Regional Approach to the Integration of Logistics Services in the EAC

Article I wrote for EABC in 2013 republished here.

The five East African Community (EAC) countries vary in their degree of integration into world markets, global supply chains and application of global best practices in trade logistics. The 2012 publication Trade in the Global Economy, compares the Logistics PerformanceIndex (LPI) of 155 countries and is measurement of the logistics efficiency of an economy. The performance of the EAC Partner States is poor overall, and not surprisingly it varies widely between the landlocked and transit countries. Tanzania for instance scores the highest LPI in the EAC region with a rank of 88 out of 155 countries, followed by Kenya at 122, Rwanda at 139 and Burundi at 155. Landlocked economies are geographically disadvantaged and restricted with regard to transit and logistical transport conditions outside their borders and hence faced with longer transit times and higher transit and transport costs. Recent studies show that importing into a landlocked country typically takes a week longer than its coastal neighbors while freight costs alone can be up to 40 per cent of export values for landlocked developing countries. The higher costs are caused by inadequate transit transport inter-modal connections, poor regulation and service and to address these concerns, the EAC region could benefit from a regional approach to streamline the logistics services sector and consolidate the broad range of logistics institutions, private sector, and relevant stakeholders into a single cross-border transport, logistics system and platform.

African economies generally have the highest trade logistics costs in the world and the EAC is not an exception to this trend. In a recent study, a set of estimates for Kenya, Tanzania and Uganda places the average cost of trade logistics services at the equivalent of a tax of between 25 and 40 percent on value added, which is rather alarming. For this reason, overall performance of the logistics sector in the EAC can impact negatively on the regions trade competitiveness, trade expansion, export diversification, ability to attract foreign direct investments, and invigorate economic growth. While infrastructure is an important and costly constraint, institutions, the regulatory environment and regional cooperation are equally vital for efficient logistics services and the consolidation of the EAC customs union and common market. 

Logistics services encompass streamlined door-to-door multimodal transport services from a logistics chain perspective and they determine the cost of getting goods from point of supplier to point of buyer. These services include services auxiliary to all modes of transport such as maritime, road, air, rail and pipeline services, freight and include other relevant services such as courier, cargo and freight services, customs broker services, testing services, warehousing, distribution, information and communication management and some aspects of financial services. Logistics services have become an increasingly large obstacle to Africa’s trade performance because of a profound change in the nature of international trade that has taken place in the last quarter century: the explosion of “trade in tasks.” In some manufacturing activities, a production process can be decomposed into a series of steps or tasks and since transport and coordination costs have fallen in many parts of the world, it has become efficient to produce different steps in the process in different countries. Even though African enterprises could compete with Chinese and Indian firms in factory floor costs in some product lines such as garments and other simple manufactured goods, overall African producers might be unable to compete given that the cost and efficiency of logistics services in the continent is a major supply side constraint 

Reforms are underway in the EAC region, to consolidate the customs union through various separate interventions, including harmonization of policies and regulations, modernization of transport and border management institutions, the NTB monitoring mechanism, standards and testing and investment in infrastructure. The 2012 World Bank Doing Business Report indicates that all 5 EAC economies implemented 11 combined regulatory reforms in trade facilitation, in areas such as the electronic submission of documents, risk management systems for inspections and joint border cooperation. While this is commendable, rather than individually address interlinked trade logistics issues, the EAC Partner States could jointly consider a comprehensive program on trade logistics services to address the weakest links in the macro-supply chain and thereby stimulate cooperation between public and private players. A legal instrument similar to the Logistics Protocol found in the ASEAN region, could provide a cross-sectoral platform for regulatory cooperation and dialogue among government, business, and civil society. An EAC logistics sectoral protocol would also consolidate the cross-cutting objectives of the Common Market as enshrined in Part B of the Protocol on the Establishment of the Common Market Protocol. A useful place to start would be a road-map for the integration of the logistics services sector through a framework for private public consultative dialogue, progressive liberalization and trade facilitation, in order to support the enhancement of EAC competitiveness and creation of an integrated trade logistics environment. 

Case for a Multilateral Investment Agreement?

Despite the importance of FDI, its governance is fragmented and is found in multilateral agreements, RTAs and in BITs. There is however no single, comprehensive multilateral treaty or institution to oversee investment activity. Previous attempts to bring FDI under multilateral purview have failed. The result is a complex and confusing overlay of disciplines at different levels. To address this issue, a recent study on Investment under the auspices of the World Economic Forum makes a case for multilateral rules on investment and six reasons are stressed. 

First, the rise of Global Value Chains (GVCs) sharpens the need for global and holistic regulations; GVCs need global rules. Second, there is a proven appetite for international investment regulation; nations are “voting with their pens” for more discipline – signing hundreds of BITs and RTAs. But the result lacks coherence in terms of rules and application. Third, the North-South divide is disappearing on the investment-governance issue. Emerging markets’ role in FDI has grown tremendously in recent years –both as home and host nations. Fourth, the stigma that has been historically attached to FDI has sharply abated in recent years. Many countries are pursuing economic liberalization for the recognized benefits it brings. Fifth, and by contrast, the fragile and slow recovery of the world economy has led some countries to adopt protectionist measures against trade and investment. This regression heightens the need for multilateral rules. Sixth, increased FDI by State Owned Enterprises (SOEs) and Sovereign Wealth Funds (SWFs) presents new challenges to ensuring that competition conditions in the global marketplace remain equitable and do not give rise to national security concerns.

The report further argues that if an International Investment Agreement (IIA) is to emerge in the future, the WTO is the logical home for it. The WTO has the potential to yield more equitable outcomes and ensure non-discrimination, and it provides access to a dispute settlement mechanism that has worked well. This IIA may entail provisions in different areas, including the protection of investors, establishing investor-state dispute settlement and subjecting the agreement to the WTO state-state system, and providing post establishment national treatment. Pre-establishment or access provisions on investment are also important, as are notions of corporate social responsibility. In any case, there is a sense that the balance of rights and obligations needs to be revisited.

However another Study by Econstor states that the case for a WTO agreement on investment is weak. Four main reasons are given. 

• The absence of such an agreement has not prevented the recent boom of FDI in developing countries through RTAs, BITs and unilaterally.
• Likewise, substantial unilateral liberalization of FDI regulations was undertaken in the past even though multilateral obligations to do so did not exist. 
• The coverage of protections provided for investors in various BITs (and RTAs) goes beyond what can be expected from the Doha Round. Nevertheless, BITs do not appear to have had a significant impact on FDI flows to signatory countries. 
• It is also questionable whether RTAs such as NAFTA as well as MERCOSUR had a strong and lasting effect on FDI flows to developing member countries. 

Linking Trade Policy to Supply Chain Constraints

Since the birth of the GATT in 1947, multilateral negotiations have focused primarily on reducing barriers to trade for specific products and sectors: tariffs, subsidies, and different types of nontariff barriers. A recent report by the World Economic Forum, in collaboration with Bain & Company and the World Bank (WEF 2013), Enabling Trade: Valuing Growth Opportunities (World Economic Forum, Bain & Co. and World Bank 2013) concludes that improving border management and transport and communications infrastructure services could increase global GDP by up to six times more than removing all import tariffs.

Reducing supply-chain barriers to attain 50% of the global best practice level – as observed in Singapore – could increase global GDP by some 4.7% and global trade by 14.5%. By contrast, the global GDP and trade gains available from complete worldwide tariff elimination amount to some 0.7% and 10.1%, respectively. The gains from reducing supply-chain barriers would also be more evenly distributed across countries than those associated with tariff elimination. A less ambitious set of reforms that moves countries halfway to regional best practice (e.g. Chile in Latin America) could increase global GDP by 2.6% and world trade by 9.4%.

A pilot project implemented by eBay shows that helping small and medium-sized enterprises navigate the regulatory regimes of importing countries could expand their volume of international sales by 60 to 80%. Given that small and medium-sized enterprises account for a large share of total economic activity, this type of targeted trade facilitation could have significant positive spillover effects on employment.

Such large increases in GDP would be associated with positive effects on unemployment, potentially adding millions of jobs to the global workforce.

What could be done to realise the large potential welfare gains from an approach to policy focussed on supply chain barriers? The World Economic Forum report makes five specific recommendations:

1. Create a national mechanism to set policy priorities for improving supply-chain efficiency based on objective performance data and feedback loops between government and firms;

Governments must work with businesses and analysts to determine the policies and procedures that will help reach key tipping points. A central component of this effort should be the creation of mechanisms to collect data on factors affecting supply-chain operations. These data can then be used to identify ‘clusters’ of policies that jointly determine key supply chain barriers, identify priorities for action, and assess progress.

2. Create a focal point within government with a mandate to coordinate and oversee all regulation that directly affects supply chain efficiency;

Given the importance of tipping points, governments need to design policy with an economy-wide vision and recognition that industry-specific supply chains are affected by different clusters of policies. Improving supply-chain performance requires coherence and coordination across many government agencies and collaboration with industry.

3. Ensure that small and medium-sized enterprises’ interests are represented in the policy prioritisation process and that solutions are designed to address specific constraints that impact disproportionately on these businesses;

Because small and medium-sized enterprises’ ability to overcome supply-chain barriers is proportionally more difficult, governments should pay special attention to the needs of smaller businesses. For example, one relatively straightforward policy identified in the report is to raise levels for customs-duty collection that are too trivial to merit serious consideration in order to facilitate small-business engagement in international markets; another is to ensure that initiatives to reduce regulatory compliance costs such as ‘trusted trader’ programmes are complemented by programs that are accessible to small and medium-sized enterprises.

4. Pursue a ‘whole of the supply chain’ approach in international trade negotiations;

Greater coherence of domestic policies is important, but a key insight derived from the case studies is that coordination across countries matters as well. Joint action will increase the overall gains from lower supply-chain barriers. International trade negotiations usually take a silo approach, addressing policy areas in isolation. Lowering supply-chain barriers requires a more comprehensive and integrated approach that spans key sectors that impact on trade logistics, including services such as transport and distribution, as well as policy areas that jointly determine supply-chain performance – in particular those related to border protection and management, product health and safety, foreign investment, and the movement of business people and service providers.

Such a ‘whole of the supply chain’ approach can be pursued both at the multilateral (i.e. WTO) level and in regional trade agreements. Doing so would greatly enhance the relevance of international trade cooperation for businesses and help generate the engagement that is needed for trade agreements to obtain the political support needed to be adopted by national legislatures and to be implemented by governments. As has been argued by many observers, one lesson of the failure to conclude the Doha Round is that what is on the table is not seen to make enough of a difference from an operational business perspective. A supply-chain approach has great potential to address this failure and in the process provide a low-cost economic stimulus for the world economy in the medium term.

5. Launch a global effort to pursue conversion of manual and paper-based documentation to electronic systems, using globally agreed data formats.

Many of the inefficiencies in the operation of supply chains reflect a lack of reliability due to delays and uncertainty stemming from manual paper-based documentation, redundancy in data requirements and the absence of pre-arrival clearance and risk management-based implementation of policy. A global effort to adopt common documentary and electronic data/information standards would reduce administrative costs, errors, and time associated with moving goods across borders.

To address some these challenges, it is hoped that the WTO negotiations on trade facilitation will be succesfully concluded in Bali at the end of this year, 2013.

EAC Industrialization Policy 2012-2032

The EAC Industrialization Policy and Strategy provides general contours of policy intentions and strategic areas of focus to guide EAC towards achieving the set goals and in particular, attaining industrialized economic status by 2032. The EAC Industrialization Policy is intended to address the challenges facing the region particularly, the need to build a more diversified regional economic structure. 

The formulation of the policy was accomplished through a comprehensive and inclusive process, based on analysis and wide consultations with stakeholders in the Partner States. The policy is aligned to the relevant Articles of the Treaty in particular Article 79 and 80 which provide for regional co-operation in matters of industrial development as well as Article 44 of Common Market Protocol in which the Partner States undertake to adopt common principles to cooperate in Industrial Development in the region. 

The Partner States have set themselves ambitious targets to be met within the timeframe, of the policy as follows: 

a) Diversifying the manufacturing base and raising local value added content (LVAC) of resource based exports to 40% from the currently estimated value of 8.62 % by 2032; 

b) Strengthening national and regional institutional frameworks and capabilities for industrial policy design and implementation; and delivery of support services to ensure sustainable industrialization in the region; 

c) Strengthening R&D, Technology and Innovation capabilities to facilitate structural transformation of the manufacturing sector and upgrading of production systems; 

d) Increasing the contribution of (i) intra regional manufacturing exports relative to total manufactured imports in to the region from the current 5% to about 25% by 2032 

e) increasing the share of manufactured exports as a percentage of total merchandise exports to 60% from an average of 20%; and

f) Transforming Micro Small and Medium Enterprises into viable and sustainable business entities capable of contributing up to 50% of manufacturing GDP from 20% base rate.

To address the industrialisation challenges, the following broad policy measures will be undertaken:

1. Promoting the Development of Strategic Regional Industries/Value Chains; and enhance Value Addition

2. Strengthening national and regional institutional capabilities for industrial policy design and management

3. Strengthening the capacity of industry support institutions (ISIs) to develop and sustain a competitive regional industrial sector

4. Strengthening the Business and Regulatory Environment

5. Enhancing access to financial and technical resources for Industrialization

6. Facilitating the development of, and access to appropriate industrial skills and know-how

7. Facilitating the Development of Micro, small and medium enterprises (MISMEs)

8. Strengthening Industrial Information Management and Dissemination Systems

9. Promoting equitable industrial development in the EAC region

10. Developing supporting infrastructure for industrialisation along selected economic corridors

11. Promoting regional collaboration and development of capability in industrial R&D, technology and innovation

12. Promoting sustainable Industrialisation and environment management

13. Expansion of trade and market access for manufactured products

14. Promoting Gender in industrial development.

To exploit the resource endowment in the region and enhance the region’s industrialisation levels, the EAC Industrialisation Policy has earmarked six strategic resource-based industries, in which the region has a comparative advantage and which will be developed to facilitate productive integration (PI) through industrial deepening, diversifying, specialisation and upgrading. The strategic regional industries to be promoted include:

1. Agro processing

2. Iron steel processing and other mineral processing

3. Chemicals (fertilizers and agro chemicals)

4. Pharmaceuticals

5. Energy

6. Oil and gas processing

See the Policy and related documents here.

New Database On Global Value Supply Chains

The European Union has launched the new "World Input-Output Database" which allows trade analysts to assess the global value chains created by world trade. These added-value chains have become an essential feature of economic reality as trade is becoming increasingly globalised as today's traded products are not produced in a single location but rather are the end result of a series of steps carried out in many countries around the world. Instead of counting the gross value of goods and services exchanged, the new database reveals the value added embodied in these goods and services as they are traded internationally. The findings are significant as they change the perception of the competitiveness of certain sectors in some countries. 

In addition, policy makers and societies at large are facing increasingly pressing trade-offs between socio-economic and environmental developments. Increases in production induce growth in the use of non-renewable resources such as fossil fuels, materials, land and water. Furthermore, they generate higher levels of waste and emissions of environmental pollutants. Simultaneously, increasing global integration through international trade and technological developments creates a tension. In this regard, the database considers satellite accounts with environmental and socio-economic indicators, from which industry-level data can provide the necessary input to several types of models used to evaluate policies aimed at striking a suitable balance between growth, environmental degradation and inequality across the world.

Karel De Gucht, the EU commissioner for trade has said that the change in statistical accounting for trade applied in the database has been developed to determine the consequences of the fragmentation of supply chains. For example a third of world trade happens within firms while two thirds of European imports are not of final products but of intermediate goods and raw materials, to which EU firms add one or more layers of value before they are finally sold, often for export.  The EU trade commissioner gave the example of a Nokia smartphone, "it is listed as being made in China, but in reality 54% of its value comes from tasks that are carried out in Europe. Key components are produced in other parts of Asia and only the assembly itself actually happens in China.  Today, we measure trade by counting the total price of the good that is being exported or imported, but because we do this both for components and for final products we get a distorted picture of what is really happening.  Hence according to the database, when we look at trade in value as opposed to traditional statistics, EU trade deficit with China is reduced by 36%. In 2011, the trade deficit between the EU and China stood at EUR155.9 billion however using this new method China-EU deficit starts to look like less of a problem."

On services, interestingly when looking at trade in supply chain terms,  the classic distinction in trade policy between goods and services is increasingly artificial. This is because services represents almost 60% of the value European firms add to the products exported from Europe. 

The database covers 27 EU countries and 13 other major countries in the world for the period from 1995 to 2009. It is notable that not a single African country is included in the database which possibly says something about Africa's non-participation or rather minuscule contribution to global supply chains. In addition, all BRICS economies are included in the database with the notable exception of South Africa.  One wonders why the EU wants African countries to eliminate export taxes (under the EPAs) when in essence the contribution of African exports to global trade and supply chains is too insignificant to be in included in the database.

African countries generally export largely raw materials (e.g fuels, metals) and some agricultural products to the EU and generally lack capacity to add value domestically especially for manufactured products. Other supply capacity barriers to Africa's participation in global value chains include limited foreign ownership and lack of global networks which are a significant factor in characterizing the intensity of global exports but not necessarily for regional exports. The lack of technological advancement is also a significant barrier especially in global exports. Public infrastructure constraints, such as inferior power services and customs delays, seem to have more immediate impacts on regional exports as does customs efficiency and poor trade facilitation which is also hampers the competitive participation of African producers in global supply chain industries. 

In a related article, we saw that China overcame similar challenges by exploiting joint ventures.  China allowed foreign firms access to the domestic market in exchange for technology transfer through joint production or joint ventures. In fact, 100% foreign owned firms were a rarity among the leading players in the industry in China, unlike Export Processing Zones in Africa. China’s openness to foreign investment and its willingness to create Special Economic Zones (SEZs) where foreign producers could operate with good infrastructure and with minimum hassles must therefore receive considerable credit. However if China  welcomed foreign companies, she always did so with the objective of fostering domestic capabilities.