represented on the MPEDA governing council. There is, therefore, close co-ordination between these two bodies which are primarily responsible for organizing the shrimp industrys as well as the governments response to the US anti -dumping investigations. After the statement of the Commerce Minister on the possible threat to Indian shrimp exports to the United States, these two bodies went into action. To explore the possibilities of avoiding the anti-dumping action and, if necessary, to take legal action, a delegation comprising senior members of the SEAI went to Washington in September 2003, and after discussions in various quarters, decided to sign an agreement with the law firm, Garvey Schubert and Barer, to be the counsel in the United States for the anti-dumping investigations. After returning to India, the SEAI informed its members through a circular letter that Ms Lisbeth Levinson, a partner in the firm, will personally and exclusively handle our case. Regarding the extremely damaging potential of the proposed antidumping action, the SEAI pointed out to its members that in July 2003 the United States had imposed anti-dumping duty ranging from 44% to 63% on catfish fillet imports from Vietnam which would remain in force for five years. There will be annual reviews to decide whether the duties need any adjustments upwards or downwards. The Association warned its members that any such move against Indias shrim p exports would ring the death knell of the industry. The Association also realized the importance of other related regulatory provisions for Indian shrimp exports to the United States. The SEAI informed its members that within twenty days of filing the case, the United States could start imposing anti-dumping duties which would be returned only if the Indian exporters won the case. Since this antidumping duty would have to be paid by the US importers, the SEAI cautioned that they might stay away from India, and therefore the business would start to become affected long before the case came to its final conclusion. The game plan worked out by the MPEDA and the SEAI was comprehensive. It involved approaching the central government, developing contacts with counterpart bodies in other countries which

might be named in the petition, and putting their house in order, to raise resources. By October 2003, the plan had started taking shape. In a statement on 8 October 2003, K. Jose Cyriac, the chairman of the MPEDA , said, We are discussing the issues with other countries which are likely to be labelled with dumping charges. The SEAI president, Abraham Tharakan, after describing the petition as extremely unfair, said that in addition to calling for government support it would seek to co-operate with major exporting associations in Vietnam, Thailand and China and to forge an alliance among the Asian exporters. Some twenty-five Indian companies export to the United States, and the industry anticipated that the case might be filed against six or seven big players. However, the SEAI decided to fight the case from the platform of the organization as a mark of solidarity. We will back each indicted company, said Ranjit Bhattacharye, secretary-general of the SEAI, whose management committee decided that it would defend the industrys position, meet the cost of the legal process and not leave the cost to be borne by those Indian firms that might be selected for investigations. The SEAI has estimated a total budgetary requirement of Rs. 70 million to fight the case. Of this, SEAI would mobilize Rs. 40 million internally and the remaining Rs 30 million would be collected from its members, depending on the volume and value of their individual exports to the US market . When the initiation decision came on 21 January 2004, both the organizations were unhappy, but they were expecting it and were therefore ready to act. According to the SEAI, with over 75% of the US producers having signed the petition, proceeding with the hearing was a fait accompli. Both Jose Cyriac and Abraham Tharakan left for the United States to take further action to protect the interests of the Indian shrimp exporters. The SEAI had worked out plans to contest the dumping allegations on various grounds. It put forward two major differences between the Indian and the US sea-caught shrimp and offered reasons why Indian shrimp is cheaper. First, there are specific variations between the shrimp caught off the south-west coast of the United States and in Indian waters, so that prices are bound to be different. The threat for the domestic shrimp farmer in the United States comes from China, Thailand, Indonesia and Ecuador. Indias shrimp exports are predominantly of black tiger and scampi varieties which are not cultivated in the United States, according to the president of SEAI.

Second, while fishing in the United States is a capital-intensive activity calling for major investment , in India shrimp capture is carried out with a very low level of capital and requiring hardly any investment. This makes the cost of production considerably lower in India compared with that for shrimp sea-caught off the US coast. Jose Cyriac observed, after the decision to initiate investigations, that the cost of cultured and captured shrimp in India was far lower than that of shrimp caught and bought in the US market , enabling Indian exporters to compete with US shrimp in price. Further, the petition filed before the US Department of Commerce had mixed up count and weight (shrimp is sold by size and the number of shrimp constituting 1 kg), providing another avenue to contest the case. When the ITC decision on the preliminary affirmative decision came on 17 February 2004, the Indian shrimp industry termed it discriminatory and unjust. Tharakan of the SEAI said, We are deeply disappointed and upset by the verdict. Asserting that the Indian shrimp industry has not been resorting to dumping, he was confident of ultimate victory: We have a strong case against US shrimpers. We are certain that we will win the case despite the setback. Tharakan said that there was no possibility of the United States succeeding in imposing an anti-dumping duty on Indian shrimp as it was not sold below the cost price. On the contrary, it was sold to US importers at a price higher than that for Japan and for other countries. On receipt of the preliminary decision, Indian exporters who were mobilizingfunds said that they would fight the case till the end. Jose Cyriac commented: The government is unhappy with the US verdict. But it is only a preliminary finding. We will help the Indian exporters fight the case in the United States. The government itself came out with a statement on 18 February 2004, when S. N. Menon, special secretary in the Department of Commerce, said, We will fight it out. We are all geared up to fight the case and the industry has already hired lawyers for this. Menon observed that India had a strong case as India was exporting mainly tiger shrimps which are not found there and that too, in unprocessed form. Noting that 80% of shrimp consumption in the United States is met through imports, Menon said that unprocessed Indian shrimps generated about 1 million jobs in the US food processing industry, therefore, any action against Indian shrimp would adversely affect the US food processing sector. The SEAI and its members were getting ready for the next set of actions. After the preliminary positive determination by the ITC, the next step was for the Department of Commerce (ITA) to prove whether there had been dumping and at what level. As part of that exercise, a few leading firms would be selected from each country and detailed questionnaires would be sent to them. According to Sandu Joseph, the secretary of the SEAI, a team of US DOC officials would visit Kerala, a major shrimp producing state, in June or early July. They will visit our shrimp farming factories and verify our accounting practices. Our factories and accounts are open. We want to

prove that we are not producing and exporting cheap shrimp to the United States. Joseph also referred to the support the Association could mobilize in the United States. The SEAI had been receiving favourable support from a group of US congressmen to fight the anti-dumping investigations. Joseph said that more than a dozen members of the Congress had written to US Commerce Secretary Donald Evans, asking him to use fair and reasonable procedures in the investigative process. While the industry and the SEAI, as well as the Indian government, are fairly confident of the strength of their case, the biggest problem being faced by the shrimp exporters is the uncertainty caused by the antidumping investigations. After the announcement of the preliminary ITC determination, Sandu Joseph commented that We have been badly affected. There is no shrimp export happening to the US now. He said that Indian shrimp exporters had not received any export order from the United States since 17 February 2004. By April 2004 there was widespread concern among the exporters, growers and other stakeholders. Shrimp exports to the United States had come almost to a standstill due to the uncertainty regarding the contingent applicability and incidence of the anti-dumping duty. According to Joseph Zavier, general secretary of the Kerala Boat Owners Association, with almost insignificant exports to the United States since February the shrimp catch had been reduced by 40-45%. The price per kilogramme of white shrimps, Rs. 280 a few months previously, had crashed to Rs. 100 in April, while the price per kilogramme of another variety of prawn had fallen from Rs. 80 to Rs. 40. In Tamil Nadu and Andhra Pradesh, two large southern states, shrimp farming is done in large barren areas converted into farms. Mohammad Nayeem, once a prosperous shrimp farmer in Andhra Pradesh, is now a broken man. He owns 100 acres of shrimp farm and used to sell the products at a price of Rs. 450-600 per kilogramme, but after the ITC decision the price had crashed to Rs. 220, while the cost of production was Rs. 250. In Kerala, shrimp farming is mostly done in paddy fields, converted into shrimp farms, on the fringes of backwaters. According to Rajan P. Mambaly who is one of those who has given his land under lease for shrimp farming, the duty, if imposed, will hit him and the farmers hard, as the net price to the growers would come down to the extent of the anti-dumping duty. The preliminary determination came on 28 July 2004. In a media briefing on 29 July 2004 the chairman of the MPEDA observed, We are not happy with the preliminary determination of the duty rates. The final determination would be on 16 December 2004 and we will fight the case

further and try to bring it down to zero level. The investigation has now moved into the final determination stage. As part of the procedure, DOC officials visited India in August-September 2004 for onsite verification of the information and data submitted by the mandatory respondents during the preliminary phase of the investigations.

WTO-related issues

back to top

Indias shrimp export to the United States came under difficulties before, when the United States banned the import of captured shrimp from certain countries, including India, in 1976. It was on the ground that trawling for shrimp by mechanized means had been adversely affecting certain varieties of sea turtles. The dispute on the US ban on the import of shrimp caught without using turtle extruder devices during harvesting was taken to the WTO Dispute Settlement system by the affected countries, including India. The WTO ruled against the United States and asked it to make the regime WTO-compatible. However, since that had not yet happened, Indias exports to the United States of aquaculture shrimp and shrimp caught by non-mechanized means were being made on the basis of certification by the MPEDA, as required under the law. The trade lobbyists in the United States, such as the Consuming Industries Trade Action Coalition (CITAC), the Seafood Distributors Association and others which were against the imposition of antidumping duties on imported shrimp, have raised the issue of the Continued Dumping or Subsidy Offset Act 2000, popularly known as the Byrd Amendment. They want the Act to be repealed or modified to make it WTO-compatible. Under the Amendment, the US government distributes the anti-dumping and anti-subsidy duties to the US firms that brought forward the cases. The Act was perceived to violate WTO rules by several countries. Eleven members of the WTO (Australia, Brazil, Canada, Chile, India, Indonesia, Japan, South Korea, Mexico, Thailand and the EU) requested the establishment of a Panel, while six others (Argentina, Costa Rica, Hong Kong, China, Israel and Norway) joined as third parties, supporting the complainants. On 16 September 2002, the Panel Report recommended the repeal of the Byrd Amendment, as it was held to be a WTO-incompatible response to dumping and subsidization. Offset payments constitute a remedy, in addition to the imposition of an anti-dumping or anti-subsidy duty and this is not envisioned under the WTO rules. Following a US appeal in October 2002, the Appellate Body in its report in January 2003 confirmed the Panels central finding that the Byrd Amendment is WTO -

inconsistent. The deadline for the US to bring the Byrd Amendment into WTO conformity expired on 27 December 2003. As a consequence, the EU has requested the WTO to authorize retaliatory measures in January 2004. The issue is currently before the WTO and the United States has, as yet, taken no action towards ensuring WTO compliance. However, at the meeting of the WTO Negotiating Group on Rules (26-28 April 2004), the United States said that it was beyond question that countries have the sovereign right to distribute government revenues as they deem appropriate, but added that the United States intended to implement the Byrd Amendment ruling.

IV. Lessons learnt

back to top

The crisis caused by the anti-dumping petition of the Ad Hoc Group has been so far handled competently. The two nodal agencies, one a government body (the MPEDA) and the other a private trade body (the SEAI) have co-ordinated their approaches. One reason for this of course is that the SEAI is represented in the management of the MPEDA. Several visits by the representatives of those two bodies to Washington at critical points also helped to bring an understanding of the nature of the problem and how to face it. This resulted in the selection and appointment of the legal counsel, as early as September 2003. The importance of co-ordinated action by the threatened partners, even those outside India, was appreciated and was worked on by the trade representatives with their counterparts in several Asian countries included in the petition. Another achievement has been the speedy resolution of the issue of financing. The fact that the Association decided to bear more than 50% of the total costs from its internal resources and the rest from the contribution of members according to the value of their respective exports was critical. Equally critical has been the governments steadfast support for the shrimp industry. But what remains unaddressed is the issue which is in fact generic and therefore affects all cases, including the shrimp case. Anti-dumping cases take a long time to be finally decided. During this period, trade is affected because importers are risk-avoiders and will, therefore, be likely to shift to new sources of supply until the uncertainty is resolved. Industry people pointed out that an anti-dumping case was initiated against Indian leather goods in South Africa two years ago. Although the case was ultimately settled in Indias favour, the market was lost to India, because of the uncertainty caused by the transitional decisions. There is, therefore, a huge human element in such cases where the products originate in small and medium-sized enterprise sectors, and a large number of poor and marginal farmers, artisans or unskilled or semi-

skilled labour are engaged in the production of such goods. As of now, there is no institutional mechanism, in the form of a safety net, to take care of this problem. The Indian shrimp industry is one where the problem is acute because of the way in which it is organized. As observed earlier, the industry is fragmented and dominated by small fishermen and farmers. Uncertainty for any reason create risks which they are not equipped to bear. This case has highlighted the need for the government to look at this issue. Since the Indian government has already indicated its decision to fight an adverse judgment, the need is more acute. The shrimp industry in India had always focused on one or two major markets for growth. Previously it was Japan and during the last few years, it has been the United States. It has now learnt the importance of diversification. A. J. Tharakan, the SEAI president, has said that they are exploring alternative markets to make up for the loss of the lucrative USmarket . But it will be a long drawn-out process. It is not easy to establish your presence. This is why it is important to start early a lesson the industry appears to have learned from this experience.

http://www.wto.org/english/res_e/booksp_e/casestudies_e/case17_e.htm

China challenges U.S. anti-dumping measures at WTO

GENEVA Tue Dec 3, 2013 10:32am EST 3 COMMENTS

inShare2

Share this Email Print

1 OF 3. China's chief trade

representative Gao Hucheng (C) looks through a document as he attends the ninth World Trade Organization (WTO) Ministerial Conference opening ceremony in Nusa Dua, on the Indonesian resort island of Bali December 3, 2013.
CREDIT: REUTERS/EDGAR SU

RELATED TOPICS

China

(Reuters) - China launched a trade

dispute against the United States on Tuesday to

challenge Washington's accusations that China has dumped cheap exports on the U.S. market, the World Trade Organization said in a statement. The dispute, the first WTO complaint launched by China this year, was filed on the first day of the trade body's biennial ministerial conference, which is being held in Bali. It is the eighth trade complaint that China has filed over U.S. trade remedies, the WTO said. Its case argues that Washington assesses "dumping" - selling exports at unfairly cheap prices - in a way that breaks WTO rules. The WTO did not say which products were affected by the case, but China's Xinhua news agency cited Shen Danyang, spokesman for China's Ministry of Commerce, as saying there were 13 anti-dumping measures in question, covering products such as oil well pipelines and total exports of $8.4 billion.

The United States has 60 days to try to settle the complaint. After that China could ask the WTO to adjudicate. The United States has repeatedly lost WTO cases over its use of a particular calculation for assessing suspected dumping cases. The United States has said that its calculation method, known as "zeroing", is superior to the WTO's approved methodology, but it has nevertheless promised not to use it in future, after losing numerous legal rulings over the issue. Under the Anti-dumping Agreement,

imposition of an anti-dumping duty requires that the investigating authority have evidence not only to substantiate dumping, but also to prove that the dumping has resulted in injury to a competing domestic industry in the importing country. It should also be noted that often the most serious victims of abusive anti-dumping measures are the consumers and user industries in the importing country.
http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/12/03/us-china-wto-idUSBRE9B20MD20131203 anti dumping

http://www.wto.org/english/news_e/news13_e/ds471rfc_03dec13_e.htm

US challenges India's requirements for solar products in WTO

Tuesday, February 11, 2014 - 12:02 IST | Agency: IANS

In another potential blow to India-US ties after the Khobragade affair, US Monday challenged India's domestic content requirements in Phase II of India's National Solar Mission (NSM). "These domestic content requirements discriminate against US exports by requiring solar power developers to use Indian-manufactured equipment instead of US equipment," said US Trade Representative (USTR) Mike Froman. Announcing the "trade enforcement action" against India, Froman said it has requested World

Trade Organisation (WTO) dispute settlement consultations with India on the issue. "These unfair requirements are against WTO rules, and we are standing up today for the rights of American workers and businesses," he said. "We also take this action in support of the rapid global deployment of renewable energy." "These types of 'localisation' measures not only are an unfair barrier to US exports, but also raise the cost of solar energy, hindering deployment of solar energy around the world, including in India," he added. In October 2013, India's cabinet approved measures governing the implementation of Phase II of the NSM. For solar projects under Phase II, India is again imposing domestic content requirements, under which solar power developers must use Indian-manufactured solar cells and modules instead of US or other imported equipment, USTR said. Moreover, the Phase II domestic content requirements have been expanded to cover thin film technology, which was exempt from such requirements under Phase I, USTR said. As thin film currently comprises the majority of US solar product exports to India, these domestic content requirements are likely to cause even greater harm to US producers than under Phase I, it said. A request for consultations is the first step in the WTO dispute settlement process, and consultations are intended to help parties find a solution at this stage. Under WTO rules, if the matter is not resolved through consultations within 60 days of the request, the US states may ask the WTO to establish a dispute settlement panel, USTR said.

The announcement came days after The US Chamber of Commerce Friday asked the USTR to designate India a Priority Foreign Country "in order to strengthen engagement with India to address the rapidly deteriorating intellectual property environment in this market ".
In seeking for India the classification given to the worst offenders of intellectual property rights (IPR), the chamber said it was highlighting "India as a country with particular challenges with respect to intellectual property protections". "Because India has not shown a record of engagement on these issues and the environment has deteriorated significantly since last year, we are now recommending that India be designated a Priority Foreign Country," it said. The chamber cited what it called "specific policy examples across a range of industry sectors which are affecting the IP community in India and causing concerns throughout the business community".

http://www.dnaindia.com/world/report-us-challenges-india-s-requirements-for-solar-products-in-wto1961063

IES PLANS 30 CENTERS THIS YEAR

FEBRUARY 11, 2014 | COMMENTS ( 0 ) |

Indian Educational Services (IES) is planning to expand its network via the franchise route and looks forward to come up with 30 centers by end of this year. The brand currently has franchise centers in Varanasi, Lucknow, Siliguri, Butwal, Patna, Pokhra, Narayanghar and Birgunj. Raghav Mantri, MD, IES says: Our target is to reach 30 centers by end of this year. We offer four days training to our franchisees for Brain Matrix Test and the admission and counselling services. Beside that we support our franchisees in setting up of office systems as per ISO 9001-2008 guidelines, give them online counselling support for initial few clients, provide operation manual, marketing manual and counselling booklet for successful business operations. The major growth drive for our brand has been its reliability and service delivery.

The brand realised that reaching out to students across India only through digital and tele marketing is impossible so, the brand formed its strategy under FOFO model that helped it fetching great returns. IES offers educational opportunities to investors and edupreneurs to develop successful business network and profits via the franchise route. In the next five years the brand sees itself increasing and reaching the count to 100 centres, doubling its revenue every year.
The franchisee must carefully negotiate the license and must develop a marketing or business plan with the franchisor. The fees must be fully disclosed and there should not be any hidden fees

http://news.franchiseindia.com/IES-plans-30-centers-this-year-5374/#.UvsxU2KSxPc http://news.franchiseindia.com/ http://www.franchise.co.nz/article/view/195-legislation-help-or-hindrance-

CAROMA EYES BENGALURU, HYDERABAD FOR EXPANSION

FEBRUARY 04, 2014 | COMMENTS ( 0 ) |

Australia's Luxury Sanitary Bathware Brand Caroma plans vast expansion in 2014-15. Last year the brand entered India and is now eyeing Bengaluru and Hyderabad markets for expansion through franchise route. Aftab Ahmed, General Manager, International Sales & Marketing, Claytan Australia , says: We are eyeing state wise franchisees. We are looking at Middle to High End market in India and therefore our initial focus is Metropolitan cities as our target audience is concentrated there. In India, we have started from Delhi where we have already opened our first experience centre. In the next 12 months we would like to open another two in Bengaluru and Hyderabad. Then we will quickly move on to Mumbai, Chennai and Kolkata as well. A Caroma franchisee will get complete support from our side. This will include complete design of the showroom with Display Subsidies. We will also offer technical and mar keting support. Internationally, Caroma was established in 1940 and has grown from being a small manufacturer to a complete bathroom solutions manufacturer. Caroma's history of design and product leadership has been achieved by a total commitment to research and development in all areas of quality, aesthetics and technical excellence.

http://news.franchiseindia.com/Caroma-eyes-Bengaluru-Hyderabad-for-expansion5365/#.Uvsy2mKSxPc

Reconsidering SDRs

CORRESPONDENCE

GLOBAL GOV'T

ECON

By Ronald McKinnon | July 6, 2009 | 11:31 PM HIR Issue: Frontiers of Conflict The current global financial crisis has unsurprisingly intensified calls to reform the governance of

the International Monetary Fund. Richard Coopers article, Necessary Reform: The IMF and International Financial Architecture (Winter 2008), parallels Chinese Governor Zhou Xiaochuans speech on March 23, 2009. In the speech, Zhou suggested broadening IMF governance to better reflect the rising economic importance of emerging markets with an uneasy hold on large reserves of dollar assets; in light of this, he advocated the revival of the IMFs Special Drawing Rights (SDR) facility. It would act as a super-sovereign reserve currency to replace purely national currencies, such as the US dollar, in official exchange reserves. Fortuitously, Cooper analyzed several of the important issues that Zhou raises. First is the issue of legitimate governance. Cooper has been a leading advocate to greatly expand IMF voting and borrowing rights to emerging in order to better reflect their economic reform. This would require a sharp fall in the voting rights of medium-sized European countries (below the current 31 percent), while possibly ending the convention of a European IMF Managing Director. However, Cooper admits that such reform before the global financial crisis would not have made any difference. During this era of the great moderation, there were therefore no significant demands for drawings from the IMF. In my view, the huge US cumulative current-account deficits essentially prevented most emerging markets from international borrowing, so that they could not (as in the past) build up unsustainable foreign currency (dollar) debts that led to devaluations. Because the dollar was effectively international money, the United States alone had an ultra-soft international borrowing constraint, free to increase debt without devaluation risk. It is this asymmetry of international currency arrangements that Zhou wants to change by rehabilitating SDR. But is this possible? Cooper points out that the SDR is not itself an independent monetary entity, but rather a unit of account based on the purchasing powers of the underlying dollar, euro, pound

sterling, and yen. Cooper argues, To deal with a market crisis, the SDRs would have to be converted into the national currencies relevant for dealing with the financial crisis. Yet this is feasible only if the government of the country whose national currency is demanded agrees to accept SDRs in exchange. Furthermore, the IMF has no means to independently determine the real purchasing power of SDRs in terms of goods and services. Because private markets do not exist to buy and sell SDRs, the IMF cannot target some putative world price level. Therefore, SDRs are viewed as relatively illiquid assets of uncertain purchasing powerunattractive for trade-surplus countries to hold unless the IMF prevailed on them to do so. While they became a rather cheap line of credit to poor countries who spent them immediately, they did not prove effective substitutes for the more liquid dollar assets. The SDR facility atrophied, and the amount of SDRs outstanding today is only US$32 billion. Zhou identifies real problems with international currency asymmetry: the dollar standard and (I would add) the euro standard in Eastern Europe. But Cooper probably agrees with me that the SDR route that Zhou envisions is notand has not beena promising way of dealing with the underlying asymmetries. In the absence of a single super-sovereign world money, globalization through increased trade and capital flows results in a financial system that is inherently fragile. http://hir.harvard.edu/frontiers-of-conflict/reconsidering-sdrs

Special Drawing Rights (SDRs)

October 1, 2013

The SDR is an international reserve asset, created by the IMF in 1969 to supplement its member countries' official reserves. Its value is based on a basket of four key international currencies, and SDRs can be exchanged for freely usable currencies. With a general SDR allocation that took effect on August 28 and a special allocation on September 9, 2009, the amount of SDRs increased from SDR 21.4 billion to around SDR 204 billion (equivalent to about $309 billion, converted using the rate of September 10, 2013).

The role of the SDR

http://www.imf.org/external/np/exr/facts/sdr.HTM

Green Acres master charged with fraud

by Simon Lord, last updated on 23rd July 2009

7 November 2008 - Former Green Acres master franchisee Keith Lapham appeared in court yesterday on two charges of obtaining by deception and one charge of fraud. The charges follow a lengthy investigation by the Serious Fraud Office into allegations that Mr Lapham used his position as a Green Acres master franchisee to defraud 200 immigrants of up to $4 million. The story broke just

before Christmas 2007 and has been a major factor behind the Government's review of the need for franchise legislation. The SFO alleges that Mr Lapham fraudulently obtained $3,591,900 from approximately 172 people to whom he granted sub-franchises in the period from March to December 2007. A second charge alleges that he mis-represented the number of sub-franchisees in the Auckland area. The third charge relates to false representations that Mr Lapham is alleged to have made to Green Acres about how many sub-franchises he had granted, thereby defrauding the company of $244,800. Green Acres has always said that it, too, was a victim of the actions of its master franchisee. No charges have been laid against Green Acres and chief executive Andrew Chisholm says that at no time was the company or any of its directors the subject of an SFO inquiry. The company welcomed the news that Mr Lapham had been charged. Green Acres has taken a number of steps to assist those affected by Mr Lapham's actions, including granting genuine franchises in ironing and other services at no further fee. However, it is reported that there are still problems with some of those affected and several experienced franchise lawyers who have talked to Franchise

New Zealand have voiced the opinion that, as Mr Lapham was a properly-appointed master franchisee, the
company is responsible for his actions whether or not they were taken with the company's knowledge. Green Acres does not accept that this view reflects the correct position. Mr Lapham was remanded on bail until 2 February 2009.