Australia and New Zealand · Public discussion

More food for thought

Started by cfsmtb · · Last activity · 6 posts · 666 views

Thread navigation

Jump through the discussion

Go to the original post, the replies on this page, or the latest preserved contribution.

Thread details

What we know about this thread

Original section
Australia and New Zealand
Published
30 April 2006
Last activity
1 May 2006
Original author
cfsmtb
Posts
6
Discussion status
Public discussion
Total views
666
Views / 30 days
0

The navigation and discussion metadata provide context. Posts remain in their original chronological order.

Showing posts 1–6 of 6
Posts remain in their original chronological order.

Text size
  1. Info from The Bulletin of the Institute for Transportation & Development Policy (ITDP)

    *****************
    WTO Negotiations Open Possibility of Defining Bicycles as Environmental Goods
    http://itdp.org/STe/ste21/wto.html

    Current efforts to designate bikes as “environmentally preferable products” free of tariffs and other trade barriers have gone largely unnoticed by the international bicycling community.

    Organizations promoting bicycle use at the international level may have a new avenue to do so -- through the liberalization of trade in bicycles, bicycle parts and components, and bicycle accessories that could result from the World Trade Organization's (WTO) current negotiations on environmental goods and services.

    The mandate for these negotiations comes from the so-called Doha Development Agenda (DDA), issued by trade ministers at the WTO Ministerial Conference in Doha, Qatar, in November 2002. Paragraph 31(iii) of the DDA calls for the reduction or elimination of tariff and non-tariff barriers to environmental goods and services. WTO ministers did not, however, define what constitutes an "environmental good", so the negotiations have moved forward largely on the basis of lists of suggested goods by WTO member economies.

    One sub-category of products is referred to as "environmentally preferable products", or EPPs, deemed superior to close substitutes because of the way they are produced, used or disposed of.

    At the end of 2004, the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) was asked by its member countries to prepare a study of EPPs, concentrating on products whose liberalization would benefit developing countries, either through improved environmental outcomes or increased trade in the product. The bicycle emerged as one of the three EPPs the OECD Secretariat chose to study in depth.
    (A copy of the report may be found here: http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/45/19/35841725.pdf)

    In mid-2005, Switzerland, an OECD member country, submitted its own list of proposed environmental goods to the WTO, which included bicycles, bicycle parts and components, and certain accessories. The Swiss proposal has been met with mixed reactions by other member countries, many of which are represented in WTO negotiations by representatives from trade ministries who do not grasp the bicycle's environmental relevance. Others, usually from environment ministries, have generally been more supportive of the idea.

    As of this writing, no definitive common list of environmentally goods has been agreed by WTO negotiators. There may still be an opportunity for bicycle advocates to tell their countries' WTO delegates just how important it is to grant "environmental good" status to bicycles, parts and accessories.

  2. so, what are the possible effects of this if it gets up?

    are there tarrifs and trade barriers on bikes?

    (apart frm the sometimes phenominal markup by Oz wholesalers... 🙄 )

  3. flyingdutch said:

    so, what are the possible effects of this if it gets up?

    Very little.

    The goal of the WTO is to eliminate all tariffs. A campaign to only
    selectively reduce tariffs on environmentally beneficial goods would seem
    to collusion by environmentalists and manufactures to maintain or increase
    tariffs and undermine the WTO. Environmentalists are against global trade
    in general, except where it favours their religion.

    Quoted message said:

    are there tarrifs and trade barriers on bikes?

    Australia, like most developed nations, has no significant tariffs on most
    manufactured goods. It would be better to remove them all simply to remove
    the cost of administering them. The only reason that we keep them is
    symbolic to pander to certain industries and to provide something to bring
    to the table for trade deals. Australia does still have significant tariffs
    on cars, footwear and textiles, but they are being phased out to the point
    where they will not be significant.

    We have already have free trade with NZ, have agreed to phase out tariffs
    on US goods and negotiating an FTA with China and starting proceeding with
    Japan (though those are far from certain).

    Asia, North America and Europe already have free trade within their
    borders.

    As far as I am aware Australia has no tariff on bicycles. A local
    manufacturer applied for a tariff of 5% on bicycles in 2002 but that was
    protested against and it was found that they contained less than 25% local
    components, the tariffs removed in 2004. Thus there is no duty on bicycles.
    [1]

    dewatf.

    1. http://www.abc.dotars.gov.au/news/gnssept2004_b.aspx#bia3

  4. This ITDP article is an international perspective on WTO tariffs. Therefore in context, you're entirely ignored the points made in the article. It's about international bicycle / sustainable transport advocates seeing an opportunity to proport for change in an international context.

  5. cfsmtb said:

    This ITDP article is an international perspective on WTO tariffs.
    Therefore in context, you're entirely ignored the points made in the
    article. It's about international bicycle / sustainable transport
    advocates seeing an opportunity to proport for change in an
    international context.

    It's European internal politics, they fiddle as they cheer the WTO project
    goes down the gurgler.

    dewatf.

  6. cfsmtb said:

    This ITDP article is an international perspective on WTO tariffs.
    Therefore in context, you're entirely ignored the points made in the
    article. It's about international bicycle / sustainable transport
    advocates seeing an opportunity to proport for change in an
    international context.

    OK I'll elaborate on my answer since I have a few more minutes.

    Australia doesn't impose tariffs on bicyles. The US doesn't impose many
    tariffs on manufactured goods and US companies make components in China and
    sell very cheap bicycles. Asia doesn't impose tariffs on its bicycles.
    Europe doesn't impose tariffs on bicycles.

    And I did read the article and noted a few key points very quickly that the
    discuss about this nonsense started in Doha in 2002, 4 years ago.

    So Ghana imposes tariffs on Swiss bicyles!

    "The Swiss proposal has been met with mixed reactions by other member
    countries, many of which are represented in WTO negotiations by
    representatives from trade ministries who do not grasp the bicycle's
    environmental relevance. Others, usually from environment ministries,
    have generally been more supportive of the idea."

    i.e. the point is about trivial religious rhetoric and of no trade
    relevance. It's main point is to distract people from the tariffs Europe
    imposes that hurt the developing world.

    That their major point is that "Current efforts to designate bikes as
    “environmentally preferable products” free of tariffs and other trade
    barriers have gone largely unnoticed by the international bicycling
    community." The reason that it has gone unnoticed is that it is an
    irrelevant proposal, part of an agenda to derail free trade, that happened
    4 years ago and has achieve nothing, and is irrelevant to any bicylce users
    it is target at.

    dewatf.

Active in the last 60 minutes

Active in this thread

0 users · 0 guests ·0 bots ·0 total

No signed-in users are active right now.

No known search crawlers active right now.