1.

Introduction

International body that promotes and enforces the provisions of trade laws and
regulations. The WTO has the authority to administer and police new and exiting free
trade agreements to oversee world trade practices, and to settle trade disputes among
member states.
The WTO was established in 1994 .The WTO began operation on January 1,1995. The
WTO is based in Geneva, Switzerland.
Critics charge that WTO trade rules do not sufficiently protect workers' rights, the
environment, or the human health.
In the last fifty years, great progress has been made in integrating developing
countries into the multilateral trading system and in their participation in the WTO. But
the progress has been uneven, with some developing countries still only marginally
integrated in the global economy.
The pace and scope of liberalization has varied among developing countries, all have
participated in the process.
In goods sector all developing countries have conducted programmes of tariff reform
and reduction. Many have also reduced export taxation and subsidies. In services,
developing countries have made significant steps in autonomous liberalization and bound
many sectors, modes of delivery and investment regimes.
These important developments in trade policies have been complemented by
liberalization of exchange controls and restrictions on current account.
This paper reviews how the development dimension has been addressed for developing
countries in the the WTO and to check if the implementation of free trade is beneficial for
developing countries or not.

1.1 Statement of the Problem

"Developing countries vs WTO"

WTO members are distinctly divided into two categories: Developing countries
Developed countries
Most of the articles and agreements of WTO are favoring developed countries. The rule
and law makers of WTO are developed countries and they arc the significant fund provider
to WTO. They use their authority to shape WTO's laws and regulations according to their
own needs. But there is no one who listens to the problems of the developing countries,
economic interests of developing countries are not secured by
WTO. Therefore the gap between the developed and under developed countries is
widening.

1.2 Objectives of the Study

•To check the benefits of free trade for developing countries.
•To determine the factors creating hurdles for developing countries under WTO.
 The scale at which developing countries adopt free trade liberalization.
•

These factors would be discussed with the following variables:

. GDP
• External Debt
• Trade balance

1.3 Methodology
To conduct this study we first gathered data from different sources. Main sources of
data are:
• Economic Survey of Pakistan
• PDR
• The Economist
• International Statistical Review

1.4 Organization of Data

First provided introduction of WTO then statement of the problem is provide then
objectives of the study i.e., Developing Countries vs. WTO. Then we reviewed the different
research article by different economies of the world and summarized these articles. Then
we sorted out different finds from the tables provided in this whole literature considering
different variables such as GDP, Trade Balance, External Debt etc. In the end different
suggestions are recommended for developing countries to achieve economic progress.
2. Review of literature

Greider (December 1999) says that WTO lack authority to control the trading issues of
world. The countries which sponsor the WTO to run its issues arc not allowing WTO to
take such steps which are against them and are in favor of developing countries. WTO
must also use its authority to remove child labor, improvement in working conditions of
laborers in member countries. If the governments of countries will check these issues
then this thing is against WTO agreement.
Elizabeth Becker (August, 2002) in this article discusses about the harmful effect on
the developing countries of the farm subsidies America is providing. The 2/3rd of the
population of the developing countries live on farms and America subsidies on farm
production in their sector arc becoming very harmful for developing countries.
Tutwiler (June, 2005) explains that trade relates to growth and that economic growth is
essential to end poverty in developing countries. He explains that agriculture growth, rural
development, and poverty alleviation can be done with free trade within fellow developing
countries.
Vogel (2005) says that WTO has the power to check new and exiting free trade
agreements and it has the authority to settle any trade dispute among the member
countries. WTO is formally structuralized and has its own law. Some people criticize WTO
because its rule does not provide protection to the rights of workers. WTO is also
criticized because; the press is not allowed to know about WTO decisions on the trade
disputes.
Vogle says (2006) that the constitution of WTO protects the property rights but does
not protect the rights of workers and environmental concerns arc becoming the cause of
criticism. If reforms are not made in WTO, then WTO will collapse. Human rights and
environmental concerns are not protected by WTO, so there will be many challenges
because the companies to get success use child labor, prison labor etc. These issues are
the direct challenges for the authority of WTO.
Dr. Abdul Sapoor (November 2006) says that countries which want to get the benefit of
free trade and want to transfer these benefits to the poor people of that country should
take some complementary steps in education, transportation, and health facilities. China
and Indonesia have invested in roads and agriculture facilities which have helped them to
reduce poverty. Bangladesh has improved the female employment rate by giving them
loans and producing their products at home and then exporting their products.
Zaidi (2006) says that one of the main objectives of WTO is to safe guard the share of
developing countries especially of least developing countries in global trade so that their
needs for economic development can be fulfilled. Some of the developing countries like
China, India, Malaysia, Brazil, Korea has got benefits from liberalization of trade. Due to
factors such as high technology and largo scale economies.
Greider, in this article discusses that the developing countries don't fully trade with
each other. Exporters of developing countries are still having trade with developed
countries. The markets of developed countries provide low profits and there arc many
restrictions to enter to these markets. But many developing countries provide different
attracting investment opportunities for other developing countries. These developing
countries can get benefit by trading with each other.
Paul says that the main responsibility of WTO is to promote free trade. Agriculture is
the main source of economic growth in developing countries. Developed countries insists
developing countries to open up their agriculture markets and stop providing subsidies on
agriculture products. In textile sector the same attitude is adopted by the developed
countries towards developing countries. Agriculture and textile are the main sources of
foreign trade for developing countries. Although the developing countries says that they
have opened their markets for free trade but the true picture is that the developed
countries resists to import products from developing countries.
Blusteim explains that the developing countries arc not happy with the pro-
industrialized countries policies of free trade. Developing countries are asked by
developed countries to cut down bigger percentage of tariffs on agriculture products, so
that the developed countries can sell more of their products to th« developing countries.
Steven says that WTO has two main purposes to make rules for world trade and to
settle trade disputes between the nations. The members of WTO consist of industrialized
nations as well as developing countries. The economist who supports WTO says that the
WTO is beneficial for the expansion of trade in the world and it will help to turn low
inflation and it will increase product quality.

WTO is an organization which drafts trade rules for global trade and tries to end the

disputes among the member countries. Industrialized/developed countries are not letting
the WTO "PRO POOR". Some of the WTO policies are against worker rights and

environmental concerns. Some of the developed countries have received some benefits

due to liberalization of trade but most of the developing countries are not reaping the

benefits of economic progress.

3. Findings and Analysis of data

Although some policies of WTO (Liberalization of Markets- Free Trade ) has helped

some of the developing countries like China, India, Korea, Taiwan, Malaysia to boost-up

there economies but the most developed countries like African countries, Pakistan etc.

have not reaped the benefits by the adoption of WTO policies. It is because when we
compare the scale of economy of Pakistan with China we come to know that the market

size, land and the population strength of China is far greater than of Pakistan. But when

we compare Pakistan with Korea we come to know that the Koreans have much less land

and population than Pakistan but they have developed themselves in high tech industry.
 Cou Global Trade Developing
ntry Countries

Trade
1990 2004 1990 2004
Ex Im Ex Im Ex Im Ex Im
po po por por po po po po
rt rt ts ts rts rt* rt* rt*
TABLE 3.1 GLOBAL TRADE AND DEVELOPING COUNTRIES TRADE
s s
Chin 1. 1. 6. 5. 7. 6. 19 19
a 77 47 5 9 31 56 .7 .9
5 5
Hon 2. 2. 2. 2. 9. 10 8. 9.
g 35 28 9 9 69 .1 84 70
Kon 5
g
Sing 1. 1. 2. 1. 6. 7. 5. 5.
apor 50 68 0 7 22 48 97 82
e
S. 1. 1. 2. 2. 7. 8. 8. 7.9
Kore 86 93 8 4 66 60 45 7
a
Mexi 1. 1. 2. 2. 4. 5. 6. 7.
co 1® 20 1 2 80 36 27 33
Tai 1. 1. 2. 1. 7. 6. 6. 5.
wan 91 51 0 8 91 75 03 96
Mala 0. 0. 1. 1. 3. 3. 4. 3.7
ysia 84 81 4 1 47 60 21 4
Indi 0. 0. 0. 1. 2. 2. 2. 3.
a 51 65 8 0 11 90 41 38
1
Braz 0. 0. 1. 0. 3. 2. 3. 2.
il 89 62 1 7 70 77 21 34
Thai 0. 0. 1. 1. 2. 4. 3. 3.
land 65 91 1 0 71 06 25 39
 In 1990, the share of 10 leading developing countries— China, Hong Kong, South
Korea, Taiwan, Singapore, Mexico, Malaysia, India, Thailand, and Brazil - in global
exports and imports was 13.44 and 13.06 % respectively. In 2004, the share of the
same 10 countries in global exports and imports had reached 23% and 20% each.
Minus these 10 economies, the percentage share of developing countries in
global exports and imports in 1990 was 10.77% and 9.49% respectively. In 2004,
that share was 10.75% for exports and 10.43% for imports. The share of the 10
leading economies in total exports and imports of developing countriesin 1990 was
55% and 58% respectively. The share has increased to 68% for exports and 69% for
imports in 2004.
On the other hand, LDC (Least Developed Countries) - the countries most in need of
benefits—accounted for less than 1% of global exports and imports in 1990 and continued
to have that low share in 2004. In terms of their in developing countries' trade, the
situation is disappointing as well.
In 1990, LDCs accounted for 2.32% of exports and 3.14% of total imports. In 2004, their
share in exports and imports had fallen to 1.92% and 2.29% respectively.
The top ten exporters in south- south trade in 2003 were: China (19.7%), Hong Kong
(14.2%), South Korea (11.1%), Singapore (9.4%), Taiwan (9.3%), Malaysia (6%), Thailand
(4.1%), India (3.4%), Brazil (3.3%) and Indonesia (3.1%). These countries together account
for 83.5% of exports in south-south trade.
This makes it clear that the capacity to drive benefit from opportunity thrown up by
trade liberalization is dependent on the supply side and strength of developing countries.
Two types of countries arc beneficiaries of trade liberalization.
 On the one hand, there are bigger countries like China and India where firms can realize
the economies of scale and thus price-out their competitors in foreign countries by
offering cheaper products.
On the other hand, there arc smaller but relatively advanced developing countries like
South Korea and Singapore whose exports depends on high tech value added products.
These countries compete not only on the basis of price but on the basis of product
differentiation.
It is also marked that while the developed countries insist on continuation of their past
practices, developing countries are being forced to open up there markets and also
withdraw the subsidies provided to agriculture. Developed countries provide subsidies to
many sectors, agriculture in particular, which comprises of a small percentage of
population. These groups may be small but enjoy enormous political clout and are capable
of pressuring there governments to continue subsidy on farm products.
As against this a country like Pakistan has to protect the interest of millions of people,
more than 50% of total population, dependent on agriculture. Therefore if we apply the
policies of WTO at the right moment it will cost very heavily to the agriculture sector of
Pakistan.
The general consensus is that WTO members are distinctly divided into two categories,
developed and developing countries.
Most of the articles and agreements are tilted towards developed countries. To bring a
change or amendment in these articles developing countries will have to join their hands
to reap the real benefits of globalization.
 As regards textile quota phase out and its integration in free trade regime, the
experience of developing countries may be expressed as 'completely disappointing'. Some
of the textile products have been termed 'sensitive' by the developed countries and their
integration is being done at a very slow pace. These products are the main foreign
exchange earners for the developing countries. Despite the claim by the developed
countries that their markets are open, they resist import of various commodities from the
developing countries by imposing non-tariff barrier Considering the imports and exports of
developing countries, after attempting some polices, 2000 we came to know that the
balance of import and export is mostly negative. So if these countries implements WTO
right now, they will be at a great loss.
Countrie 200 200 200 200 200
s 0 1 2 3 4
Afghanis Impo 55 55 95 210 340
tan rt 0 1 0 1 1
Expo 18 11 10 14 541.
rt 6 3 1 4 8
Balan - - - - -
ce 36 43 84 195 2859.
8 8 9 7 6
TABLE 3.2 Developing Countries Total External Trade (US MILLION)
Azerbai Impo 117 143 166 262 351
jan rt 2.1 1.1 5.5 6.2 5.9
Expo 174 231 216 259 361
rt 5.2 4.2 7.4 0.4 5.4
Balan 573. 883. 501. - 99.
ce 1 1 9 35. 5
8
Ira Impo 150 181 220 287 313
n rt 86 29 36 95 00
Expo 284 239 282 337 387
rt 61 04 37 88 90
Balan 133 577 620 499 749
ce 75 5 1 3 0
Kazakhst Impo 504 644 658 840 130
an rt 0 5.6 4 8.7 70
Expo 881 863 967 12926 184
rt 2.2 1.5 0.3 .7 70
Balan 377 218 308 451 540
ce 2.2 5.9 6.3 8 0
Kyrgyzst Impo 554. 467. 586. 717. 941.
an rt 1 2 7 0 0
Expo 504. 476. 485. 581 718.
rt 5 1 5 .7 8
Balan - 8. - - -
ce 49.6 9 101. 136. 222.
2 3 2
Pakist Impo 103 107 103 122 155
Countries 200 2001 2002 200 200
0 3 4
Turkmenis Impo 178 234 2119 251 285
tan rt 5 9 .4 2 0
Expo 2505 2620 2855 363 400
rt .5 .2 .6 2 0
Balan 720. 271 736. 112 115
ce 5 .2 2 0 0
Uzbekist Impo 2047 3136 271 2964 381
an rt .4 .9 2 .2 6
Expo 3264 3170 2988 372 485
rt .7 .4 .4 5 3
Balan 501. - 99. 760 98
ce 9 35. 5 .8 0
8
World Impo 66970 64520 66930 77780 86194
Total rt 00 00 00 00 01
Expo 64450 61910 64550 75030 82813
rt 00 00 00 00 85
Balan - - - 15281 16900
ce 25200 26100 23800 000 786
0 0 0
3.1 GDP Growth Rate

After 2000, the GDP growth rate of developing countries is showing the
positive results, the reason for this is completely not due to WTO
implication/liberalization but there are some other factors also such as external
aid etc.
 CountrieTABLE 3.3 GDP
2000 2001Growth Rate (%)
2002 2003 2004
s
Afghanista n.a. n.a. n.a. 15.7 8.0
n
Azerbaijan 11.1 9.9 10.6 11.2 10.2
Iran 5.93 5.38 7.83 8.03 5.6
Kazakhsta 9.8 13.5 9.8 9.2 9.4
n
Kyrgyzsta 5.4 5.3 0.0 6.7 7.1
n
Pakistan 3.9 1.8 3.1 6.4 8.4
Tajikistan 8.3 10.2 9.5 10.2 10.6
Turkey 7.4 -7.5 7.9 5.8 8.9
Turkmenis 18.6 20.4 19.8 17.0 7.0
tan
Uzbekista 3.8 4.2 4.2 4.2 7.7
n
World 5.1 2.3 2.8 3.5 5.0
It seems that if the trade is liberalized and there is free trade, the amount of debt on
LDCs will increase.
Year 1 1975 1980 198 1990 1995 2000
TABLE 3.4 Dimensions of the LDC Debt Burden.
5 1970-2000 (billions of dollars)

970
Total 68. 180. 635. 949. 1182 1808 2140.
4 0 8 0 . . 6
External 3 9
debt
Of which 14. 55. 64.7 285.
9 6 1
Africa 283. 304.
3 1

So the liberalization of trade in this field doesn't favour LCDs

3.2 Current Overview of LDC Economies

According to UN data profile, the current economic condition of least

developed countries is given below:
 TABLE 3.5 Least Developed
Economy 2000 Countries
2004Economy 2005
GDP (current US $) 182.1 261.0 298.4
billion billion billion
GDP growth (annual 4.3 6. 6.
%) 2 1
Inflation 5.3 5. 6.
8 5
Agriculture, value 33. 28. 27.
added(% 2 4 8

of GDP)
Industry, value added 23. 26. 27.
(% of GDP) 8 1 3

Services, etc. ,value 43. 45. 44.

added(% of GDP) 0 5 6

Exports of goods & 22. 22. 22.

services(% GDP) 3 9 1

Imports of goods & 29. 31. 31.

services(% GDP) 5 8 5

Gross capital 20. 21. 21.

formation (% of GDP) 0 4 6
 TABLE 3.6 Percentage share of developing countries in global trade
Indic 1990 2000 2003 2004
ators
Expor 24.21 31.97 32.38 33.46
ts
Impor 22.53 28.99 29.27 30.43
ts

The share of developing countries in global exports has gone up from 24.21% in 1990
to 33.46% in 2004 and their share in imports increased from 22.52% to 30.43% during this
period thus the developing countries taken as a group have done well in terms of their
share in global trade. But this performance can easily be attributed to relatively
advanced developing countries (Korea, China, Hong Kong, Singapore, etc).
The evolution of developing countries* share of world trade in total merchandise and
in manufactures and gives a snapshot of their current position in services trade.
The increase in the share of developing country merchandise exports accounted for by
manufactures, from 7 per cent in 1963 to 65 per cent in 1995 and 1997, reflects a shift in
the export structure of developing countries away from primary products and raw
materials. Again, regional differences arc very marked: the share of merchandise exports
from China accounted for by manufactures rose from 25 per cent to 88 per centbetween
1963 and 1995, while the share of manufactures in African merchandise exports rose from
2 per cent to 28 per cent over the same period

During the period 1970-1997, the openness of all regions to trade (as measured by the
share or merchandise trade in GDP at constant prices) has increased considerably. For the
world as a whole, the trade-to-GDP ratio has risen from 13.8 to 26.5 per cent in this period,
with the most rapid increase between 1984-87 (when the ratio stood at approximately 18
per cent) and 1997. In the same period, the trade-to-GDP ratio for developing countries
rose from 23 to 35 per cent; most of this increase again took place since the mid-1980s.

Some of developing countries like Brazil, China, India etc. the percentage growth rate
of their capital is very high but for the most of developing countries it is low.
TABLE 3.7 Cumulative Percentage Annual Growth Rate (1995-

2005)
 Population Capital Total Factor
Productivity
North 1.05 3.33 Low

America
Western 0.10 0.83 High

Europe
Australia/Ne 0.97 1.84 Low

w Zealand
Japan 0.20 0.37 Low
China 0.83 9.08 Very High
Taiwan 0.73 4.52 Very High
Indonesia 1.31 1.82 Low
India 1.59 8.01 Medium

Other South 2.10 3.39 Medium

Asia
Brazil 1.26 -0.69 High
Rest of 1.65 4.15 Medium
World
 Based on balance-of-payments data, the total value of world exports of commercial
services was estimated at USD 1,310 billion in 1997. The United States and Canada were
estimated to account for approximately one-fifth of this total; Western Europe for 45 per
cent; Latin America for some 4 per cent; Africa for 2.1 per cent and Asia, other than Japan
and Australia, for some 16 per cent. Roughly, therefore, developing countries accounted
for about 21 per cent of world exports of commercial services.
3.Developments since the Establishment of The WTO
The trend towards fuller participation of the developing countries in the multilateral
trading system has continued since the establishment of the WTO. Negotiations under the
GATS which were carried forward from the Uruguay Round have resulted in substantial
commitments from these countries. Another noteworthy area of their participation has
been the Information Technology Agreement. The WTO Members have also taken further
initiatives for the benefit of the least- developing countries in the following fields:
 1 Telecomm
. unications

3.Financial services

4.Movement of natural persons

3.5 The Implementation of the WTO Agreements: Developing Countries' Concerns

In reviewing the implementation of the WTO Agreements, developing country Members
have identified a variety of issues reflecting their diverse interests and priorities. These
relate mainly to the following areas: (i) trade opportunities for products of interest to
developing countries; (ii) provisions that require WTO Members to safeguard the interests
of developing countries; (iii) transitional periods; and (iv) technical assistance to
developing countries.

The persistence of impediments to market access in areas of export interest to

developing countries has been identified as a major policy concern. Developing country
Members have cited the adverse effects of tariff escalation and tariff peaks both in
relation to agricultural products and industrial goods.
 There are also concerns that burdensome administrative and customs procedures,
changes to rules of origin and frequent use of safeguard measures are adversely affecting
exports of textiles and clothing products from developing countries.

2.Recognition and safeguard of interests

As noted, most of the WTO Agreements contain provisions for the recognition and
safeguard of developing countries' interests. Developing countries have claimed that
these provisions have been largely ineffectual. Concerns have been also raised that
initiatives are lacking to facilitate the active participation of developing countries in the
relevant standard setting organizations.
3.Transitional periods
Transitional periods are intended to facilitate the implementation of WTO Agreements
by developing countries. It has been claimed, however, that the transitional periods do not
always give sufficient time to deal with specific shortfalls in capacity that are faced by
individual Members, or with their precise development needs. Specific areas in which a
need for extension has been referred to by some include those related to export subsidies
for industrial products, TRIMS and TRIPS.
4. Technical assistance
Many Members have stressed the critical and continuing need for assistance to
strengthen the technical capacity of developing countries in order to permit them to meet
their WTO obligations. In addition, Members have emphasized the importance of matching
assistance more closely to the specific technical or legal needs of individual developing
countries. For this purpose, while recognizing the efforts made by the international
community, especially in the context of the LDCs, there have been calls not only for an
increase in technical assistance, but also for more effectively co-ordinate technical
assistance from all sources.

Now considering PAKISTAN

Pakistan today meets most of the essential requirements that the foreign businesses
and investors are looking for. Macroeconomic stability, deep-rooted structural reforms,
high standards of economic governance, outward looking orientation, liberalized trade and
investment regime, easy access to policy makers, low production costs, sophisticated
financial sector and its location as a regional hub make it a highly attractive country for
business and investment.
TABLE 3.8 Overview ofOctober
the Economy Chang
After
October Military COUP
1999 2004 e in
the
Indica
tor
GDP 4.2% 6.4% Positi
Growth
ve
Rate
Inflatio 5.7% 4.6% Positi
n ve
Externa 52% 37% Positi
l ve
Debt/G
DP
Exports US$ 7.8 US$ 13 Positi
billion billion ve
Foreign US$ 472 US$ Positi
Direct
million 950 ve
Invest
ment million
Unempl 6% 8% Negat
oyment ive
 At the time of army coup, October 1999 in Pakistan the economic condition was not
very good. Soon after the military takeover Pakistan was forced to become the part of
alliance against the terrorism in the world. Pakistan had a dramatic economic changes
after military takeover. It is not because of good economic policies but it is because of
external aid which Pakistan received after becoming the part of global alliance against
terrorism.
At the time of army coup the GDP growth rate of Pakistan was 4.2% which
exceeded to 6.4% in 2004. Similarly, the exports has risen from US $ 7.8 billion to US $
13 billion. But the unemployment level has risen from 6% to 8%. So if Pakistan
adopts more policies for trade liberalization there is a risk of more unemployment.
Considering the case of Pakistan especially, we come to know that the imports of
Pakistan were always greater than its imports, but the ratio of trade balance shows that
it is going towards negative side, just before the liberalization of trade Pakistan had very
high trade balance.
TABU 3.9 EXPORTS. IMPORTS. & TRADE BALANCE AT CONSTANT PRICES OF 1960-70 ( $
US Million )
 Year Expor Impor Trade
s ts ts Balance
1949- 176 595 -419
50
1959- 176 479 -303
60
1969- 338 690 -352
70
1979- 855 1714
80 -859
1989- 1167 1634 -467
90
1995- 2509 3402 -893
96

If there is liberalization of trade, there will more deficit in foreign trade because
before liberalization Pakistan local industry was unable to cover the import/export deficit
and if there is free trade there will be more losses.
3.6 New trade liberalization polices adopted by Pakistan (Current Issues)
 Now considering Pakistan's current agreements on free trade we come to know that
the Pakistan has just signed (November 2006) free trade agreement with China. China
being a friendly neighbor is always very supportive to Pakistan especially in economic
field. China is also going to open its first ever economic zone (Outside China) in Pakistan
which is an example of corporation in trade between developing countries.
On the other hand India is asking Pakistani government to award it as a most favored
nation status for trade. Pakistani government has liberalized trade to some extent and has
removed duties and lifted ban on some of daily household (almost 150 products) use
products (2005-06). So Pakistani government is not allowing complete free trade with
India because if Pakistani government does so then their will be bombardment of Indian
made products which are low in price as compared to products which are manufactured in
Pakistan. This will cause the local producers to suffer a lot. Pakistani government has to
decide at what level, when and how much liberalized trade with India.

4. Conclusion and Recommendations

Free trade no doubt, increases the size of the pie but the distribution of enlarged pie is
uneven with bigger and relatively more advanced countries getting the lion's share. Hence
no surprisingly in the wake of liberalization bigger or relatively more advanced developing
countries have performed far better than smaller or less advanced developing countries.
Developed countries have moved towards service based economy and their growth
have showed, the demand for primary commodities has fallen.
So developing countries have moved towards the production of value-added exports
and these exports have increased.
 Even in case of South-South trade beneficiary are again bigger and relatively advanced
economies.
Two types of developing countries arc beneficiaries of trade liberalization:
•China and India competitiveness is based on price. Enjoying economies of large

scale.
•Korea and Singapore are beneficiaries because their exports are high tech value

added products.

Complementary measures must be taken, such as

■• Improvement in the quality of education.Investment in rural roads and other

infrastructure.

■ Support for agricultural research and extension.

■Creation of effective social safety nets for poor.

Developing country like Pakistan must liberalize to make WTO regime PROPOOR,

Press must be allowed to overview the hearing of different disputes among the member
countries. Make WTO more democratic. More authority must be given to developing
countries to participate in different functioning of WTO.

It needs the policy space of Pakistan (developing countries) to decide What, When and
How much to liberalize.

In order to make WTO regime more PRO POOR Pakistan need to explore non-traditional
market like that of Latin America and South Africa.