World Trade Organisation

History

At the United Nations conference held at Geneva in 1947, twenty three countries including United
States of America signed General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT). During the same year,
a charter was put on the table for setting up, within the United Nations Organisation, of a new agency
to be called International Trade Organisation (ITO). Fifty nations signed the charter in Havana the
following year, but it was never subsequently ratified by the required number of countries. The
purpose of the agreement was to promote international trade free of barriers in the aftermath of World
War II, and to draw up proposals for the implementation of policies based on those principles set in
the agreement. It covered all the issues like tariffs, quotas, taxes, international commodity
agreements and whatever was considered to have a bearing on the development of international
trade, and was based on policies of non-discrimination and tariff reductions.

GATT has been expanded and updated through a series of multi-year conferences. The most famous
have been the Kennedy Round (1963-1967), the Tokyo Round (1973-1979), and the Uruguay Round
(1986-1994). The Uruguay Round ended with the decision to dissolve GATT and establish the more
powerful and more institutionalised World Trade Organization (WTO) in 1995. The WTO replaced
GATT as an international organization, but the General Agreement still exists as the WTO’s umbrella
treaty for trade in goods. Trade lawyers distinguish between the GATT 1994, the updated
agreement, and the GATT 1947, the original agreement which is still the heart of GATT 1994.

Introduction

The WTO has nearly 150 members, accounting for over 97% of world trade. Around 30 others are
negotiating membership. By definition, the World Trade Organization (WTO) deals with the rules of
trade between nations at a global or near-global level. But there is more to it than that. There are a
number of ways of looking at the WTO. It’s an organization for liberalizing trade. It’s a forum for
governments to negotiate trade agreements. It’s a place for them to settle trade disputes. It operates
a system of trade rules. (But it is not a Superman, just in case anyone thought it could solve — or
cause — all the world’s problems!). The WTO is like a table. People sit round the table and
negotiate, and resolve trade disputes.

Essentially, the WTO is a place where member governments try to sort out the trade problems they
face with each other. Therefore, the first step is to talk. The WTO was born out of negotiations, and
everything the WTO does is the result of negotiations. Where countries have faced trade barriers
and wanted them lowered, the negotiations have helped to liberalize trade. But the WTO is not just
about liberalizing trade, and in some circumstances its rules support maintaining trade barriers — for
example to protect consumers or prevent the spread of disease.

WTO also ensures that individuals, companies and governments know what the trade rules are
around the world, and gives them the confidence that there will be no sudden changes of policy. In
other words, the rules have to be “transparent” and predictable.

Principles / Characteristics of WTO Trading System

The World Trade Organisation is based on the following core-principles or characteristics:

1. Trade without discrimination:

The main principle in the charter of the World Trade Organisation is to promote international trade
without any discrimination. This principle is further elaborated into two – MFN and national treatment:
 (a) Most-favoured-nation (MFN) – treating other people equally: Under the WTO
agreements, countries cannot normally discriminate between their trading partners. If a
member country grants a special favour (such as a lower customs duty) to another member
country, she has to do the same for all other WTO members.

This principle is also known as most-favoured-nation (MFN) treatment. It is so important that it

is the first article of the GATT, which governs trade in goods. MFN is also a priority in the
General Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS) and the Agreement on Trade-Related
Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS).

However, some exceptions are allowed. For example, countries can set up a free trade
agreement that applies only to goods traded within the group —discriminating against goods
from outside. Or they can give developing countries special access to their markets. Or a
country can raise barriers against products that are considered to be traded unfairly from
specific countries. In general, MFN means that every time a country lowers a trade barrier or
opens up a market, it has to do so for the same goods or services from all its trading partners
— whether rich or poor, weak or strong.

(b) National treatment – Treating foreigners and locals equally: Imported and locally-
produced goods should be treated equally — at least after the foreign goods have entered the
market. The same should apply to foreign and domestic services, and to foreign and local
trademarks, copyrights and patents.

National treatment only applies once a product, service or item of intellectual property has
entered the market. Therefore, charging customs duty on an import is not a violation of
national treatment even if locally-produced products are not charged an equivalent tax.

2. Freer trade:

First of all it should be noted here that the WTO is not for free trade at any cost. It is all about
lowering trade barriers between trading countries. The barriers concerned include customs duties (or
tariffs) and measures such as import bans or quotas that restrict quantities selectively. From time to
time other issues such as red tape and exchange rate policies have also been discussed.

Opening markets can be beneficial, but it also requires adjustment. The WTO agreements allow
countries to introduce changes gradually, through ‘progressive liberalization’. Developing countries
are usually given longer to fulfil their obligations.

3. Predictability:

Sometimes, promising not to raise a trade barrier can be as important as lowering one, because the
promise gives businesses a clearer view of their future opportunities. With stability and predictability,
investment is encouraged, jobs are created and consumers can fully enjoy the benefits of competition
— choice and lower prices. The multilateral trading system is an attempt by governments to make the
business environment stable and predictable.

One way of making investment stable and predictable is to ‘bind’ the member countries to their
commitments. For example, ceilings on customs tariff rates, etc. However, a country can change its
bindings, but only after negotiating and compensating its trading partners.

There are other ways as well to improve predictability and stability. One way is to discourage the use
of quotas and other measures used to set limits on quantities of imports. Another way is to make
countries’ trade rules as clear and transparent as possible. Many WTO agreements require
governments to disclose their policies and practices publicly within the country or by notifying the
WTO. The regular surveillance of national trade policies through the Trade Policy Review Mechanism
provides a further means of encouraging transparency both domestically and at the multilateral level.

4. Promoting fair competition:

WTO is a system of rules dedicated to open, fair and undistorted competition. The rules on non-
discrimination — MFN and national treatment — are designed to secure fair conditions of trade. So
these rules also apply on dumping and subsidies. Many of the other WTO agreements aim to
support fair competition, for example, in agriculture, intellectual property, services, etc.

5. Encouraging development and economic reform:

The WTO system contributes to development. On the other hand, developing countries need
flexibility in the time they take to implement the system’s agreements. Over 3/4th of WTO members
are developing countries and countries in transition to market economies. During the seven and a
half years of the Uruguay Round, over 60 of these countries implemented trade liberalization
programmes autonomously. At the end of the Uruguay Round, developing countries were prepared
to take on most of the obligations that are required of developed countries. But the agreements did
give them transition periods to adjust to the more unfamiliar and, perhaps, difficult WTO provisions —
particularly for the poorest or ‘least-developed’ countries such as Bangladesh, Cambodia, Djibouti,
Central African Republic, Guinea, Madagascar, Myanmar, Nepal, Uganda, etc. A ministerial decision
adopted at the end of the round says better-off countries should accelerate implementing market
access commitments on goods exported by the least-developed countries, and it seeks increased
technical assistance for them. More recently, developed countries have started to allow duty-free and
quota-free imports for almost all products from least-developed countries.

Benefits of World Trade Organisation

The following common benefits of the WTO’s trading system doesn’t claim that everything is perfect,
otherwise there would be no need for further negotiations and for the system to evolve and reform
continually:

1. The system helps promote peace. Peace is partly an outcome of two of the most
fundamental principles of the trading system:

• helping trade to flow smoothly, and

• providing countries with a constructive and fair outlet for dealing with disputes over
trade issues.

It is also an outcome of the international confidence and cooperation that the system creates
and reinforces.

2. Disputes are handled constructively. As trade expands in volume, in the number of

products traded, and in the numbers of countries and companies trading, there is a greater
chance that disputes will arise. The WTO system helps resolve these disputes peacefully and
constructively.

Around 300 disputes have been brought to the WTO since it was set up in 1995. Without a
means of tackling these constructively and harmoniously, some could have led to more serious
political conflict.

3. A system makes life easier for all. Decisions in the WTO are made by consensus. The WTO
agreements were negotiated by all members, were approved by consensus and were ratified
in all members’ parliaments. The agreements apply to everyone. This makes life easier for all,
in several different ways. Smaller countries can enjoy some increased bargaining power.
 Without a multilateral regime such as the WTO’s system, the more powerful countries would
be freer to impose their will unilaterally on their smaller trading partners. Smaller countries
would have to deal with each of the major economic powers individually, and would be much
less able to resist unwanted pressure.

In addition, smaller countries can perform more effectively if they make use of the
opportunities to form alliances and to pool resources. Several are already doing this.

4. Freer trade cuts the costs of living. Protectionism is expensive as it raises prices through
imposition of import duties and quotas. The WTO’s global system lowers trade barriers
through negotiation and applies the principle of non-discrimination. The result is reduced costs
of production (because imports used in production are cheaper) and reduced prices of finished
goods and services, and ultimately a lower cost of living.

5. It provides more choice of products and qualities. This expands the range of final products
and services that are made by domestic producers, and it increases the range of technologies
they can use. When mobile telephone equipment became available, services sprang up even
in the countries that did not make the equipment. Sometimes, the success of an imported
product or service on the domestic market can also encourage new local producers to
compete, increasing the choice of brands available to consumers as well as increasing the
range of goods and services produced locally.

6. Trade raises incomes. Lowering trade barriers allows trade to increase, which adds to
incomes — national incomes and personal incomes. But some adjustment is necessary.
Trade also poses challenges as domestic producers face competition from imports. But the
fact that there is additional income means that resources are available for governments to
redistribute the benefits from those who gain the most — for example to help companies and
workers adapt by becoming more productive and competitive in what they were already doing,
or by switching to new activities.

7. Trade stimulates economic growth. This is a difficult subject to tackle in simple terms.
There is strong evidence that trade boosts economic growth, and that economic growth means
more jobs. It is also true that some jobs are lost even when trade is expanding. But the picture
is complicated by a number of factors. Nevertheless, the alternative – protectionism – is not
the way to tackle employment problems. In fact, the protectionism hurts the employment in
the long run. For example, the US car industry, when the US Government designed trade
barriers to protect the jobs by restricting imports of Japanese Cars, the American cars became
more expensive, fewer cars were sold and there were major job cuts.

8. The basic principles make life more efficient. One of the most important features of WTO is
that it provides efficiency in the international trade mechanism. It helps to cut costs because
of important principles enshrined in the system. Such principles include non-discriminatory
trade, transparency, increased certainty in trade conditions, simplification and standardisation
of customs procedures, removal of red tapism, removal of bureaucracy, centralised databases
of information, and such other measures that come under the head ‘trade facilitation’.

9. Governments are shielded from lobbying. One of the lessons of the protectionism that
dominated the early decades of the 20th Century was the damage that can be caused if
narrow sectoral interests gain an unbalanced share of political influence. The result was
increasingly restrictive policy which turned into a trade war.

Superficially, restricting imports looks like an effective way of supporting an economic sector.
But it biases the economy against other sectors which shouldn’t be penalized — if you protect
your clothing industry, everyone else has to pay for more expensive clothes, which puts
pressure on wages in all sectors.
 Governments need to be armed against pressure from narrow interest groups, and the WTO
system can help. The GATT-WTO system covers a wide range of sectors. So, if during a
GATT-WTO trade negotiation one pressure group lobbies its government to be considered as
a special case in need of protection, the government can reject the protectionist pressure by
arguing that it needs a broad-ranging agreement that will benefit all sectors of the economy.

10. The system encourages good government. Under WTO rules, once a commitment has
been made to liberalize a sector of trade, it is difficult to reverse. The rules also discourage a
range of unwise policies. For businesses, that means greater certainty and clarity about
trading conditions. For governments it can often mean good discipline.

The WTO agreements help in reducing corruption and bad government. But, quite often,
governments use the WTO as a welcome external constraint on their policies. This cannot be
done because it would violate the WTO agreements.

Criticism on World Trade Organisation

Criticisms of the WTO are often based on fundamental misunderstandings of the way the WTO
works. Following are most common misunderstandings or criticisms on WTO:

1. The WTO dictates policy. According to critics, the WTO dictates the trade policy on its
member countries. But that is not the case; in fact, it’s the governments who dictate to the
WTO. WTO is a member-driven organisation. The rules of WTO are based on agreements
resulting from negotiations among member governments. These rules are ratified by
members’ parliaments. And all the decisions taken in the WTO are virtually made by
consensus among all members.

2. The WTO is for free trade. There is another criticism on the World Trade Organisation is that
it promotes free trade. According to critics, free trade could hamper the domestic production
and serves the interests of giant global companies. Small domestic companies are unable to
compete with such multinational companies and would not be able to survive. As a result,
unemployment increases and national income decreases. It is true that it is one of the
principles of WTO system that the member countries should lower their trade barriers and
allow trade to flow more freely. But how low those barriers should go depends on the
bargaining of member countries.

Moreover, the rules written into the agreements allow barriers to be lowered gradually so that
domestic producers can adjust.

3. According to critics, the commercial interests take priority over development. Whereas,
the WTO agreements are full of provisions taking the interests of development into account.
Freer trade boosts economic growth and supports development. In that sense, commerce and
development are good for each other.

4. Environmental issues. In WTO system, commercial interests do not take priority over
environmental protection. Whereas, many provisions of WTO take environmental concerns
specifically into account. For example, the preamble of the Marrakesh (Morocco) Agreement
establishing the World Trade Organization includes among its objectives, optimal use of the
world’s resources, sustainable development and environmental protection.

5. Health and safety issues. Key clauses in the agreements (such as GATT Art. 20) specifically
allow governments to take actions to protect human, animal or plant life or health. But these
actions are disciplined, for example to prevent them being used as an excuse for protecting
domestic producers — protectionism in disguise.
 6. The WTO destroys jobs and worsens poverty. Another accusation on WTO is that WTO
system destroys jobs and widens the gap between rich and poor. In other words, it promotes
economic inequalities internationally. The accusation is inaccurate and simplistic. Trade can
be a powerful force for creating jobs and reducing poverty. Sometimes adjustments are
necessary to deal with job losses, and here the picture is complicated. In any case, the
alternative of protectionism is not the solution. It should be borne in mind that the biggest
beneficiary is the country that lowers its own trade barriers.

7. Small countries are powerless in the WTO. But small countries are not powerless in WTO.
In fact, they would be weaker without WTO. The WTO increases their bargaining power. In
recent years, developing countries have become considerably more active in WTO
negotiations, submitting an unprecedented number of trade proposals. They expressed
satisfaction with the process leading to the Doha declarations. All of this bears testimony to
their confidence in the system.

8. The WTO is the tool of powerful lobbies. This is a common misunderstanding that the
system of the World Trade Organisation supports the powerful countries such as US, EU,
Japan, etc. Giant corporations get undue protection from the WTO. The answer is that the
WTO is a common platform for all the governments. The WTO treats all the countries equally.
Therefore, WTO is not the tool of powerful lobbies; in fact, it offers governments a means to
reduce the influence of narrow vested interests. The most common feature of the WTO is the
negotiations that took place between the governments. These negotiations create a balance
of interests. Governments can find it easier to reject pressure from particular lobbying groups
by arguing that it had to accept the overall package in the interests of the country as a whole.

The WTO does not support the giant multinational companies. The WTO is an organisation of
governments. The private sector, non-governmental organizations and other lobbying groups
do not participate in WTO activities except in special events such as seminars and
symposiums.

9. Weaker countries are forced to join the WTO. Another criticism about the WTO is that the
weaker or developing countries or poor countries are influenced by developed countries or by
the WTO itself to join the WTO. In fact, weaker countries do have a choice to join the WTO or
not. However, they are convinced to join the WTO, because they can enjoy the benefits that
all WTO members grant to each other. They have the opportunity to trade, negotiate, and
settle their disputes with advanced countries within the WTO. Whereas, outside the WTO, i.e.,
under bilateral agreements, smaller countries are weaker and cannot increase their bargaining
power esp. with advanced countries.

10. The WTO is undemocratic. Some theorists claim that the system of the WTO is
undemocratic. Whereas, decisions in the WTO are generally by consensus. In principle, that’s
even more democratic than majority rule because no decision is taken until everyone agrees.

WTO and the Developing Countries

In the World Trade Organisation, there are around 146 members from developing countries, i.e.,
about 2/3rd majority of the WTO. They play an increasingly important and active role in the WTO
because of their numbers, because they are becoming more important in the global economy, and
because they increasingly look to trade as a vital tool in their development efforts. Developing
countries are a highly diverse group often with very different views and concerns. The WTO deals
with the special needs of developing countries in three ways:

• the WTO agreements contain special provisions on developing countries

 • the Committee on Trade and Development is the main body focusing on work in this area in
the WTO, with some others dealing with specific topics such as trade and debt, and
technology transfer
• the WTO Secretariat provides technical assistance (mainly training of various kinds) for
developing countries.

The WTO agreements include numerous provisions giving developing and least-developed countries
special rights or extra leniency — ‘special and differential treatment’. Among these are provisions that
allow developed countries to treat developing countries more favourably than other WTO members.

The least-developed countries receive extra attention in the WTO. All the WTO agreements
recognize that they must benefit from the greatest possible flexibility, and better-off members must
make extra efforts to lower import barriers on least-developed countries’ exports.

The specific work on developing countries within the WTO can be divided into two broad areas:

1. the work of the WTO committees, and

2. the training for government officials and others.

1. WTO Committees:

The WTO consists of the following committees:

(a) Trade and Development Committee: The WTO Committee on Trade and Development has
a wide-ranging mandate. It has the following priorities regarding the developing countries:

· implementation of provisions favouring developing countries,

· guidelines for technical cooperation,

· increased participation of developing countries in the trading system, and

· the position of least-developed countries.

Member-countries also have to inform the WTO about special programmes involving trade
concessions for products from developing countries, and about regional arrangements among
developing countries.

(b) Sub-Committee on Least-Developed Countries: The Subcommittee on Least-Developed

Countries reports to the Trade and Development Committee, but it is an important body in its
own right. Its work focuses on two related issues:

· ways of integrating least-developed countries into the multilateral trading system

· technical cooperation.

The subcommittee also examines periodically how special provisions favouring least-
developed countries in the WTO agreements are being implemented. The following are the
WTO member countries categorized as least-developed countries by the UN:

Angola, Bangladesh, Burundi, Cambodia, Central African Republic, Chad, Congo, Djibouti,
Gambia, Guinea, Guinea Bissau, Haiti, Madagascar, Malawi, Maldives, Mali, Mauritania,
Mozambique, Myanmar, Nepal, Niger, Rwanda, Senegal, Solomon Islands, Tanzania, Uganda,
Zambia, etc.
 Some additional least-developed countries are in the process of accession to the WTO. They
are: Bhutan, Ethiopia, Laos, Sudan, and Yemen.

2. WTO Technical Cooperation:

The second area of working on developing countries within the WTO is associated with the technical
cooperation or the training of government officials and businessmen from developing countries. It is
devoted entirely in helping developing countries and countries in transition from centrally-planned
economies to operate successfully in the multilateral trading system. The objective is to help build the
necessary institutions and to train officials. The subjects covered deal both with trade policies and
with effective negotiation.

The WTO holds regular training sessions on trade policy in Geneva. In addition, it organizes about
400 technical cooperation activities annually, including seminars and workshops in various countries
and courses in Geneva.

Targeted are developing countries and countries in transition from former socialist or communist
systems, with a special emphasis on African countries. Seminars have also been organized in Asia,
Latin America, the Caribbean, Middle East and Pacific.

Funding for technical cooperation and training comes from three sources: the WTO’s regular budget,
voluntary contributions from WTO members, and cost-sharing either by countries involved in an event
or by international organizations.

Challenges to the Developing World

The developing countries under the new WTO regime are faced with a considerable increase in their
obligations particularly in respect of government procurements, subsidies, anti-dumping, customs
valuation and import licensing procedures. Again, the new obligations that they have accepted in the
area of services and intellectual property rights could have adverse economic impact on their
development.

The developing world, which consists of two-third majority of the total WTO membership, has not
reaped plausible benefits under WTO regime. They also have a strong feeling that their voice is not
being heard, and the issues raised by them are not being addressed. However, some noticeable
change of strategy at the WTO seems to have taken place in recent years.

Major share of the world trade is controlled by the developed world. According to a survey only 17
countries control 72% of the world trade. A major dilemma faced by the developing countries in the
trade liberalisation process is that a country may be able to control the speed of trade liberalisation,
but cannot determine by itself how fast its exports should grow. Exports performance depends on
quality, price and competitiveness of exportable commodities. Also, to become competitive,
investment is required in developing the infrastructure, technology, human resources, and enterprise
capacity for new exports, which is a long-term process and not easily achieved. The interesting
phenomenon is that the developed world continues to insist on free trade and services and bringing
down the tariffs in order to ensure fair competition between local and imported products. While, on
the other hand, the developed world itself continues to follow protectionist policies in the case of
agriculture to safeguard its costly products against cheaper foodstuff from the developing world.

Suggestions to the Developing Countries:

The developing world has tried to raise its voice on various forums but without much success. Apart
from raising hue and cry for better treatment by the WTO and the developed world it should have its
own strategy for economic development. Following are the suggestions for the developing countries:
 • Identification of core strengths and competitive edge,
• Concentrate mainly on industries which use local raw material,
• Improve efficiencies, lower costs and upgrade quality of products in order to be able to make
them export oriented to earn valuable foreign exchange,
• Develop small and medium enterprises,
• Continue to improve productivity in agriculture / fishing in order to remain self reliant in food
production and earn good value for their exports,
• Develop human resource through education, training, healthcare and social justice, and
• The Government should reduce its role in running business.

But, unfortunately, most of the developing countries to-day is plagued by inefficiency, corruption,
dishonesty, low productivity and a lack of will and desire on the part of elected representatives to
improve the status quo. The developing countries cannot prosper on the prescriptions laid down by
the World Bank, IMF or regular dole from rich nations. South Asian economies, especially Malaysia,
Singapore, South Korea and China are a glaring example of what can be achieved through following
a pragmatic path. Even the Indian economy has grown rapidly over the past decade with real GDP
growth averaging some 6% annually, in part due to continued structural reform, including trade
liberalisation. In recent years, though, Pakistan has also shown a remarkable performance in real
GDP growth rate: 8.4% during the fiscal year 2004-05, 6.4% during 2003-04 and 5.1% during 2002-
03, but yet there are many reforms to be made especially in manufacturing and service sectors.

The developing countries have a tough task ahead. If they do not take corrective measures they will
be rendered producers of raw materials and operating locally produced agro-based industries only.
They will, obviously, miss the opportunity to benefit from global trade. According to a research report
by David Dollar of the World Bank, the growth rate of the developing countries during 1990s has
been 5% (3.5% excluding China against 2% of the rich countries. He believes that there is solid
evidence available to prove that this has happened due to participation in the free trade and
globalisation process.

According to WTO Annual Report 2002, poor countries need to grow their way out of poverty and
trade can serve as a key engine of that growth. But currently products of developing countries face
many obstacles in entering the markets of rich countries. Rich counties need to do more to reduce
trade-distorting subsidies and dismantle their existing barriers on competitive exports from
developing countries.

Challenges faced by Pakistan

Two schools of thought prevail in Pakistan in regard to impact of WTO regime on the economy. One
group favours WTO Trade Agreements completely as it believes that free trade will have a strong
positive effect in enabling conditions for poverty reduction through employment opportunities, social
welfare services, and infrastructure that can potentially benefit the poor. On the other hand, the
second school of thought believes that everything going wrong in the developing world is the result of
the WTO regime. They feel that the WTO has been formed to further the interests of the developed
world only. The fact of the matter is that we lack any empirical study and the different opinions are
based on assumptions only.

Major challenges faced by Pakistan are as follows:

• Lowering of tariffs leading to cheaper imports would pose serious threat to the local industry,
which, in spite of inefficiencies, has thrived to-date owing to protectionist policies,
• An end to the quota system in textiles in early 2005 poses a serious challenge to our key
foreign exchange driver,
• Due to lowering of tariffs the taxes earned by the Government on imports are constantly
showing a marked reduction as a percentage to total taxes collected,
 • Lack of a clear and transparent policy by the Government towards WTO regime – and lack of
understanding of implications of Trade Agreements on our economic life.

Considering the challenges, the Government has identified the following industries with core
strengths that need most attention for development:

• Oil, gas and energy,

• Chemical, fertiliser and pharmaceuticals,
• Textile and allied industries,
• Light engineering,
• Information technology,
• Small and medium enterprises.

Other industries, which have been identified for improvements, are sports, surgical, cement, sugar,
automobile, etc. These industries will cater both for local and export markets. Needless to mention
that a number of industries will be at the risk of partial or complete closure, as they will not be able to
compete with the onslaught of cheaper imports. The local electronics industry, where product
replacements are extremely rapid, faces the risk of being phased out.

The industry, which needs our utmost attention, is textiles, as it contributes almost 60% to our
exports. With the start of new open trade policy from January 2005, Pakistan is facing a serious
problem of tough competition from China, India, Bangladesh and a number of other countries. Our
machinery is old, productivity is low, costs are higher and the manpower is not well-trained. We need
to invest at least US $ 6 to 7 billion in order to overcome these problems, and remain competitive in
the world market through exporting value added products.

It is heartening to note that the Government is well aware of this problem, and constant efforts are
being made to produce contamination free cotton, and modernise the present outdated machinery
and infrastructure. However, both the Government and the industry will have to move much faster in
order to meet the foreign demands. If we are competitive with better quality of products and
acceptable prices, we may be able to gain a greater share of the textile trade in the world market.

Conclusion

In the present scenario of the global trade, both developing and developed worlds have their roles to
play. The WTO and the developed world must make further concessions for the developing
countries, which are in majority and have a very small portion of the total world trade, and are not in a
position to compete with the advanced industrialised nations. On the other hand, the developing
world has its own responsibilities to share. They cannot continue to live on grant-in-aids and
consider others responsible for all their ills, while squandering their own resources. They have to put
in serious efforts for overall improvement in the quality of life of their impoverished masses, through
sustained economic growth. This would help them achieve their due share in the global trade, rather
than see it marginalized further.