The Impact Of The General Agreement On Trade In Services

» Posted by on Apr 13, 2021 in Uncategorized | 0 comments

Its objective is to further liberalize public services. While private companies that provide public services may have their advantages, concerns about something like GATS relate to some kind of concentrated ownership, foreign ownership by large transnational corporations and rules that limit or hinder the ability of national governments to hold companies accountable for appropriate accountability. For a wide range of `services`, this therefore has a wider impact than many other (often undemocratic) international trade and investment agreements. While national governments have the option of excluding certain services from liberalisation under the GATS, they are also under pressure from international trade interests not to exclude any “commercial” service. Important utilities, such as water and electricity, are most often linked to consumer purchases and are therefore clearly “commercially supplied”. The same is true of many health and education services that some countries are supposed to “export” as profitable industries. [6] While services currently account for more than two-thirds of world output and employment, they account for no more than 25% of total trade, as measured by the balance of payments. But this apparently modest proportion should not be underestimated. Indeed, the balance of payments statistics do not cover one of the types of services defined in the GATS, i.e.

the supply by commercial presence in another country (mode 3). Although services are increasingly being exchanged in their own legislation, they also serve as essential inputs for the production of goods and, therefore, services, when value-added, account for about 50% of world trade. While the concept of progressive liberalisation is one of the fundamental principles of the GATS, Article XIX provides that liberalisation takes place in accordance with national political objectives and the level of development of members, both in the various sectors and in the various sectors. Developing countries will thus have flexibility to open fewer sectors, liberalize fewer types of transactions and gradually expand market access depending on their development situation. Other provisions ensure that developing countries have greater flexibility in implementing the policy of economic integration, maintaining constraints on the reasons for the balance of payments and determining access and use of their telecommunications networks and services. In addition, developing countries are entitled to technical assistance from the WTO secretariat. The AGCS ACCORD comprises four types of service delivery in the context of cross-border trade:[3] No. The results of the sectoral negotiations are new specific commitments and/or exemptions for the sector concerned. They are therefore not legally independent of other sectoral obligations and are not different agreements from the GATS. New obligations and exemptions from the MFN were included in existing lists and exception lists in separate GATS protocols.

The interests of developing countries have inspired both the overall structure of the agreement and certain articles.

2013 Rededication Sign and Ceremony Thank You Page

Thanks to David Dickey, Tom Hagerty, Chuck Welch, Abhishek Mukherjee, and the Lakeland Library History Room for photos and video.

And a special thanks to every person and organization that reminds Lakelanders about the Frances Langford Promenade.