Example collocations logo

Trade in sentence

11085 examples of Trade in a sentence

Much theoretical and empirical research demonstrates that opening trade can spur a country’s GDP growth.
Often, the incremental growth that comes with a trade opening is unevenly shared; moreover, in many cases, some receive a smaller share than they did before.
Similarly, from a global perspective, opening trade can contribute to the world’s overall economic growth, but does not guarantee that the benefits will be fairly distributed among countries.
Some say that no country loses, in absolute terms, from opening trade; otherwise, they would not participate in free-trade deals.
Still, the uneven distribution of the benefits created by a global trade opening means that some countries, especially the least developed, gain little in comparative terms, and are possibly even hurt.
This explains growing concern about the role of trade in development, despite the obvious fact that increased global trade has lifted hundreds of millions of people out of poverty in recent decades.
Unlike individual countries, there is no central authority that can enforce redistribution of wealth around the globe, so the problem of fairness must be addressed through the development mandates embedded in trade negotiations.
A key aspect of these development concerns is identifying the appropriate balance in any trade agreement.
“Special and differential treatment” is the technical term used in trade negotiations to indicate that the balance must be tilted toward developing countries, with the extent of this treatment to be decided by the parties to the talks.
But, while the tendency in current trade negotiations to allow developing countries to open their markets less than others helps to achieve more balance, it may undermine the original goals of enhancing efficiency and boosting growth.
Furthermore, it fails to encourage more South-South trade.
And, in the end, this focus on the defensive side of trade liberalization makes negotiations more difficult.
Among the major multilateral institutions, the WTO maintains jurisdiction over trade.
Within member governments, relations with the WTO are usually the responsibility of the trade or foreign ministry, while multilateral financial institutions, including the regional development banks, are generally the responsibility of the finance ministry.
Thus, aid for trade, one of the key tasks on the WTO agenda, has weak institutional links to trade negotiations.
A more ambitious approach would be to link aid and trade explicitly.
A concrete funding mechanism in trade agreements warrants serious consideration, particularly in areas such as the WTO’s trade-facilitation negotiations, where capacity-building in developing countries is a key issue.
Rather, WTO trade agreements could establish effective links with multilateral and regional development banks, thereby helping to realize the principle of closer international coordination set out in the Marrakesh Agreement.
The two rabbits of international trade can be caught.
But doing so requires innovative approaches that help to ensure that trade serves developing countries, rather than vice versa.
In response, both al-Nahda and the PJD are emphasizing job creation, free trade, foreign investment, and a crackdown on the corruption that has plagued their countries’ economies.
Those policies should include trade liberalization.
Until now, less than 2% of the Maghreb countries’ foreign trade has remained within the region.
If the region’s new leaders can integrate their economies, a market of more than 75 million consumers would attract more foreign investment and trade with the rest of the world.
Liberal trade initiatives have run into trouble in Congress, while new trade barriers have been mooted for products flooding in from China.
When the Doha trade round was launched shortly after September 11, 2001, there was plenty of international goodwill.
Free trade would lead to an overwhelming boost to welfare everywhere, but especially in the developing world.
Increased negative sentiment could have the worst possible result: not just Doha’s failure, but also the raising of trade and immigration barriers.
Moreover, the long-term impact of free trade is huge.
In addition, the experiences of successful reformers like Korea, China, India, and Chile suggest that trade liberalization immediately boosts annual economic growth rates by several percentage points for many years.
BackNext