Co-auteur
  • MESSERLIN Patrick (3)
  • ORLIAC Thomas (1)
  • DELPEUCH Claire (1)
  • EMERSON Michael (1)
  • Voir plus
Type de Document
  • Working paper (2)
  • Communication non publiée (1)
Publié en 2011 Collection CEPS Working Paper
EMERSON Michael
JANDIERI Vakhtang
9
vues

0
téléchargements
This item has no abtract.

This following study is a “meta-evaluation” of the way aid agencies evaluate and assess their trade-related operations – and was undertaken as part of the OECD’s broader efforts to improve the effectiveness of aid-for-trade. It focuses on 162 evaluations of operations in two countries - Ghana and Vietnam - and two sectors - transport and storage - between 1999 and 2010. In particular, it looks at whether trade was a true objective of the operations under scrutiny, and whether trade and development outcomes were evaluated. More broadly, it asks whether the evaluations selected offer the information that policy makers in charge of international aid want – and need - to get from field evaluators.

Publié en 2010 Nom de la conférence Workshop on “Accounting for water scarcity and pollution in the rules of international trade”
11
vues

0
téléchargements
It is widely recognized that forecasting future climate shocks at a regional level̶which regions will be flooded, which ones will be under water stress on a year by year basis̶is largely out of reach. In such circumstances, trade gets back a role that has faded away during the last sixty years of relatively stable climatic, economic and political conditions. It is to be the ultimate insurer. Regions under sudden water stress will need to import food products in exceptional quantities, and trade happens to be a cheap (efficient) insurance scheme to face a sudden instability in water resources in some parts of the world. There are thus good reasons to look at whether the world trade regime could provide a strong and sound framework to the international water regime. Not many papers have looked at this issue. They generally see the WTO as a source of problems rather than of solutions. Hence, they argue for specific international agreements on water. But, the climate community experience of the COP15 (the 2009 Copenhagen Summit on Climate Change) is a strong warning signal showing how difficult it is to build a “specific” international regime. In contrast, this paper argues that the basic principles on which the world trade regime is built would be equally useful for the international water regime, and that the WTO rules are flexible enough to address the specific problems raised by water management in a international context. It also argues that, if current international trade mirrors domestic distortions, limiting such trade will cost a lot in terms of water use. Killing the messenger (trade) does not solve the problems (domestic markets).