Transatlantic Regulatory Cooperation in Services: Can it Help the Developing World?

8/8/2019 Transatlantic Regulatory Cooperation in Services: Can it Help the Developing World?

1/29

Transatlantic RegulatoryCooperation in Services

Can it help the developing world?

Linda Schmid

Independent Consultant

International Trade Policy and Development


2/29

2008 Te German Marshall Fund o the United States. All rights reserved.

No part o this publication may be reproduced or transmitted in any orm or by any means without permission

in writing rom the German Marshall Fund o the United States (GMF). Please direct inquiries to:

Te German Marshall Fund o the United States

1744 R Street, NW

Washington, DC 20009

1 202 683 2650

F 1 202 265 1662

E [email protected]

Tis publication can be downloaded or ree at http://www.gmus.org/publications/index.cm. Limited print

copies are also available. o request a copy, send an e-mail to [email protected].

GMF Paper Series

Te GMF Paper Series presents research on a variety o transatlantic topics by sta, ellows, and partners o theGerman Marshall Fund o the United States. Te views expressed here are those o the author and do not neces-

sarily represent the view o GMF. Comments rom readers are welcome; reply to the mailing address above or by

e-mail to [email protected].

About GMF

Te German Marshall Fund o the United States (GMF) is a non-partisan American public policy and grant-

making institution dedicated to promoting greater cooperation and understanding between the United States

and Europe.

GMF does this by supporting individuals and institutions working on transatlantic issues, by convening leaders

to discuss the most pressing transatlantic themes, and by examining ways in which transatlantic cooperation can

address a variety o global policy challenges. In addition, GMF supports a number o initiatives to strengthendemocracies.

Founded in 1972 through a gi rom Germany as a permanent memorial to Marshall Plan assistance, GMF

maintains a strong presence on both sides o the Atlantic. In addition to its headquarters in Washington, DC,

GMF has seven ofces in Europe: Berlin, Bratislava, Paris, Brussels, Belgrade, Ankara, and Bucharest.


3/29

ransatlantic Regulatory Cooperation inServices: Can it help the developing world?

A Report o the German Marshall Fund O he United States

April 2008

L S

I C

I P D

L S . S

I C G. S Cbb C P

Bb. P, U.S. C S I

W, DC. S b Managing the Challenges of WTO Participation, L@..

I ..................................................................................................................... 3

R C S Mk ................................. 4

E S R M D W .............................. 7

C Wk D C R S ........................ 9

W C S I R C .................... 1

W E U U S S D SS Mk D C ............................................................ 14

T I Wk ........................................................................ 1

C A F R ..............................................................

A........................................................................................................................ 1

Ax 1: F F Of D A .....................

Ax : Of D A b Mj P .............................. 3

Ax 3: A Of D A S ............................ 5

Bb ................................................................................................................... 6


4/29

ransatlantic Regulatory Cooperation in Services 3

Introduction

1 E U (EU) U S(U.S.) k

. D

k .

, b

.

R EU/U.S. k

. A EU/U.S.

b bk b A,

b- , z

.

. S

G D

P (GDP)

b . F,

. b

k bz,

q

z. S

b

k , qb,

. S

, ,

.

A EUU.S. z

k

b -

. E U

U S k

,

, b

.

b k

b.


5/29

he German Marshall Fund o the United States4

Regulatory Cooperation in the

Transatlantic Services Market2 EU U.S. . E 4%

U.S. -b x

5.3 I , U

K, G, F, Sz,

N

x -b

U S.4 U S

x 3% EU x

.5 E

, b

b . U.S.

E b -b

4. E 6%

b U

S . U K

b G F

U S.6

3 U S B E A, U.S. InternationalServices Cross-Border Trade in 2005 and Sales through Affiliates

in 2004, Ob 6, . 4.4 U S B E A, U.S. InternationalServices Cross-Border Trade in 2005 and Sales through Affiliatesin 2004, Ob 6, . 5.

5 E b ://....

6 U S B E A, U.S. InternationalServices Cross-Border Trade in 2005 and Sales through Affiliatesin 2004, Ob 6, . 36.

Points of Cooperation

E U U S

k

. E U k

b x

5, U

S k b .1 C

.5% x

1.% E U,

.3% x 14.4%

U S. M b ,

b : 5, 7.6% U.S. ,

E U 7%. B

E U U S

k

b .

1 W Oz, International Trade Statistics, 6,. .

Oz E C D,OECD in Figures, 6, . 33.

Table 1: Share o goods and commercial services in total trade, 2005

Ex I

V S V S

GC

G

C

W 1,69 1. 19. 1,61 1.4 1.6

E U (5) 4,97 77.5 .5 4,93 7. 1.

U S 15 71.7 .3 1,959 5.6 14.4

(B , b b )

S: W Oz, International Trade Statistics, 6, . 1.


6/29


There is a

renewed

impetus for

regulatory

cooperation.

Avoiding Points of Differences

b E U

U S

b , ,

z

b ,

,

. A ,

b b

b

b

. Ex

b:

, ,

b -b .7 D

q

k

.

EU F

C D U.S. Sb-

Ox A. F, x

EU U S.9

Cq,

. I , E U

U S

b , b

k :

7 S O E C- D(OECD), The Benefits of Liberalizing Product Markets and Reduc-ing Barriers to International Trade and Investment: The Case ofthe United States and the European Union, M 5, . .

E. , SEC Testimony Concerning Global Markets, NationalRegulation, and Cooperation before the House Financial ServicesCommittee, M 13, 4, . 6.

9 R. E, EU C B M, TheFinancial Times, M 5, 7.

E C (EC)

U.S. O M B (OMB)

.1

U.S./EU H-L R

C F

, x x, .11

V - ,

F Mk R

D,

.1

I x

b

, b,

. R

:

x x,

,

;13

, ,

k

;

b

;

1 O U S R, 2005Roadmap for EUUS Regulatory Cooperation and Transparency,://../_/__/.

11 O U S R, U.S.EUHigh-Level Regulatory Corporation Forum Agenda, M 6,://...

1 S x, K. Ax, E. F, H. E. Jk, N.M,A Report on the Transatlantic Financial Services Regu-latory Dialogue: Discussion Paper No. 576, H L S,J 7, . 5.

13 E C, Non Paper for FSC Meeting, S-b 5, . 1.


7/29


,

;

k

b;

k

b.14

,

EU U.S.

bz . S

b -b

,

k z.

b b

, EU U.S.

,15

z q .

14 O U S R, EUU.S. FinancialMarkets Regulatory Dialogue, J 4, ://.USR..

15

Sb-Ox A SEC , G q . SEC b x. EU F C D -q - . SEC bj. SE. , SEC Testimony Concerning Global Markets, NationalRegulation, and Cooperation before the House Financial ServicesCommittee, M 13, 4, . 6.

x . D

b

q b A.

C

E U U

S

. E

,

z

E U U S

.

E U U S

x

k

.

b b

k

b

. G

b

E U U S

k

.


8/29


Iriuscidunt verci

tinciduisi. Lis ad

elessi. Um alis

dolor si. Ing eum

dolorem nullaor

tionseq uipsum

ipsusto dolore

feum quiscil iscil

er si et vent amc

ad dio eum vel

The Importance of Service Industries toDeveloping Countries

b

-. I , b

, ,

x GDP. F x,

E A C (EAC),

54% GDP;

S A D C (SADC),

67% GDP.16

b

. W

x ,

, b 1% b 5,

b A 13% . 17

H, k

b

k.

A q

:

D

b ,

, x b

.

I 1

, ,

16 W Bk W D I Db,://. bk..

17 W Oz, International Trade Statistics, 6.

1 I k - ; x, , , q .

, , k, .

k

.

R 19 b

b

--k, q,

.

, q

b

.

.

C b

k

. Lk, b

, b b

q

.1

19 R x b, q, q --k.

R z q, x , , x.

1 G , E U US k k , , b b b b .

Effective Services Regulation

Matters to the Developing World3


9/29


Services are

a valuable

source of

employment

and an

expanding

proportion

of GDP.

Chart 1: The importance of services in the EAC and the SADC, 2005

Va

luea

dde

dbyser

vices

(%o

fGDP)

KENYA UGANDA TANZANIA

SOUTH

AFRICA MAURITIUS ZIMBABWE NAMIBIA ZAMBIA

MOZAM-

BIQUE MALAWI BOTSWANA LESOTHO

SWAZI-

LAND TANZANIA ANGOLA

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

Source: The World Bank World Development Indicators Database.


10/29


A ,

b

k.

D

. M

k-

b , q ,

, x

. I ,

k k .

D ,

q , , ,

, k

k.

I , k

b , ,

x .

U N [] 3, A

11.9%, 5.4%,

k 3.9%.3

, , , q, q . F x b, J. H H.K. N-, Liberalization of Trade in Producer ServicesThe Impact onDeveloping Countries, C. M I, 1999.

3 UN C D, Negotiationson Transport and Logistics Services: Issues to Consider, 6D:UNCAD/SDE/LB/5/3, . 4.

I , q bk

b

;

.4

I ,

b q

; b

.5

I b

x.

B b

b

.6

D

.

G k b

k , , ,

b b b .

R k

x

k. G

b

q b .

4 S b b b , b .

5 D bz

, b bb . SP.A. S,Assessment of the Telecommunications Services Sectorin CARICOM: Convergence Issues at the Regional and Interna-tional Level, Cbb R N M, J6, . 414.

6 E C R AP Pk, Services Capacity Report, Sb 5,://.-k./P/Pb_1..

Current Weaknesses in Developing

Countries Regulatory Systems4


11/29


D b b q x

k:

A clear political mandate

A

b j

. A k

b , bk

. W

,

bj

. D

- k j

,, , ,

k.

I

,

.

A USAID : I

, x

b b b

.7

Good governance

G

b b

7 U.S. A I D (USAID), OI, Fb 16, 7.

. Y

,

q.

b b

. Bk I

S (BIS), I Oz

S C (IOSCO),

I A I S

(IAIS)

.

b ,

k , x k, b ,

. k

,

b x,

j ,

.

Regulatory independence

S b

b

k. E b

b

k . R

, ,

k .

D b

k. I

, x

,

. Cq,

x .

R

b b

b, b.


12/29


Cooperation

between

regulators

from different

countries is

fundamental to

market oversight

Regulatory cooperation

C b

k

bz . S

q b b,

j,

q .

F,

k q

k, b

.

x

b . R

, IOSCO

: b b

b

.

b

k q

x .9 Y

,

,

k .

Procedural transparency

P

, , q

k. A

I I F,

, b, k

b

b x . W

, ,

,

, b

IAIS, IOSCO, BIS z - b .

9 I Oz S C, Objec-tives and Principles of Securities Regulation, M 3.

q , .3

P

b,

-k, k

q. O b

, b,

k.

D

b

k. D

q b

, b

k, k

. M

k k

b .

, b

q

.

Competition policy

D k

. H

q

. N

,

, b .

N x,

, , ,

, -

k .

3 I I F, Proposal for a StrategicDialogue on Effective Regulation, Db 6, . 4.


13/29

Cumsan hendio

con vullaorem

zzrilit laorting

el do exer si tin

ulputem iure

velendrer sequat.

Ummy nissis eum

dolummy nullaor

amconsecte

exercilisl ut

vullandio odo


B

b

bz, b b

.

,

k , .

I ,

j

.

b ,

z

b

. Cq,

q b .

UN A

x

k, ,

.31

R

q -

-- b.

b

bz. E U U

S

: b ,

, b -

b.

31

U N C D, Tradeand Development Aspects of Insurance Services and RegulatoryFrameworks, 5 D: UNCAD/DIC/NCD/5/17,. 4.

Bilateral

EC3 U S

j

(ODA) b

( Ax 1). E 1%

b ODA

. A

b 1% ( Ax ).

F EC U S,

b ODA.

Multilateral

I M F (IMF), W

Bk, UN E A

U

S E U. I ,

. F x,

W Bk F S A

P33

, , q .34

S, J I A

P35

A

b

k, b

3 EC b . Mb - EC.S OECD, European Community Development Assistance Com-

mittee Peer Review, J 7, . 41.33 W Bk I E G, Financial Sector

Assessment Program IEG Review of the Joint World Bank andIMF Initiative, 6.

34 F S I A P,O I, M 14, 7.

35 W Oz, Technical Assistance and TrainingPlan, 6, . 6.

What is the Current State of

International Regulatory Cooperation?5


14/29

Iriuscidunt verci

tinciduisi. Lis ad

elessi. Um alis

dolor si. Ing eum

dolorem nullaor

tionseq uipsum

ipsusto dolore

feum quiscil iscil

er si et vent amc

ad dio eum vel


k .M

- b ( b), k

.

Standards-setting bodies

S- b x

b k

. S b

.

I C Nk (ICN)

x b

z k

. S,

I C A Oz (ICAO),

I M Oz (IMO),

I U

(IU)

.36 I ,

Bk I S (BIS),

I Oz S

C (IOSCO) I

A I S (IAS)

. S b

z

x x 37

x x

.

36 ICAO, IMO, IU b UN.

37 F C, O I, M ,7.

Assessment

D

k

. M, b,

k

k , ,

, , .

Cq,

x -

b k.

q

x

. I ,

,3

k: Bz, R,

I, C (BRIC).

BRIC z k

b k b

. N,

,

k

b

j . , ,

.

3 F S I A P, O- I, M 14, 7.


15/29

Cumsan hendio

con vullaorem

zzrilit laorting

el do exer si tin

ulputem iure

velendrer sequat.

Ummy nissis eum

dolummy nullaor

amconsecte

exercilisl ut

vullandio odo


E U U S q b

k

. E

U.S. ,

, b

b

k. I

x z

b

, , , .

E U U S

-b

x

. z

b , b

b, ,

. F,

k x

.

P

UN M D

G. M D

b

b

-b, b, -

[]

, ,

.39

R b bj

b b .

39 ://..//

E U U S b j

k

b j

.

, ,

z, ,

k

. I, , b ,

,

, b b .

Promote good governance

E U U S

,

,

. B

,

E U U S

b

b b .

A

,

b k

. I :

z x

b

x

What the European Union and United

States Should Do to Strengthen Services

Markets in Developing Countries6


16/29

Iriuscidunt verci

tinciduisi. Lis ad

elessi. Um alis

dolor si. Ing eum

dolorem nullaor

tionseq uipsum

ipsusto dolore

feum quiscil iscil

er si et vent amc

ad dio eum vel


A k q , E U U

S b x

.

.

EU U.S. ; ,

E U U S

, ,

.

4

D , E U U S

b

b

.

I ,

k

b. b

b

k

. F x,

,

q k,

b b

. O b

b

.

b x, k ,

. E

b bj q b z z

, b

k b b .

4 E. M. G J. D. R, Global CompetitionPolicy, I I E, 1997, . 339.

Support regional integration

R

k

b .41 B ,

b

x k .

A b

x

, ,

.

b k ,

x b, b

. R

. F x, b

Oz E Cbb S (OECS),4

,

k E Cbb

A. A

q

.43

A b

, , , , .

A USAID ,

.44 A

41 K N S Wk, Nb, K, - b I L E A P,M 3, 6.

4 Mb Oz E Cbb S: A, A Bb, D, G,M, S. K N, S. L, S. V G, ://../b..

43 P.A. S,Assessment of the Telecommunications ServicesSector in CARICOM: Convergence Issues at the Regional andInternational Level, Cbb R N M,J 6, . 414.

44 U.S. A I D (USAID), OI, Fb 16, 7.


17/29

Cumsan hendio

con vullaorem

zzrilit laorting

el do exer si tin

ulputem iure

velendrer sequat.

Ummy nissis eum

dolummy nullaor

amconsecte

exercilisl ut

vullandio odo


b

z,

E A C (EAC), E

C W A S (ECOWAS),

Oz E Cbb S (OECS),

Cbb C C Mk

(CARICOM), C Mk E

S A (COMESA).

x

b-

. S

,

b , k -

.

q

, -

, k

k.45

Contribute to the predictability of the

multilateral trading environment

E U U S b b

. G

U.S. EU k ,

b

. S k

z

.

A

E U U S

b b.

I z

45 O U S R, EUU.S. Regula-tory Cooperation Best Cooperative Practices, J 6, ://...

b

. S

b 46

q

k .

B b b

x

W

Oz (WO).

. B

.

U.S. b

, ,

. Lk, EU

E P A (EPA)

.47

q

b

. Mk

b

q .

k

.

E U U S

k

. U R

46 (GAS A X), - (GAS A XIII), b (GASA XV).

47 CEC E P A (EPA),://..//.


18/29


The European

Union and the

United States

should intensify

multilateral trade

negotiations.

k. U G A

S (GAS),

A VI ,

x.

GAS x

b k

.

GAS A VI q b

b, bj

. A

. , WO Wk G

D R

(q

q ,

q)

b [ ].4

R

Ax 49

4 W Oz,A Handbook on the GATS Agree-ment, Cb U P, 5, . 3.

49 W Oz,A Handbook on the GATS Agree-ment, Cb U P, 5, . 5.

R P .5 I ,

b bj

, ,

, b b

, ,

.

F, GAS Ax F S51

.

U C F

S .

E U5 j WO

b

.

5 ://..//_/_/_/3_.

51 W Oz,A Handbook on the GATS Agree-ment, Cb U P, 5, . .

5 W Oz,Additional Commitments by theEuropean Communities and Their Member States, (GAS/SC/31/S.4/R.1), P.1.


19/29

Cumsan hendio

con vullaorem

zzrilit laorting

el do exer si tin

ulputem iure

velendrer sequat.

Ummy nissis eum

dolummy nullaor

amconsecte

exercilisl ut

vullandio odo


E U U Sb b

k

bb . A

E U

U S

k

. A b,

E U U S x

b

, k

.

D bb

bj, ,

q. , 5 P

D A E,53

z

.

E U U S

P D -b .

M, b

E

U U S

. F x S

E I54 U S

EU

b C

E F A.55 D

53 ://..

54 ://...

55 ://..//RA.=IP/6/137

k.56 E U U S

k

. F x, U.S. M

C C b 4 x

. I B,

, U S

q

j. E

U j , ,

j k

.57

S x .

B k , E U

U S

b

b

, b z:

F, k

. A

b

q E U U

S

. k

.

S, b

, E U U

S

b .

b

56 M C C, O I,M 9, 7.

57 M C C, O I,M 9, 7.

The Importance of Working Together

7


20/29

Iriuscidunt verci

tinciduisi. Lis ad

elessi. Um alis

dolor si. Ing eum

dolorem nullaor

tionseq uipsum

ipsusto dolore

feum quiscil iscil

er si et vent amc

ad dio eum vel


b , .

b

.

,

. W

, E

U U S

.

F, b ,

x k

k

.


21/29

Cumsan hendio

con vullaorem

zzrilit laorting

el do exer si tin

ulputem iure

velendrer sequat.

Ummy nissis eum

dolummy nullaor

amconsecte

exercilisl ut

vullandio odo


R x . I

k

. k

, x x,

.

,

k . F,

x b

. G

, b

.

E U U S

b

. W

b ,

E U U S k

b

b x

b . A

b

bz.

I ,

b D R

.

Aj

b

b

. E U U S

.

N,

. I x

b

. , , q

:

x

-q

.

A

. R

,

, , ,

, .

R b ,

, .

A

U.S. b

EU EPA

. A x

b F A (FA)

EPA

. A x

U.S. EU b

b

q.

b E U U S

b . R

k

, ,

. S

x q

.

Conclusion and Areas for

Further Research8


22/29

Iriuscidunt verci

tinciduisi. Lis ad

elessi. Um alis

dolor si. Ing eum

dolorem nullaor

tionseq uipsum

ipsusto dolore

feum quiscil iscil

er si et vent amc

ad dio eum vel


BIS Bk I SCAFA-DR D RbC AU.S. F A

CARICOM Cbb C C Mk

COMESA C Mk E S A

EAC E A C

EC E C

ECOWAS E C W A S

EPA E P A

EU E U

FDI F D IFA F A

GAS G A S

GDP G D P

IAIS I A I S

ICAO I C A Oz

ICN I C Nk

IFRS I F R S

IMF I M F

IMO I M OzIOSCO I Oz S C

IU I U

MOU M U

ODA O D A

OECS Oz E Cbb S

OECD O E C- D

OMB O M B

SEC S Ex C

U.S. U SWO W Oz

Acronyms

9


23/29

Cumsan hendio

con vullaorem

zzrilit laorting

el do exer si tin

ulputem iure

velendrer sequat.

Ummy nissis eum

dolummy nullaor

amconsecte

exercilisl ut

vullandio odo


Annex 1: Total Financial Flows of Official

Development Assistance

Table 2: U.S. total nancial fows o ODA

USD x

U S 1999 199495 1 3 4 5

9,63 9,17 1,15 13,517 17,3 19,5 6,575

O 9,536 ,647 11,49 13,9 16,3 19,75 7,6

B 7597 6,449 ,4 1,57 14,659 16,5 5,79

M 1939 ,19 3,145 ,7 1,661 3,455 ,343

O 473 1,17 755 7 1,6 679 1,4

B 473 1,17 755 7 1,6 679 1,4

M

G b NGO ,191 ,55 4,569 5,7 6,36 6,79 ,69

P k ,45 4,96 1,64 5,173 14,147 6,465 69,6

13,73 53,361 3,61 4,41 37,6 3,3 14,41

S: OECD, United States Development Assistance Committee Peer Review 6.

Table 3: EC total nancial fows o ODA

USD x

EC 1999 199495 1 3 4 5

,969 5,19 6,93 6,33 ,319 1,559 1,95

O ,777 5,111 5,961 5,44 7,173 ,74 9,39

B ,546 4,57 5,517 5,15 6,445 ,6 ,67

M 31 54 444 9 7 636 73

O 193 79 331 3 1,146 1,56 1,595

B 193 79 331 3 1,146 1,56 1,595

M

G b NGO

P k

,969 5,19 6,93 6,33 ,319 1,559 1,95

S: OECD, European Community Development Assistance Committee Peer Review 7.


24/29

Iriuscidunt verci

tinciduisi. Lis ad

elessi. Um alis

dolor si. Ing eum

dolorem nullaor

tionseq uipsum

ipsusto dolore

feum quiscil iscil

er si et vent amc

ad dio eum vel


Annex 2: Official Development Assistance

by Major Purposes

Table 4: U.S. bilateral ODA by major purposes at current prices and exchange rates

U S 199495 1999- 45 4

USD P

USD P

USD P

%

Social infrastructure and services 2,420 37 3,546 35 10,761 43 38

E 37 6 9 3 635 3 9

b 71 1 155 499 3

H 536 39 4 1,141 5 5

: b 5 3 331 3 99 4 3

P

55 651 6 1,446 6 3

W 76 1 164 91 4 4

G * 43 7 6 6 4,71 13

O

53 1,445 14 1,66 7 4

Economic infrastructureand services*

1,033 16 1,344 13 3,341 13 17

* 4 1 74 3 5

C* 77 1 1 7 1 1

E* 1 3 1 1 1,77 7

Bk * 74 1 1 14 1 1

B * 647 1 1,1 1 446

Production sectors 982 15 368 4 1,500 6 6

Multisector 67 1 1,017 10 1,272 5 7

Commodity and program aid 980 15 1,127 11 1,034 4 3

Action relating to debt 102 1 2,211 9 11

Humanitarian aid 463 7 1,610 16 3,279 13 7

Administrative costs of donors 525 8 702 7 1,040 4 5

Core support to NGOs 2

Refugees in donor countries 254 3 503 2 3

Total bilateral allocable 6,470 100 10,069 100 24,942 100 100

For reference:

b , 79 1,5 4,94 9 76

O : 1,55 15 16

,196 1 ,449 ,9 1 4

Total ODA 10,244 100 12,534 100 27,840 100 100

S: OECD, United States Development Assistance Committee Peer Review 6.*R ODA .


25/29

Cumsan hendio

con vullaorem

zzrilit laorting

el do exer si tin

ulputem iure

velendrer sequat.

Ummy nissis eum

dolummy nullaor

amconsecte

exercilisl ut

vullandio odo


Table 5: EC bilateral ODA by major purposes at current prices and exchange rates

EC 1995 45 45

USD P

USD P

USD P

%

Social infrastructure and services 497 27 1,824 26 4,295 42 34

E 3 39 6 53 6

b 19 1 5 4 5

H 67 4 95 4 45 4 4

: b 5 3 167 39 4

P

35 41 1 145 1 3

W 41 3 55 5 5

G * 34 641 9 1,91 19 11

O

3 15 3 645 6 4

Economic infrastructure and

services*316 17 1,171 17 1,497 15 14

* 67 14 549 94 1 5

C* 9 131 7 1

E* 1 1 4 5 3 5

Bk * 5 13 1 3 1

B * 7 1 19 1

Production sectors 325 17 622 9 725 7 6

Multisector 130 7 632 9 674 7 7

Commodity and program aid 534 28 1,495 22 1,304 13 3

Action relating to debt 21

Humanitarian aid 74 4 903 13 1,096 11 8

Administrative costs of donors 184 3 594 6 5

Core support to NGOs 96 1 1 0 2

Refugees in donor countries 3

Total bilateral allocable 1,876 100 6,927 100 10,187 100 100For reference:

b 6,74 7,6 6 1,7 94 77

O : 4,65 64 3 4 4

9 1 1,145 14 69 6 3

Total ODA 7,642 100 8,371 100 10,836 100 100

S: OECD, European Community Development Assistance Committee Peer Review 7.*R ODA .


26/29

Iriuscidunt verci

tinciduisi. Lis ad

elessi. Um alis

dolor si. Ing eum

dolorem nullaor

tionseq uipsum

ipsusto dolore

feum quiscil iscil

er si et vent amc

ad dio eum vel


Annex 3: Additional Official Development

Assistance Statistics

Table 6: Bilateral ODA by region 200405 average

EC (USD ) U.S. (USD )

Sb-S A 3,3 Sb-S A 3,99

S C A 73 S C A ,311

O A O 497 O A O 744

M E N A 1,371 M E N A ,371

L A Cbb 75 L A Cbb 1,

E 1,66 E 657

U 1,5 U 3,

S: OECD, D A C, ://../.

Table 7: Top 10 recipients o gross ODA 200405 average

EC (USD ) U.S. (USD )

1 k 36 1 Iq 6,96

Sb M 6 A 1,6

3 M 5 3 E 75

4 A 34 4 S 575

5 C, D Rb 3 5 E 55

6 E 4 6 J 367 P . 197 7 Cb 366

I 164 P . 7

9 Mzbq 16 9 U 5

1 z 161 1 Pk 4

S: OECD, D A C, ://../.


27/29

Cumsan hendio

con vullaorem

zzrilit laorting

el do exer si tin

ulputem iure

velendrer sequat.

Ummy nissis eum

dolummy nullaor

amconsecte

exercilisl ut

vullandio odo


Bibliography

Ax, K., E. F, H. E. Jk N.M,A Report on the Transatlantic Financial

Services Regulatory Dialogue: Discussion Paper

No. 576, H L S, J 7.

E, R., EU C B

M, The Financial Times, M 5, 7.

E C R

A P Pk, Services

Capacity Report, Sb 5, ://.

-k./P/Pb_1..

E C, Non Paper for FSC Meeting,

Sb 5.

E b, ://.....

G, E. M., J. D. R, Global

Competition Policy, I I

E, 1997.

G, J., B. Jb, A D

I F Ax, The

Financial Times, M 7, 7.

H, J., H.K. N, Liberalization of Trade

in Producer ServicesThe Impact on Developing

Countries, C. M I, 1999.

://.b./

://..., E E.

://..//RA.

=IP/6/137

://..//

://.b./

://.k./

://../

://..

://../b.

://.b.

://..//

://../://..//_/_/

_/3_.

I I F, Proposal for

a Strategic Dialogue on Effective Regulation,

Db 6.

I Oz S

C, Objectives and Principles of

Securities Regulation. M 3.

K N S Wk, Nb,

K, b I L E A P, M 3, 6.

O U S R,

2005 Roadmap for EUUS Regulatory

Cooperation and Transparency, ://..

/_/__/.

O U S R,

U.S.EU High-Level Regulatory Corporation

Forum Agenda, M 6, ://...

O U S R,

EUU.S. Financial Markets Regulatory Dialogue,

J 4, ://...

O U S R, EU

U.S. Regulatory Cooperation Best Cooperative

Practices, J 6, ://...

Oz E C

D, The Benefits of Liberalizing

Product Markets and Reducing Barriers to

International Trade and Investment: The Case

of the United States and the European Union,

M 5.

Oz E C D, OECD in Figures, 6.

Oz E C

D, European Community

Development Assistance Committee PeerReview,

7


28/29

Iriuscidunt verci

tinciduisi. Lis ad

elessi. Um alis

dolor si. Ing eum

dolorem nullaor

tionseq uipsum

ipsusto dolore

feum quiscil iscil

er si et vent amc

ad dio eum vel


W Oz,AdditionalCommitments by the European Communities and

Their Member States, (GAS/SC/31/S.4/

R.1), . 1.

W Oz,A Handbook on the

GATS Agreement, Cb U

P, 5.

W Oz, International Trade

Statistics, 6.

W Oz, Technical Assistance and

Training Plan, 6.

Interviews

F C, O I,

M , 7.

F S I A

P, O I, M 14, 7.

Gbb, Rb, Ex D P,

I I F, O

I, M 13, 7.

Gb S F, O I, Fb

1, 7.

M C C, O

I, M 9, 7.

M D I, O I,

M 1, 7.

U.S. A I D

(USAID), O I, Fb 16, 7.

Oz E C D, United States Development

Assistance Committee Peer Review, 6

S, P.A.,Assessment of the Telecommunications

Services Sector in CARICOM: Convergence

Issues at the Regional and International Level,

Caribbean Regional Negotiating Machinery,

J 6.

, E., SEC Testimony Concerning Global

Markets, National Regulation, and Cooperation

before the House Financial Services Committee,

M 13, 4.

, E., R.J. P, A B

C-B A US I: N

I Fk, Harvard Law Review,

V 4, Nb 1, W 7.

U N C

D, Trade and Development

Aspects of Insurance Services and Regulatory

Frameworks, 5 D: UNCAD/DIC/

NCD/5/17.

U S B E A, U.S.

International Services Cross-Border Trade

in 2005 and Sales through Affiliates in 2004,

Ob 6.

W Bk I E G,

Financial Sector Assessment Program IEG Review

of the Joint World Bank and IMF Initiative, 6.

W Bk W D I

Db, ://. bk..


29/29

Off i c e s

Washington Berlin Bratislava ParisBrussels Belgrade Ankara Bucharest

www.gmu.org

Date post:	10-Apr-2018
Category:	Documents
Upload:	german-marshall-fund-of-the-united-states
View:	217 times
Download:	0 times

Transatlantic Regulatory Cooperation in Services: Can it Help the Developing World?

Documents