K. M. Bagdasaryan. Evolution of the Generalized Scheme of Preferences

UDК 339.13.027.2 

DOI: 10.15507/2413-1407.119.030.202202.278-297 

Abstract

Introduction. The revision of the old U.S. rules of assigning developing country status under the law of countervailing duties in 2020 theoretically symbolizes another stage in the evolution of the Generalized Scheme of Preferences, but practically means a new form of battle for international competitiveness. There is no common criterion for determination of developing countries, either at the level of international organizations, including the World Trade Organization, or at the level of donor countries, while the list of least developed countries is determined by the United Nations, and they automatically become recipients of tariff preferences under the Generalized Scheme of Preferences. In this regard, the main idea and purpose of the study is to identify the applied aspects of the development of the international system of GSP and criteria for identifying developing countries to improve the system of tariff preferences EAEU and increase the competitiveness of goods produced in the domestic market.

Materials and Methods. The paper reviews established rules within the GSP and features of the functioning of this system in the U.S., Canada, Japan, Britain and such integration groupings as the European Union, Commonwealth of Independent States and EAEU. To identify main aspects of this transformation it has been used the method of cross-country comparison, as well as methods of systematic and comparative analysis of relevant international and national legal acts and scientific papers.

Results. We have revealed an international trend that is being formed by the leading economic actors to establish new rules for the functioning of the GSP and the criterion for determining the beneficiary countries. This trend will obviously affect the general rules of international trade within the framework of the World Trade Organization and to some extent will bring changes in its architecture.

Discussion and Conclusion. The process of active unilateral revision of established for half a century international trade rules beyond the framework of international organizations gives to the problem a new systemic character and opens up an opportunity for future studies. It is obvious that we are on the beginning of entire international economic relations system transformation, which at the first stage will be accompanied by negative processes and will require an adequate response from the Russian state authorities, coordinating bodies of the EAEU and interested major economic agents.

Keywords: generalized scheme of preferences, status of developing countries, Gross national income classification, EAEU, Russian Federation, preferential tariffs

Conflict of interests. The author declares that there is no conflict of interest.

Funding. The article was written based on the Russian Academy of National Economy and Public Administration under the President of the Russian Federation state assignment research program.

For citation: Bagdasaryan K.M. Evolution of the Generalized Scheme of Preferences. Regionology. Russian Journal of Regional Studies. 2022;30(2):278‒297. doi: https://doi.org/10.15507/2413-1407.119.030.202202.278-297

REFERENCES

1. Klasen S., Martínez-Zarzoso I., Nowak-Lehmann F., Bruckner M. Does the Designation of Least Developed Country Status Promote Exports? The Journal of International Trade & Economic Development. 2021;30(2):157–177. doi: https://doi.org/10.1080/09638199.2020.1831042

2. Lard S. A Review of Trade Preference Schemes for the World’s Poorest Countries. Trade Policy. 2015;(1):31–77. Available at: https://tpjournal.hse.ru/article/view/8067 (accessed 04.04.2022). (In Russ., abstract in Eng.)

3. Gubin A.V. The Need for Changing the Tariff Preference System in the Eurasian Economic Union. Vestnik of Russian Customs Academy. 2017;(1):36–44. Available at: https://www.elibrary.ru/item.asp?id=28782631 (accessed 04.04.2022). (In Russ., abstract in Eng.)

4. Glekova V.V., Moskalenko O.A. Unified System of Tariff Preferences in the Eurasian Economic Union. Natsional'naya assotsiatsiya uchenykh. 2020;(59-2):31–34. Available at: https://www.elibrary.ru/item.asp?id=45629929 (accessed 04.04.2022) (In Russ., abstract in Eng.)

5. Drobot E.V., Rukosueva Yu.S. On the Efficiency of the Eurasian Economic Union Tariff Preferences Unified System. Ekonomicheskie otnosheniya. 2019;9(1):67–86. (In Russ., abstract in Eng.) doi: https://doi.org/10.18334/eo.8.4.39187

6. Makarov A.I. Legal Regulation of Forms of Realization of Software as a Method of Combating “Intellectual Piracy” in the Russian Federation. Mezhdunarodnoe publichnoe i chastnoe pravo. 2007;(6):30–31. Available at: https://www.elibrary.ru/item.asp?id=9948616 (accessed: 04.04.2022). (In Russ.)

7. Bagdasaryan K.M. Formation of the Eurasian Economic Union in the Perspective of Foreign Studies. The Eurasian Scientific Journal. 2020;12(4). Available at: https://esj.today/PDF/37ECVN420.pdf (accessed: 10.09.2021). (In Russ., abstract in Eng.)

8. Agapova A.V., Barsegyan D.E. The Directions for Improving the Unified System of Tariff Preferences of the EAEU. International Trade and Trade Policy. 2019;(2):122–136. (In Russ., abstract in Eng.) doi: https://doi.org/10.21686/2410-7395-2019-2-122-136

9. Kilina E.P., Malinina Y.A. Recommendations for Improving the System of Tariff Preferences within the EAEU. Nauchnye trudy Severo-Zapadnogo Instituta upravleniya RANKhiGS. 2020;11(5):52–65. Available at: https://www.elibrary.ru/item.asp?id=45555262 (accessed 10.09.2021). (In Russ., abstract in Eng.)

10. Bagdasaryan K.M., Pakhomov A.A. Issues Regarding EAEU Members’ Participation in the WTO Activity. Russian Economic Developments. 2016;(11):31–37. Available at: http://www.edrussia.ru/archive/2016/292-11-2016 (accessed 04.04.2022). (In Russ., abstract in Eng.)

11. Boicov V.V. The Spirit of Bandung and the Practice of Economic Cooperation in South-East Asia. Southeast Asia: Actual problems of Development. 2015;(26):18–25. Available at: https://sea.ivran.ru/articles?artid=6461 (accessed 04.04.2022). (In Russ., abstract in Eng.)

12. Shestak O.N., Bobrova K. Issues of Unified System Tariff Preferences Eurasian Economic Union. Transport Services Market (Problems of Increasing Efficiency). 2017;(10):333–339. Available at: https://www.elibrary.ru/item.asp?id=36424431 (accessed: 04.04.2022). (In Russ., abstract in Eng.)

13. Wolf R. Donald Trump’s Status-Driven Foreign Policy. Survival. 2017;59(5):99–116. doi: https://doi.org/10.1080/00396338.2017.1375260

14. Sohn Y. South Korea under the United States–China Rivalry: Dynamics of the Economic-Security Nexus in Trade Policymaking. The Pacific Review. 2019;32(6):1019–1040. doi: https://doi.org/10.1080/09512748.2019.1617770

15. Weinhardt C. Emerging Powers in the World Trading System: Contestation of the Developing Country Status and the Reproduction of Inequalities. Global Society. 2020;34(3):388–408. doi: https://doi.org/10.1080/13600826.2020.1739632

16. Fialho D., Van Bergeijk P. The Proliferation of Developing Country Classifications. The Journal of Development Studies. 2017;53(1):99–115. doi: https://doi.org/10.1080/00220388.2016.1178383

17. Farias D.B.L. Outlook for the ‘Developing Country’ Category: A Paradox of Demise and Continuity. Third World Quarterly. 2019;40(4):668–687. doi: https://doi.org/10.1080/01436597.2019.1573139

18. Ismail A. Indonesia and United States General System of Preference (US-GSP): Eligibility of Indonesia as a Beneficiary Country. Jurnal Politik Internasional. 2019;21(2):155–175. doi: https://doi.org/10.7454/global.v21i2.401

19. Drugov A.Yu. Present Stage of the Indonesia – USA Relations. Southeast Asia: Actual problems of Development. 2019;1(1):94–111. Available at: https://sea.ivran.ru/articles?artid=13847 (accessed 04.04.2022). (In Russ., abstract in Eng.)

20. Akinmade B., Khorana S., Adedoyin F.F. An Assessment of UK’s Trade with Developing Countries under the Generalised System of Preferences. Journal of Public Affair. 2022;22(1). doi: https://doi.org/10.1002/pa.2308

Submitted 12.11.2021; approved after reviewing 17.01.2022; accepted for publication 26.01.2022.

About the author:

Kniaz M. Bagdasaryan, Research Fellow, International Laboratory of Foreign Trade Research, Institute of Applied Economic Research, the Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration (82 Vernadskiy Ave., Moscow 119571, Russian Federation), Cand. Sci. (Economics), ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4162-1076, Researcher ID: AAH-9531-2019, bagdasaryan-km@ranepa.ru

The author has read and approved the final version of the manuscript.

To download article