Search results

Special and differential treatment (SDT) in the World Trade Organisation (WTO) has failed to integrate developing countries into the international trading system, as contemplated by the WTO Agreement, itself. This paper aims to interrogate the current application of SDT by WTO members as the possible undermining factor for SDT not delivering on its objective.

The research uses a qualitative legal methodology. This study conducts desk analysis of primary legal materials and existing literature to assess current reflections of SDT and draw lessons for reforms in the WTO.

From interrogating current SDT practice in the WTO and a comparative analysis with a similar differential treatment under the Montreal Protocol, this paper finds that indeed, the problem lies in the current approach to SDT application in the WTO. This study finds that the existing absence of eligibility criteria for determining access to SDT by countries is the core reason for the abuse and sub-optimal outcome from its application.

While making a case for a rules-based approach to differentiation in the WTO, this paper proposes a unique methodology for differentiating between developing countries for SDT, including the use of a composite indicator to ensure that indicators that are used sufficiently reflect their heterogeneous needs. Drawing inspiration from Gonzalez et al. (2011a), this study introduces an adaptation for selecting a threshold for graduation. Specifically, the proposal on the value of the standard deviation of countries from the weighted mean of the composite indicator as the threshold for graduating countries from SDT is novel.

The choice of Southern Europe is partly based on the observation that the sample includes a number of countries whose economies faced more severe difficulties than elsewhere in Europe. Economically they were less able to absorb the economic shock posed by COVID-19. It is also partly based on the characteristics of the pandemic. A number of countries in the sample were amongst the earliest in Europe to be hit by the pandemic and a several were harder hit in terms of both morbidity and mortality.

This study uses evidence from World Bank enterprise surveys of a sample of firms from six countries in Southern Europe. It examines the early evidence of the effects of COVID-19 on labour markets. The economic consequences potentially cover a wide range of issues. The focus of this study is on firm level evidence of the effect on labour. The evidence and the analysis are provided at a time when the pandemic is still in progress. The authors use both traditional regression analysis and IPWRA to assess the joint effect of loans versus government support on, firstly, the change in sales revenues and, secondly, the number of weeks that the firm would expect to survive with no sales revenues.

The study suggests that, despite efforts to support firms and hoard labour, there is a prospect of a significant number of firm closures with a consequent loss of employment. Temporary firm closures also represent a substantial loss of labour weeks. These are partly related to a significant number of workers subject to furloughs. The empirical findings suggest that COVID-19 cases and deaths have directly affected firm sales but government containment measures, particularly closures, have more strongly affected firms. Losses of sales were unsurprisingly related to losses of employment. Remote working has contributed to sustaining employment but online business has not affected most sectors.

The future progress of COVID-19 and government containment measures is uncertain, and the full economic consequences will probably continue to emerge after the end of the pandemic. The full extent of the impact on labour will probably not be the first of these. There are obvious advantages in seeking to learn lessons from the early stages of the pandemic but there are also obvious constraints. The full economic consequences will take longer to emerge than the pandemic itself and the full consequences for employment will take longer to be evident than many other economic effects.

Both temporary closures and furloughs impose costs that will be borne by firms, workers and government. The effects of COVID-19 on firms differ across sectors. Adverse effects tend to be higher in hospitality, non-essential retail and travel. That many firms lack the capacity to survive further temporary closures of a similar duration to those in the earlier stages emphasises that the support provided in the near future is of critical importance to control employment losses through permanent firm closures. A long-term perspective suggests neither permanent closure nor laying off workers may be the best response to a temporary crisis in demand. A stakeholder model of the firm would often suggest that it is not an optimal for the point of view of workers or the wider economy either. Both imply a preference for labour hoarding.

The most affected are sectors with a high proportion of female workers and, in consequence, most of the countries in the sample exhibit an early decline of the already lower than average share of women in employment.

The data used have been recently released and this is the first analysis using the data to look at the consequence on firms employment decisions during the Pandemic. The case of Southern Europe is much understudied, though one of the most dramatic as to the consequences of the pandemic. From a methodological point of view, the authors use not only traditional regression analysis, but also the matching approach to identify the effect of different policy options on labour demand by firms.