Back Matter

Back Matter

Author(s):
Arvind Subramanian
Published Date:
September 2000
    Share
    • ShareShare
    Show Summary Details

    Throughout this paper, the ESA region will comprise the following 22 countries: Angola, Botswana, Burundi, Comoros, Democratic Republic of Congo, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Kenya, Lesotho, Madagascar, Malawi, Mauritius, Mozambique, Namibia, Rwanda, Seychelles, South Africa, Swaziland, Tanzania, Uganda, Zambia, and Zimbabwe.

    Middle-income countries are defined by the World Bank as those with a 1998 per capita GNP of between US$760 and US$9,360.

    The trade restrictiveness index is a modified version of the one used in Sharer and others (1998), and is based on a classification system for nontariff barriers and for import and export taxes (sec Appendix I).

    For example, in the case of South Africa and its partners in SACU, the maximum tariff was 1,389 percent, there were more than 13,000 tariff lines, and the effective protection ranged from—411 to 189 percent. While extreme. South Africa’s case was not atypical, as Malawi, Mauritius, and Ethiopia also had highly distorted tariff structures.

    Of the 22 countries in the ESA region, 14 had programs with the IMF during the 1990s. The SACU countries (excluding Lesotho), Angola, Eritrea, Mauritius, and the Seychelles did not have programs with the Fund (see Appendix II, Table A2).

    While some countries—Zambia, for example—embarked on a liberalization program that encompassed both tariff and nontariff barriers, some of the other reformers, such as Tanzania, gave priority to the elimination of nontariff barriers and reduced tariffs at a later stage.

    Tentative evidence derived from developments in tariff collection ratios and a categorization of countries on the basis of the Sachs-Warner criterion suggest that the gap between ESA countries and the rest of the world has narrowed considerably since the late 1980s (Appendix II, Table A3).

    Specific revisions to tariff schedules may have prevented reductions in effective protection for important sectors of the economy. In the case of South Africa, the top rate of effective protection increased from 189 percent at the beginning of the decade to 204 percent in 1998, despite the overall trade liberalization achieved during this period.

    With the notable exception of the SACU, which had applied 72 tariff bands by end-1998.

    Zambia and Mozambique have also moved closer to Article VIII status in 1999. However, capital account liberalization has not featured prominently in the reform agenda of most countries in the region. Except for Mauritius, Uganda, and Zambia, several capital account controls are still in place in most countries.

    Including exemptions on imports by nongovernmental organizations and those financed by foreign donors, which usually cover a large part of total imports.

    In Mauritius, the share of exempted imports in total imports increased by about 10 percent during the 1990s. In Tanzania, the scope of exemptions has also increased in recent years, as evidenced by the rise in the ratio of forgone revenue relating to exemptions to total import taxes assessed (including exemptions), from 24 percent in 1993 to 48 percent in 1997–98. In Mozambique and Zambia, the authorities have emphasized recently the use of discretionary exemptions in an attempt to promote foreign investment.

    See, for instance, Rodrik (1998).

    Zambia introduced an across-the-board 5 percent import declaration fee in 1995 for fiscal reasons, which was eliminated in 1998. Also, an import ban on wheat flour, introduced in 1997, was lifted in the following year. The 10 percent export levy on tobacco, tea, and sugar introduced by Malawi in 1995 for fiscal reasons was eliminated in 1998. In Tanzania, some of the tariff increases in creases in 1992 were reversed during See. for instance, Rodrik (1998).

    Binding represents a legal commitment by a country not to raise tariffs above a specified level. If a binding is breached by a country it has to compensate partner countries or face retaliation by them.

    Computed as Hi, = Σj=1,…S(Sjj=1,….SSj)2, where Sj is the sum of deposits and loans for bank j. As defined, the index equals one in the case of a monopoly and 0 in the case of equal shares. An index value higher than 0.3 is normally associated with an imperfect market structure.

    The liberalization index corresponds to the bound rather than the applied level of access, and, therefore, does not necessarily correlate with how liberal actual conditions are.

    Tanzaiiia will withdraw from COMESA effective September 2000.

    Angola, the Democratic Republic of Congo, and the Seychelles are the only three countries that are not signatories of the protocol, though Angola and Seychelles have signaled Their intention to accede to it in the near future.

    ESA countries that are net importers of foodstuffs could also be affected by the increase in prices brought about by the reduction in subsidization of agricultural products. This increase is, however, expected to be small.

    These preferences stem from various arrangements between industrial countries and ESA countries, such as the Generalized System of Preferences between the European Union. Japan, and the United States, on the one hand, and developing countries, on the other. There are also the Lomé Convention, involving the EU and several low-income countries, including ESA countries, and others, such as the Multi-Fiber Arrangement, under which several ESA countries have special quotas for the export of textiles and clothing products.

    Tariff escalation is a phenomenon whereby tariffs increase with the stage of processing.

    This result is based on Yeats (1998) and covers eight ESA countries for which reliable data are available at a disaggregated level. The countries are Kenya, Madagascar, Malawi, Mauritius, South Africa, Uganda, Zambia, and Zimbabwe. The non-ESA sub-Saharan African countries covered are Benin, Burkina Faso, Cameroon, Gabon, Côte d’lvoire, and Senegal.

    According to Amjadi and Yeats (1995), net payments on freight and insurance by sub-Saharan African countries were in 1990–91 equivalent to about 15 percent of exports of goods and services, more than twice as high as in other developing countries. In landlocked countries such as Malawi and Uganda, the ratio was well above 50 percent.

    The single-product and three-product concentration ratios measure the share of total exports accounted for by the largest and the three largest export items, respectively.

    The following variables are analyzed: GDP growth, GDP per capita growth, growth in export volume, inflation performance, the fiscal balances, the current account balance (the latter two excluding grants and expressed as a share of GDP), and indicators of trade revenue dependency. The Democratic Republic of Congo and Eritrea are excluded from the analysis because their macroeconomic data are either unavailable or highly distorted by the recent wars in these countries.

    In virtually all cases, those countries that had open trade regimes in 1998 were also the ones that undertook the most liberalization since the beginning of the decade.

    The BLNS countries are excluded from the analysis here because their “trade taxes” largely represent transfers from South Africa under the revenue-sharing arrangements in SACU.

    The African Growth and Opportunity Act, enacted by the U.S. Congress in early 2000, provides for duty-free treatment of the exports of sub-Saharan African countries to the United States. The magnitude of benefits to these countries, especially in relation to textiles and clothing products, will be determined by rules of origin requirements that need to be fulfilled to qualify for duty-free access. An interesting feature of the Act is that it envisages the possible negotiation of free trade agreements between the United States and African countries in the future.

    Tariff escalation is significant for many product chains relevant to sub-Saharan African countries, such as wood products, textiles and clothing, fish, and leather products (Amjadi, Reinke, and Yeats, 1996).

    Pre-Uruguay Round tariffs facing sub-Saharan African countries’ exports to the EU. United Stales, and Japan averaged only 0.31 percent, less than for any other group of developing countries (Amjadi, Reinke, and Yeats. 1996).

    Appendix I Overall Trade Restrictiveness Classification Scheme

    As noted in Sharer and others (1998), the restrictiveness of the tariff regime depends on many factors, including the minimum and maximum tariff rates, the number of bands, the allocation of individual items to the bands, the existence of “exceptional” rates that lie outside the basic tariff structure, any other duties and charges (such as differential rates of excise or value-added taxes on imports, import surcharges, and statistical fees), and the extent of exemptions from customs duties. The classification scheme for overall trade restrictiveness used in this study builds on the approach developed by Sharer and others by including information on export taxes and by adding another category of nontariff barrier (NTB) restrictiveness.

    Under this approach, a country is assigned a restrictiveness ranking for both its price-based (import tariffs and export taxes) measures and its NTBs, based on the classification schemes described below. Consistent with the Lerner theorem that an export tax is equivalent to an import tax, the price-based measure is computed as the sum of import and export taxes. Whenever possible, an unweighted average of statutory tariff rates including other duties and charges was used. An average of statutory tariff rates is preferable to one based on customs collections since the latter reflects (often extensive) exemptions. An unweighted average is preferable to a trade-weighted average since items with high tariffs are likely to have small trade weights. Other duties and charges should also be included. The restrictiveness ranking accords greater weight to NTBs, which are inherently less transparent and more distortionary than tariffs.

    NTBs include quantitative restrictions, restructure licensing, bans, state trading monopolies, restrictive foreign exchange practices that affect the trade regime (for example, a surrender requirement at a non-market exchange rate, multiple exchange rates), quality controls, and customs procedures that act as trade restrictions. Such measures in effect provide indirect subsidies to import-competing domestic producers in a nontransparent manner. However, information on NTBs and their restrictiveness as measured, for instance, by ad valorem equivalents.1 may either not be available for all countries or be of limited use,2 A review of previous studies on trade reform in developing countries below shows that other researchers have faced similar difficulties. In view of this, this study utilizes four categories of NTBs (see table above).

    Overall Trade Restrictiveness Classification Scheme
    Trade Taxes2Absolutely No

    Restrictions
    Nontariff Barriers1Pervasive

    Restrictions;

    Greater than

    40 Percent

    Coverage3
    Few Restrictions;

    0–20 Percent

    Coverage3
    Substantial

    Restrictions;

    20–40 Percent

    Coverage3
    <10 percent1357
    10 to 15 percent2468
    15 to 20 percent3579
    20 to 25 percent46810
    25 to 35 percent57910
    >35 percent10101010

    Includes restrictions on exports and imports and other NTBs.

    includes customs duties and all other charges levied exclusively on imports, as well as export taxes.

    Refers to the share of total trade being affected by NTBs.

    The table illustrates the assignment of price-based and NTB categories on the 10-point scale. A country is assigned an overall rating of 10 as long as the average tariff rate exceeds 35 percent, even if the nontariff trade regime is classified as open. Countries with an overall rating of between 7 and 10 are classified as restrictive; those with a 5 or a 6 rating are classified as moderately restrictive; those with 3 or 4 as moderately open; and those with 1 or 2 as open.

    The ad valorem equivalent of an import quota is the rate of advalorem tariff that would yield the same import quantity as the quota. There are many circumstances in which import quotas and import tariffs are not equivalent, including imperfect market structures and changes in supply and demand.

    Trade or production coverage of NTBs may be useful but does not fully capture their restrictiveness.

    Appendix II Statistical Tables
    Table A1Eastern and Southern Africa: Structure of Production (Constant Prices), 1985–971
    AgricultureIndustryServices
    198519901997198519901997198519901997
    Angola14.012.28.250.254.168.035.433.926.0
    Botswana25.65.54.568.154.550.643.045.155.8
    Burundi50.248.851.222.722.717.328.229.930.2
    Comoros38.342.244.515.79.614.657.357.555.1
    Congo, Dem. Rep. of30.032.761.835.727.617.443.743.121.7
    Eritrea
    Ethiopia
    Kenya35.734.430.716.316.415.748.549.553.5
    Lesotho23.520.712.323.730.939.157.751.248.6
    Madagascar30.631.232.414.013.613.755.955.654.0
    Malawi29.426.736.319.320.917.551.853.943.7
    Mauritius17.612.89.427.832.933.155.354.757.5
    Mozambique33.526.330.239.019.526.427.554.143.4
    Namibia10.012.011.333.631.232.156.157.256.8
    Rwanda43.139.636.424.022.624.232.937.839.1
    Seychelles38.05.021.535.4102.188.0
    South Africa4.55.05.341.940.338.753.254.556.0
    Swaziland32.022.517.123.741.243.551.638.939.9
    Tanzania444.344.346.622.622.921.433.433.231.9
    Uganda57.856.446.010.011.316.933.032.936.8
    Zambia22.924.016.046.149.335.643.239.862.1
    Zimbabwe18.716.116.633.134.328.148.449.855.3
    Eastern and Southern Africa
    (weighted)11.112.213.138.136.035.549.549.752.1
    Eastern and Southern Africa (unweighted)28.526.126.129.928.929.545.148.747.8
    Sub-Saharan Africa18.419.220.137.035.733.847.147.047.4
    Middle Income5n.a.12.913.238.041.950.654.3
    Source: World Bank, World Development Indicators, 1999.

    Ratio of appropriate sectoral variable to GDP at factor cost. All averages are unweighted unless indicated otherwise. In a few cases, shares do not add up to 100.

    Final period refers to 1995.

    Initial period refers to 1988.

    Initial period refers to 1988 and final period to 1996.

    Initial period refers to 1988.

    Table A2.Eastern and Southern Africa: Countries with IMF Arrangements During the 1990s
    1990199119921993199419951996199719981999
    Angola
    Botswana
    Burundi
    Comoros
    Congo. Dem, Rep. of
    Eritrea
    Ethiopia
    Kenya
    Lesotho
    Madagascar
    Malawi
    Mauritius
    Mozambique
    Namibia
    Rwanda
    Seychelles
    South Africa
    Swaziland
    Tanzania
    Uganda
    Zambia
    Zimbabwe
    Source: IMF, international Financial Statistics.
    Table A3.Sachs-Warner Classification of Trade Policy of ESA Countries, 1980s and 1990s
    1980s OverallLate 1990s 1 Overall
    AngolaOpenClosed
    BotswanaOpen
    BurundiClosedClosed
    ComorosClosed
    Congo, Dem. Rep. ofClosedOpen
    EthiopiaClosedOpen
    KenyaClosedOpen
    LesothoOpen
    MadagascarOpen
    MalawiClosedOpen
    MauritiusOpenOpen
    MozambiqueClosedOpen
    NamibiaOpen
    RwandaClosedOpen
    SeychellesClosed
    South AfricaClosedOpen
    SwazilandOpen
    TanzaniaClosedOpen
    UgandaClosedOpen
    ZambiaClosedOpen
    ZimbabweClosedClosed
    No. of “open” countries in ESA217
    Total countries in ESA1421
    No.of “open” countries in SSA718
    Total countries in SSA2525
    No.of “open” countries in Asia711
    Total countries in Asia1515
    No.of “open” countries in Middle East
    and North Africa21
    Total countries in Middle East and North Africa99
    No. of “open” countries in W. Hemisphere322
    Total countries in Western Hemisphere2222
    No.of “open” industrial countries2224
    Total industrial countries2424

    IMF staff’s calculations applying the Sachs-Warner criterion for tariffs and nontariff barriers. That is, a country is classified as closed if its NTBs covered 40 percent or more of the value of trade or if its average tariff exceeded 40 percent.

    Table A4Eastern and Southern Africa: Current Account Exchange Restrictions, 1990 and 1999
    Article VIII StatusDate of
    1990119991Acceptance
    Angolanono
    BotswananoyesNov. 1995
    Burundinono
    ComorosnoyesJun. 1996
    Congo, Dem. Rep. ofnono
    Eritreanono
    Ethiopianono
    KenyanoyesJun. 1994
    LesothonoyesMar. 1997
    MadagascarnoyesSep. 1996
    MalawinoyesDec. 1995
    MauritiusnoyesSep. 1993
    Mozambiquenono
    NamibianoyesSep. 1996
    RwandanoyesDec. 1998
    SeychellesyesyesJan. 1978
    South AfricayesyesSep.1973
    SwazilandyesyesDec.1989
    TanzanianoyesJul. 1996
    UgandanoyesApr. 1994
    Zambianono
    ZimbabwenoyesFeb. 1995
    Total “yes”315
    In percent of total1468
    Memorandum item
    IMF membership24681
    Sources: IMF (1991); and IMF (2000).

    As of December 31.

    As of December 31, 1999, in percent of total.

    Table A5Eastern and Southern Africa: Nontariff Barriers to Imports, December 1998
    Quantitative RestrictionsRestrictive Licensing

    Requirements
    Import State

    Trading

    Monopolies
    Other1
    BansQuotasFor all

    produccs
    For some

    produccs
    AngolaNoNoyesYesNoNo
    BotswanaNoYesNoYesNoNo
    BurundiNoNoNoNoNoYes
    ComorosNoNoNoNoYesNo
    EritreaYesNoNoYesYesNo
    EthiopiaNoNoNoYesYesNo
    KenyaNoNoNoNoNoNo
    LesothoNoNoNoNoNoNo
    MadagascarNoNoNoNoNoNo
    MalawiNoNoNoNoNoNo
    MauritiusNoNoNoNoYesNo
    MozambiqueNoNoNoNoNoYes
    NamibiaNoYesNoYesYesNo
    RwandaNoNoNoNoNoNo
    SeychellesNoYesYesYesNo
    South AfricaNoNoNoNoNoYes
    SwazilandNoNoNoNoYesNo
    TanzaniaNoNoNoNoYesNo
    UgandaYesNoNoNoNoNo
    ZambiaNoNoNoNoNoNo
    ZimbabweNoNoNoYesYesNo
    Sources: World Bank and IMF staff reports; and data provided by the authorities.

    Includes countervailing duties, dumping, etc.

    Table A6Eastern and Southern Africa: Nontariff Barriers to Exports, December 1998
    Quantitative RestrictionsLicensing1DutiesMarketing

    Monopolies
    BansQuotas
    AngolaNoNoYesYesNo
    BotswanaNoNo2Yes3NoYes
    BurundiNoNoNoYesYes
    ComorosNoNoNoYesNo
    EritreaYesNoNoNoNo
    EthiopiaNoNoYesYesNo
    KenyaNoNoYesNoYes
    LesothoNoNoNo2NoNo
    MadagascarNoNoNoNoNo
    MalawiNoNoNoNoNo
    MauritiusNoNoNoNoNo
    MozambiqueNoNoNoYesNo
    NamibiaNoNo2Yes3NoYes
    RwandaNoNoNoYesNo
    SeychellesNoNoNoNoNo
    SwazilandNoNoNoyesYes
    South AfricaNoNoNoYesNo
    TanzaniaNoNoNoNoNo
    UgandaNoNoNoNoNo
    ZambiaYesNoNoNoNo
    ZimbabweNoYesYesNoYes
    Sources: World Bank and IMF staff reports; and data provided by the authorities.

    Only for restrictive (and not for statistical) purposes.

    Except for diamonds.

    All exports, except to SACU member countries, require a license. Within SACU, textiles and meat products require a license.

    Table A7Eastern and Southern Africa: Summary of Uruguay Round Commitments in Agriculture and Industry
    Agriculture
    Average

    bound

    duty
    Average

    bound

    ODC1
    Total

    average

    tariff

    binding

    (duty+ODC)
    Industry
    Previous

    bindings
    Share of

    lines bound

    in UR
    Average

    bound duty
    Average

    bound

    ODC
    Total average

    binding

    (Duty+ODC)
    Actual tariffsGap between bound and actual
    (Early 1990s)(1998)(Early 1990s)(1998)
    (Percent)(Percent of lines(Percent)
    Angola800.18004800.18024245656
    Botswana4040316817174515-282
    Burundi1003013021003013039419189
    Kenya1003013025405444191035
    Madagascar3025028011302502803015250262
    Malawi12420144447206718124955
    Mauritius120171350265178234194863
    Mozambique10030040002803003801910362370
    Namibia400403168170174515-282
    Rwanda808010010010035226578
    south Africa4040179817174515-282
    swaziland4040316817174515-282
    Tanzania12012024000.11201202402520215220
    Uganda800800350501893241
    Zambia1240124442423714528
    Zimbabwe146151618138296630323634
    Sources: Sorsa (1996); and IMF staff estimates.

    Other duties and charges.

    Table A8Eastern and Southern Africa: Commitments Undertaken in Trade in Services in the WTO
    BusinessCommunicationsConstructionDistributionEducationalEnvironmentalFinancialHealth and SocialTourism and TravelRecreationalTransportOtherTotal
    Angola3
    Burundi5
    Botswana3
    Congo, Dem. Rep. of2
    Kenya5
    Lesotho10
    Madagascar1
    Malawi5
    Mauritius3
    Mozambique1
    Namibia2
    Rwanda5
    South Africa9
    Swaziland3
    Tanzania1
    Uganda2
    Zambia4
    Zimbabwe3
    Total1075323841633367
    Source: Based on schedules of commitments submitted to the WTO.
    Table A9SADC: Intraregional and Extraregional Trade
    ImportsExports
    199019941999199019941999
    (Millions of U.S.)
    SADC trade
    Intraregional11,5313,0424,7051,0582,9554,403
    By SACU from/to rest of SADC region795605714022,0043,135
    By rest of SADC region from/to SACU9742,0343,473173442619
    Between rest of SADC region478448661484508650
    Extraregional27,66731,11535,52133,32731,97048,330
    Rest of Africa3813276301,2246331,162
    EU12,50213,39315,6659,2777,65614,880
    United States3,0674,4564,0474,3673,8966,171
    Japan2,3782,9322,2222,0741,5932,477
    Rest of world9,33910,00812,95716,38518,19223,640
    Total29,19934,15840,22634,38634,92452,733
    (Percent of total)
    SADC trade
    Intraregional5.28.911.73.18.58.3
    By SACU from/to rest of SADC region0.31.61.41.25.75.9
    By rest of SADC region from/to SACU3.36.08.60.51.31.2
    Between rest of SADC region1.61.31.61.41.51.2
    Extraregional94.891.188.396.991.591.7
    Rest of Africa1.31.01.63.61.82.2
    EU42.839.238.927.021.928.2
    United States10.513.010.112.711.711.7
    Japan8.18.65.56.04.64.7
    Rest of world32.029.332.247.752.144.8
    Total100100100100100100
    (Percent of GDP)
    Memorandum items
    Intraregional0.91.72.60.61.72.5
    Extraregional16.917.619.920.418.027.0
    Total17.919.322.521.019.729.5
    Source: IMF Direction of Trade Statistics

    Import and export data differ mainly because partner country data are used directly or indirectly in estimating missing figures. Imports are measured c.i.f., exports are measured f.o.b.

    Table A10COMESA: Intraregional and Extraregional Trade
    ImportsExports
    199019941999199019941999
    (Miffions of U.S. dollars)
    COMESA trade
    Intraregional11,0151,0541,6248999851,616
    Extraregiorial25,29625,07942,32013,94415,33019,780
    South Africa9821,8543,932169428696
    Rest of Africa388315291320495205
    EU11,5859,32815,9155,4855,8098,695
    United States2,3022,6634,2592,9393,2313,923
    Japan1,3051,2701,845588592711
    Rest of world8,7339,64916,0774,4434,7745,550
    Total26,31126,13343,94414,84316,31621,397
    (Percent of total)
    COMESA trade
    Intraregional3.94.03.76.16.07.6
    Extra regional96.196.096.393.994.092.4
    South Africa3.77.18.91.12.63.3
    Rest of Africa1.51.20.72.23.01.0
    EU44.035.736.237.035.640.6
    United States8.810.29.719.819.818.3
    Japan5.04.94.24.03.63.3
    Rest of world33.236.936.629.929.325.9
    Total100100100100100100
    (Percent of GDP)
    Memorandum items
    Intraregional0.90.91.00.80.91.0
    Extra regional21.922.00.212.113.512.2
    Total22.822.91.212.814.313.2
    Source: IMF, Direction of Trade Statistics.

    Import and export data differ mainly because partner country data are used directly or indirectly in estimating missing figures. Imports are measured c.i.f., exports are measured f.o.b.

    Table A11CBI: Intraregional and Extraregional Trade
    ImportsExports
    199019941999199019941999
    (Millions of U.S. dollars)
    CBI trade
    Intraregional16747241,1106127251,055
    Extraregional10,79811,00312,1755,6777,0528,105
    South Africa9841,6702,867169320594
    Rest of Africa329134126364485399
    EU5,0423,9813,6712,8343,2494,153
    United States634584531521621722
    Japan743705565362368417
    Rest of world3,0663,9304,4151,4252,0091,820
    Total11,47211,72713,2856,2887,7779,160
    (Percent of total)
    CBI trade
    Intraregional5.96.28.49.79.311.5
    Extraregional94.193.891.690.390.788.5
    South Africa8.614.221.62.74.16.5
    Rest of Africa2.91.11.05.86.24.4
    EU43.933.927.645.141.845.3
    United States5.55.04.08.38.07.9
    Japan6.56.04.35.84.74.5
    Rest of world26.733.533.222.725.819.9
    Total100100100100100100
    (Percent of GDP)
    Memorandum items
    Intraregional1.51.92.21.41.92.1
    Extraregional24.524.50.312.918.316.1
    Total26.030.42.514.320.118.2
    Source: IMF, Direction of Trade Statistics

    Import and export data differ mainly because partner country data are used directly or indirectly in estimating missing figures. Imports are measured c.i.f., exports are measured f.o.b.

    Table A12Selected Eastern and Southern African Countries: Tariff Preferences(In percent, unless otherwise indicated)
    OECD

    Average

    tariff

    on exports
    Average

    preference

    margin1
    European UnionJapanUSAExport Loss

    if Preferences

    Eliminated
    Export Loss

    under

    Uruguay

    Round

    (Percent of

    total exports)
    Average

    tariff

    on exports
    Preference

    margin1
    Average

    tariff on

    exports
    Preference

    margin1
    Average

    tariff on

    exports
    Preference

    margin1
    (Thousands

    of

    U.S. dollars)
    (Percent

    of total

    exports)
    Angola0.21.50.33.21.80.00.10.43,4970.3
    Botswana0.32.80.12.90.02.13.51.1-399-0.6-0.3
    Burundi2.50.1
    Comoros0.60.1
    Ethiopia0.71.30.11.91.51.32.00.45,7691.90.02
    Lesotho-3.4
    Kenya0.53.30.23.52.41.13.12.324,6202.6
    Madagascar0.52.00.42.70.80.20.81.04,7651.70.1
    Malawi1.12.40.13.50.00.15.40.62,7761.40.1
    Mozambique1.30.1
    Mauritius1.33.10.23.44.81.16.41.847,4414.8
    Rwanda3.80.1
    Swaziland0.84.40.54.96.73.03.51.92,9391.7
    Uganda0.92.40.63.00.00.02.10.39,3713.30.2
    Tanzania0.12.30.02.51.41.00.02.44,1921.40.0
    Zambia0.31.70.52.90.00.61.41.47,2971.00.5
    Zimbabwe0.92.50.23.31.21.04.01.019,7701.4
    Sources: Yeats (1994); and Harrold (1995).

    Difference between unweighted tariff faced by African exports and those paid by competitor countries

    Table A13Sub-Saharan Africa: Compound Annual Growth Rates for Exports in U.S. Dollars(Percent)
    Exporting Country1980–851985–901990–931993–961994–96
    All non–oil goods
    Kenya0.72.72.69.49.9
    Madagascar-8.53.45.418.912.4
    Malawi1.92.8-0.45.51.4
    Mauritius-0.620.62.26.810.7
    SACU-6.97.2-0.215.915.1
    Uganda-2.2-10.4-11.253.316.3
    Zambia-15.114.3-13.5-1.7-7.3
    Zimbabwe11.012.1-4.113.48.5
    Eastern and Southern Africa (ESA) countries-2.56.6-2.415.28.4
    ESA countries, excl. SACU-1.86.5-2.715.17.4
    14 SSA countries-5.26.50.014.412.4
    All non-SSA countries0.916.03.512.910.8
    All Foods
    Kenya3.00.81.69.613.3
    Madagascar-9.00.55.311.54.0
    Malawi2.42.8-0.56.21.3
    Mauritius-7.79.60.67.812.1
    SACU-12.811.8-4.219.88.4
    Uganda-3.4-10.7-13.462.218.0
    Zambia-11.411.2-2.614.434.0
    Zimbabwe10.914.11.014.34.0
    ESA countries-3.55.0-1.518.211.9
    ESA countries, excl. SACU-2.24.0-1.118.012.4
    14 SSA countries0.02.10.016.411.1
    All non-SSA countries-1.711.62.510.98.8
    All manufactures
    Kenya-6.910.95.71.6-7.5
    Madagascar1.110.819.336.928.3
    Malawi-8.98.81.9-10.6-9.0
    Mauritius12.929.32.76.410.2
    SACU1-7.23.48.917.219.3
    Uganda-26.9-8.130.8-9.025.9
    Zambia-21.829.5-1.87.38.8
    Zimbabwe3.214.1-3.27.915.0
    ESA countries-6.812.48.07.211.4
    ESA countries, excl. SACU-6.813.67.95.810.2
    14 SSA countries-0.17.06.515.317.8
    All non-SSA countries2.217.04.113.211.4
    Source: Yeats (1998).
    Table A14Sub–Saharan Africa: Structure of Exports, 1985–96
    Percent Share in Total ExportsManufactures Subgroup (Percent Share in Total Exports)
    Value (US$ million)All foodsAgricultural materialsFuelsOres and metalsManufacturesMisc. goodsLeather and rubberWood and paperTextilesIron and steelClothingFootwear
    Kenya
    198586780.67.21.40.59.51.42.20.20.30.00.60.1
    199099273.09.71.41.313.71.45.10.30.40.00.60.1
    19961,42372.813.20.50.811.80.51.60.50.40.02.40.0
    Madagascar
    198528780.43.00.05.910.40.00.80.06.60.20.00.0
    199033171.15.00.48.114.90.41.10.15.90.03.40.0
    199665855.14.82.33.732.72.30.20.42.10.025.80.0
    Malawi
    198526393.72.60.00.03.40.00.00.03.00.00.10.0
    199029793.61.70.00.04.40.00.10.11.90.01.80.0
    199634395.31.50.00.13.00.00.00.11.10.01.00.0
    Mauritius
    198547551.50.80.00.147.50.00.10.21.50.236.90.0
    19901,21131.60.50.00.167.50.00.00.22.30.052.60.0
    19961,58131.70.50.00.067.30.00.00.12.20.054.60.1
    South Africa
    19859,73311.26.816.330.333.216.30.61.60.911.20.70.0
    199013,15414.36.112.636.629.012.80.82.00.78.90.70.0
    199618,11715.34.612.027.239.112.01.32.41.011.91.40.1
    Uganda
    198540487.911.00.00.10.90.00.00.00.00.00.00.0
    199020889.69.30.00.11.00.00.10.00.00.00.00.0
    199656495.53.60.00.00.60.00.20.00.00.00.00.0
    Zambia
    19856041.91.80.094.31.90.00.00.00.10.80.00.0
    19901,0871.60.70.093.83.80.00.10.00.90.00.10.0
    19965095.12.00.083.29.50.00.10.07.00.00.10.0
    Zimbabwe
    198563038.714.60.020.825.60.01.00.01.620.71.20.0
    19901,03540.69.40.022.127.70.00.90.02.018.73.30.0
    19961,32247.89.60.714.227.20.71.50.31.914.83.60.0
    ESA countries
    198513,26123.56.712.127.728.312.10.71.21.09.31.90.0
    199018,31322.55.79.133.328.29.20.91.51.07.44.30.0
    199624,51625.35.09.022.736.59.01.11.81.29.65.60.1
    14 SSA countries
    198520,61929.38.123.218.919.323.20.41.10.96.01.20.0
    199026,10325.29.318.425.021.318.40.71.50.95.23.10.0
    199633,60628.88.116.117.528.316.10.91.71.07.04.10.1
    Source: Years (1998).52
    Table A15Selected Eastern and Southern African Countries: Concentration of Exports, 1988 and 1996
    ExporterShare in Total Exports2(Percent)
    Number of Items Exported119881996
    Largest

    product
    Three

    largest
    Largest

    product
    Three

    largest
    19881996
    Kenya131330652961
    Madagascar131529692551
    Malawi8662847490
    Mauritius11950875584
    South Africa223314321126
    Uganda5690958092
    Zambia3988946492
    Zimbabwe141622543757
    Source: Yeats (1998)

    Items are defined at the four-digit level of the Standard International Trade Classification (SITC) Revision I system. At this level, the SITC distinguishes among 632 individual products. To be included in the tabulation of an export product, the item had to account for 1 percent or more of total exports

    The share of the largest and three largest four-digit SITC products in total exports.

    Table A16Selected Eastern and Southern African Countries: Intra-industry Trade Ratios, 1988 and 1996
    CountryYearIntra-Industry Trade Ratios1
    Transport and machineryOther manufacturesAll manufactures
    Kenya19880.040.100.07
    19960.050.140.11
    Madagascar19880.010.060.04
    19960.020.120.09
    Malawi19880.020.050.04
    19960.030.110.08
    Mauritius19880.040.200.15
    19960.090.180.15
    South Africa19880.070.250.18
    19960.200.360.30
    Uganda19880.020.020.02
    19960.020.020.02
    Zambia19880.020.050.04
    19960.010.040.03
    Zimbabwe19880.020.070.06
    19960.020.130.10
    Memorandum items
    Brazil19960.570.500.53
    Chile19960.080.280.22
    Rep. of Korea19960.560.560.55
    Turkey19960.230.340.28
    Taiwan. Province of China19960.640.520.57
    Source: Yeats (1998).

    The Intra-Industry trade ratio for any industry i is calculated as li = 1 − (|Xi−Mi|)/(Xi+Mi), where Xi and Mi are the industry’s exports and imports, respectively. The value of the index lies between 0 (no intra-industry trade) and 1 (full intra-industry trade).

    Table A17Eastern and Southern Africa: Economic Conditions, 1990–92(Average annual rate in percent, unless otherwise indicated)
    GDP GrowthGDP Per Capita GrowthExport Volume GrowthInflationInvestment-to-GDP Ratio (Percent)Fiscal Balance. Excluding Grants (Percent of GDP)Current Account Balance. Excluding Grants (Percent of GDP)
    Moderate or no liberalization
    Angola1.84.54.3128.54.717.2-8.0
    Burundi3.10.111.06.814.6-10.4-19.6
    Comoros2.71.97.2-2.420.717.2-19.5
    Ethiopia-2.5-5.5-24.815.710.4-11.1-4.4
    Kenya1.8-1.12.119.420.9-8.3-5.2
    Madagascar0.7-4.02.011.95.1-7.6-11.5
    Mauritius5.34.20.98.830.0-2.3-2.8
    Rwanda0.9-1.94.611.112.3-11.8-10.4
    Seychelles5.74.913.13.122.6-5.1-6.2
    Tanzania3.20.6-0.326.826.6-5.3-16.9
    Zimbabwe1.2-1.9-5.927.618.9-7.4-7.2
    Average1.7-0.61.323.417.0-9.4-10.2
    Substantial liberalization
    Botswana5.93.13.513.121.38.51.6
    Lesotho4.71.126.115.58.9-8.4-57.4
    Malawi2.4-0.911.814.48.2-8.4-12.9
    Namibia3.3-0.12.913.924.9-3.7-11.7
    South Africa-1.2-3.93.114.516.2-5.51.1
    Swaziland4.51.03.810.922.22.6-10.1
    Mozambique-0.7-2.610.840.715.7-16.1-32.8
    Uganda3.50.718.236.217.4-11.1-15.9
    Zambia0.3-3.3-0.6124.313.4-13.8-16.1
    Average2.5-0.58.931.516.5-6.2-17.1
    Sources: IMF, African Department database, and World Economic Outlook database
    Table A18Eastern and Southern Africa: Economic Conditions(Average annual rate between 1993 and 1999, unless otherwise indicated)
    GDP GrowthGDP Per Capita GrowthExport Volume GrowthInflationInvestment-to-GDP Ratio (Percent)Fiscal Balance Excluding Grants (Percent of GDP).Current Account Balance. Excluding Grants (Percent of GDP)Average Annual Real Exchange Rate Depreciation (1990–98)
    Moderate or no liberalization
    Angola2.0-0.87.41,373.514.0-17.6-21.6-8.8
    Burundi-2.2-3.14.417.410.6-8.5-12.2-1.3
    Comoros-0.8-3.4-4.45.821.7-14.3-19.1
    Ethiopia6.33.211.73.817.2-7.8-8.16.0
    Kenya2.5-0.35.615.219.0-2.8-3.0-3.9
    Madagascar2.6-0.59.619.612.1-8.7-9.40.1
    Mauritius5.23.91.87.027.9-4.1-0.7-0.1
    Rwanda2.63.2-0.317.611.0-11.4-22.2-1.6
    Seychelles2.60.724.70.734.3-11.5-11.10.1
    Tanzania3.30.54.420.719.1-4.3-17.9-5.1
    Zimbabwe3.30.02.729.321.7-9.3-4.49.6
    Average2.50.36.2137.318.9-9.1-11.8-1.3
    Substantial liberalization
    Botswana5.12.56.99.828.42.05.0-0.9
    Lesotho3.41.18.68.949.0-3.848.20.6
    Malawi5.52.35.937.516.4-13.9-15.32.7
    Namibia2.6-0.4-0.18.220.4-4.4-7.90.3
    South Africa2.30.04.67.916.3-4.8-0.21.5
    Swaziland2.30.04.67.916.3-4.8-0.20.2
    Mozambique8.76.311.830.420.7-13.3-28.72.7
    Uganda7.14.117.59.117.7-7.4-8.51.3
    Zambia-0.9-2.9-2.155.914.0-10.4-13.1-1.3
    Average4.01.46.419.522.1-6.7-13.00.7
    Sources: IMF, African Department database, and World Economic Outlook database
    References

      Amjadi, Ayita, Ulrich Reinke, and Alexander J. Yeats, 1996, Did External Barriers Cause the Marginalization of Sub-Saharan Africa in World Trade?”, World Bank Discussion Paper No. 348 (Washington: World Bank).

      Amjadi, Ayita, and Alexander J. Yeats, 1995, Have Transport Costs Contributed to the Relative Decline of African Exports? Some Preliminary Empirical Evidence,” World Bank Policy Research Working Paper No. 1559 (Washington: World Bank).

      Collier, Paul, and Jan Willem Gunning, 1999, Explaining African Economic Performance,” Journal of Economic Literature, Vol. 37 (March), pp. 64–111.

      Dollar, David, 1992, Outward-Oriented Developing Economies Really Do Grow More Rapidly: Evidence from 95 LDCs, 1976-1985,” Economic Development and Cultural Change, Vol. 40 (April), pp. 523–4.

      Easterly, William, and Ross Levine, 1997, Africa’s Growth Tragedy: Policies and Ethnic Divisions,” Quarterly Journal of Economics, Vol. 112 (November), pp. 1203–50.

      Ebrill, Liam P., Janet Stotsky, and Renit Gropp, 1999, Revenue Implications of Trade Liberalization, IMF Occasional Paper No. 180 (Washington: International Monetary Fund).

      Edwards, Sebastian, 1998, Openness, Productivity and Growth: What Do We Really Know?”, Economic Journal, Vol. 108 (March), pp. 383–98.

      Gelbard, Enrique, and Sergio Pereira Leite, 1999, Measuring Financial Development in Sub-Saharan Africa,” IMF Working Paper 99/105 (Washington: International Monetary Fund).

      Harrold, Peter, 1995, The Impact of the Uruguay Round on Africa,” World Bank Discussion Paper No. 311 (Washington: World Bank).

      IDS (Institute of Development Studies), and BIDPA (Botswana Institute for Development Policy Analysis), 1998, Study to Assess the Economic Impact of the Proposed European Union-South Africa Free Trade Agreement on Botswana, Lesotho, Namibia, and Swaziland,” Final Report, December.

      IMANI, 1997, Impact of the EU-SA Free Trade Agreement on BLNS Countries,” Consultants’ Report.

      IMF, 1991, Exchange Arrangements and Exchange Restrictions: Annual Report 1991 (Washington: International Monetary Fund).

      IMF, 2000, Exchange Arrangements and Exchange Restrictions: Annual Report 2000 (forthcoming,Washington: International Monetary Fund).

      ITU, 1999, International Telecommunication Union Report (Geneva: International Telecommunication Union).

      Jonsson, Gunnar, and Arvind Subramanian, 2000, Dynamic Gains from Trade: Evidence from South Africa,” IMF Working Paper (forthcoming; Washington: International Monetary Fund).

      Madani, Dorsati, 1999, A Review of the Role and Impact of Export Processing Zones,” World Bank Policy Research Working Paper No. 2238 (Washington: World Bank).

      Mattoo, Aaditya, 1999, Financial Services and the World Trade Organization: Liberalization Commitments of the Developing and Transition Economies,” World Bank Policy Research Working Paper No. 2184 (Washington: World Bank).

      Mattoo, Aaditya, Randeep Rathindran, and Arvind Subramanian, 2000, Measuring Liberalization in Services and Its Impact on Growth,” mimeo (Washington: World Bank).

      Rodrik, Dani, 1998, Why Is Trade Reform So Difficult in Africa?”, Journal of African Economies, Vol. 7, Supplement 1 (June), pp. 43–69.

      Rodrik, Dani, 1999, The New Global Economy and Developing Countries: Making Openness Work (Baltimore, Maryland: Johns Hopkins University Press for the Overseas Development Council).

      Sachs, Jeffrey D., and Andrew Warner, 1995, Economic Reform and the Process of Global Integration,” Brookings Papers on Economic Activity: 1, Brookings Institution, pp. 1–118.

      Sachs, Jeffrey D., and Andrew Warner, 1997, Fundamental Sources of Long-Run Growth,” American Economic Review, Papers and Proceedings, Vol. 87 (May), pp. 184–88.

      Sharer, Robert, and others, 1998, Trade Liberalization in IMF-Supported Programs, World Economic and Financial Surveys (Washington: International Monetary Fund).

      Sorsa, Piritta, 1996, Sub-Saharan African Own Commitments in the Uruguay Round: Myth or Reality?”, World Economy, Vol. 19 (May), pp. 287–305.

      Subramanian, Arvind, and Natalia Tamirisa, Africa’s Trade Revisited,” forthcoming (Washington: International Monetary Fund).

      Wang, Zhen Kun, and L. Alan Winters, 1998, Africa’s Role in Multilateral Trade Negotiations: Past and Future,” Journal of African Economies, Vol. 7, Supplement 1 (June), pp. 1–33.

      World Bank, World Development Indicators, 1999 (Washington: World Bank).

      Yeats, Alexander J., 1994, What Are OECD Trade Preferences Worth to Sub-Saharan Africa?”, World Bank Policy Research Working Paper No. 1254 (Washington: World Bank).

      Yeats, Alexander J., 1998, What Can Be Expected from African Regional Trade Arrangements? Some Empirical Evidence,” World Bank Policy Research Working Paper No. 2004 (Washington: World Bank).

      Yeats, Alexander J., andFrancisNg, 1999, Good Governance and Trade Policy: Are They the Keys to Africa’s Global Integration and Growth?”, World Bank Policy Research Working Paper No. 2038 (Washington: World Bank).

    Recent Occasional Papers of the International Monetary Fund

    196. Trade and Trade Policies in Eastern and Southern Africa, by a staff team led by Arvind Subramanian, with Enrique Gelbard, Richard Harmsen, Katrin Elborgh-Woylek, and Piroska Nagy. 2000.

    195. The Eastern Caribbean Currency Union—Institutions. Performance, and Policy Issues, by Frits van Beek, Joseé Roberto Rosales, Mayra Zermeño, Ruby Randall, and Jorge Shepherd. 2000.

    194. Fiscal and Macroeconomic Impact of Privatization, by Jeffrey Davis, Rolando Ossowski, Thomas Richardson, and Steven Baniett. 2000.

    193. Exchange Rate Regimes in an Increasingly Integrated World Economy, by Michael Mussa, Paid Masson, Alexander Swoboda, Esteban Jadresic, Paolo Mauro, and Andy Berg. 2000.

    192. Macroprudential Indicators of Financial System Soundness, by a staff team led by Owen Evans, Alfredo M. Leone, Mahinder Gill, and Paul Hilbers. 2000.

    191. Social Issues in IMF Supported Programs, by Sanjeev Gupta, Louis Dicks-Mireaux, Ritha Khemani, Calvin McDonald, and Marijn Verhoeven. 2000.

    190. Capital Controls: Country Experiences with Their Use and Liberalization, by Akira Ariyoshi, Karl Habermeier, Bernard Laurens, lnci Ötker-Robe, Jorge Iván Canales Kriljenko, and Andrei Kirilenko. 2000.

    189. Current Account and External Sustainability in the Baltics, Russia, and Other Countries of the Former Soviet Union, by Donal McGettigan. 2000.

    188. Financial Sector Crisis and Restructuring: Lessons from Asia, by Carl-Johan Lindgren, Tomás J.T Balifio, Charles Enoch, Anne-Marie Gulde, Marc Quintyn, and Leslie Teo. 1999.

    187. Philippines: Toward Sustainable and Rapid Growth, Recent Developments and the Agenda Ahead, by Markus Rodlauer, Prakash Loungani, Vivek Arora, Charalambos Christofides, Enrique G. De la Piedra, Piyabha Kongsamut, Kristina Kostial, Victoria Summers, and Athanasios Vamvakidis. 2000.

    186. Anticipating Balance of Payments Crises: The Role of Early Warning Systems, by Andrew Berg, Eduardo Borensztein, Gian Maria Milesi-Ferretti, and Catherine Pattillo. 1999.

    185. Oman Beyond the Oil Horizon: Policies Toward Sustainable Growth, edited by Ahsan Mansur and Volker Treichel. 1999.

    184. Growth Experience in Transition Countries, 1990–98, by Oleh Havrylyshyn, Thomas Wolf, Julian Berengaut, Marta Castello-Branco, Ron van Rooden, and Valerie Mercer-Blackman. 1999.

    183. Economic Reforms in Kazakhstan, Kyrgyz Republic, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, and Uzbekistan, by Emine Gürgen, Harry Snoek, Jon Craig, Jimmy McHugh, lvailo Izvorski, and Ron van Rooden. 1999.

    182. Tax Reform in the Baltics, Russia, and Other Countries of the Former Soviet Union, by a Staff Team Led by Liam Ebrill and Oleh Havrylyshyn. 1999.

    181. The Netherlands: Transforming a Market Economy, by C. Maxwell Watson, Bas B. Bakker, Jan Kees Martijn, and Ioannis Halikias. 1999.

    180. Revenue Implications of Trade Liberalization, by Liam Ebrill, Janet Stotsky, and Reint Gropp. 1999.

    179. Dinsinflation in Transition: 1993–97, by Carlo Cottarelli and Peter Doyle. 1999.

    178. IMF-Supported Programs in Indonesia, Korea, and Thailand: A Preliminary Assessment, by Timothy Lane, Atish Ghosh, Javier Hamann, Steven Phillips, Marianne Schulze-Ghattas, and Tsidi Tsikata. 1999.

    177. Perspectives on Regional Unemployment in Europe, by Paolo Mauro, Eswar Prasad, and Antonio Spilimbergo. 1999.

    176. Back to the Future: Postwar Reconstruction and Stabilization in Lebanon, edited by Sena Eken and Thomas Helbling. 1999.

    175. Macroeconomic Developments in the Baltics, Russia, and Other Countries of the Former Soviet Union, 1992–97, by Luis M. Valdivieso. 1998.

    174. Impact of EMU on Selected Non-European Union Countries, by R. Feldman, K. Nashashibi, R. Nord, P. Allum, D. Desruelle, K. Enders, R. Kahn, and H. Temprano Arroyo. 1998.

    173. The Baltic Countries: From Economic Stabilization to EU Accession, by Julian Berengaut, Augusto Lopez-Claros, Francoise Le Gall, Dennis Jones, Richard Stern, Ann-Margret Westin, Effie Psalida, Ptetro Garibaldi. 1998.

    172. Capital Account Liberalization: Theoretical and Practical Aspects, by a staff team led by Barry Eichengreen and Michael Mussa, with Giovanni Dell’Ariccia, Enrica Detragiache, Gian Maria Milesi Ferretti, and Andrew Tweedie. 1998.

    171. Monetary Policy in Dollarized Economies, by Tomás Baliño, Adam Bennett, and Eduardo Borensztein. 1998.

    170. The West African Economic and Monetary Union; Recent Developments and Policy Issues, by a staff team led by Ernesto Hernández-Catá and comprising Christian A. Francois, Paul Masson, Pascal Bouvier, Patrick Peroz, Dominique Desruelle, and Athanasios Vamvakidis. 1998.

    169. Financial Sector Development in Sub-Saharan African Countries, by Hassanali Mehran, Piero Ugolini, Jean Phillipe Briffaux, George Iden, Tonny Lybek, Stephen Swaray, and Peter Hayward. 1998.

    168. Exit Strategies: Policy Options for Countries Seeking Greater Exchange Rate Flexibility, by a staff team led by Barry Eichengreen and Paul Masson with Hugh Bredenkamp, Barry Johnston, Javier Hamann, Esteban Jadresic, and Inci Ötker. 1998.

    167. Exchange Rate Assessment: Extensions of the Macroeconomic Balance Approach, edited by Peter Isard and Hamid Faruqee. 1998

    166. Hedge Funds and Financial Market Dynamics, by a staff team led by Barry Eichengreen and Donald Mathieson with Bankim chadha, Anne Jansen, Laura Kodres, and Sunil Sharma. 1998.

    165. Algeria: Stabilization and Transition to the Market, by Karim Nashashibi, Patricia Alonso-Gamo, Stefania Bazzoni, Alain Féler, Nicole Laframboise, and Sebastian Paris Horvitz. 1998.

    164. MULTIMOD Mark III: The Core Dynamic and Steady-State Model, by Douglas Laxton, Peter Isard, Hamid Faruqee, Eswar Prasad, and Bart Turtelboom. 1998.

    163. Egypt: Beyond Stabilization, Toward a Dynamic Market Economy, by a staff team led by Howard Handv. 1998.

    162. Fiscal Policy Rules, by George Kopits and Steven Symansky. 1998.

    161. The Nordic Banking Crises: Pitfalls in Financial Liberalization? by Burkhard Dress and Ceyla Pazarbaşioğlu. 1998.

    160. Fiscal Reform in Low-Income Countries: Experience Under IMF-Supported Programs, by a staff team led by George T. Abed and comprising liam Ebrill, Sanjeev Gupta, Benedict Clements, Ronald McMorran, Anthony Pellechio, Jerald Schiff, and Marijn Verhoeven. 1998.

    159. Hungary: Economic Policies for Sustainable Growth, Carlo Cottarelli, Thomas Krueger, Reza Moghadam, Perry Perone, Edgardo Ruggiero, and Rachel van Elkan. 1998.

    158. Transparency in Government Operations, by George Kopits and Jon Craig. 1998.

    157. Central Bank Reforms in the Baltics, Russia, and the Other Countries of the Former Soviet Union, by a staff team led by Malcolm Knight and comprising Susana Almuiñ, John Dalton, lnci Otker, Ceyla Pazarbaşioğlu, Arne B. Petersen, Peter Quirk, Nicholas M. Roberts, Gabriel Sensenbrenner, and Jan Willem van der Vossen. 1997.

    156. The ESAF at Ten Years: Economic Adjustment and Reform in Low-Income Countries, by the staff of the International Monetary Fund. 1997.

    155. Fiscal Policy Issues During the Transition in Russia, by Auguslo Lopez-Claros and Sergei V. Alexashenko.1998.

    154. Credibility Without Rules? Monetary Frameworks in the Post-Bretton Woods Era, by Carlo Cottarelli and Curzio Giannini. 1997.

    153. Pension Regimes and Saving, by G.A. Mackenzie, Philip Gerson, and Alfredo Cuevas. 1997.

    152. Hong Kong, china: Growth, Structural change, and Economic Stability During the Transition, by John Dodsworth and Dubravko Mihaljek. 1997.

    Note: For information on the title and availability of Occasional Papers not listed, please consult The IMF Publications Catalog or contact IMF Publication Services.

      You are not logged in and do not have access to this content. Please login or, to subscribe to IMF eLibrary, please click here

      Other Resources Citing This Publication