China's Accession to the World Trade Organization : The Services Dimension
China's General Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS) commitments represent the most radical services reform program negotiated in the World Trade Organization. China has promised to eliminate over the next few years most restrictions on forei...
Main Author: | |
---|---|
Format: | Policy Research Working Paper |
Language: | English en_US |
Published: |
World Bank, Washington, DC
2014
|
Subjects: | |
Online Access: | http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/2002/12/2082428/chinas-accession-world-trade-organization-services-dimension http://hdl.handle.net/10986/19194 |
Summary: | China's General Agreement on Trade
in Services (GATS) commitments represent the most radical
services reform program negotiated in the World Trade
Organization. China has promised to eliminate over the next
few years most restrictions on foreign entry and ownership,
as well as most forms of discrimination against foreign
firms. These changes are in themselves desirable. However,
realizing the gains from, and perhaps even the
sustainability of, liberalization will require the
implementation of complementary regulatory reform and the
appropriate sequencing of reforms. Three issues, in
particular, merit attention: 1) Initial restrictions on the
geographical scope of services liberalization could
encourage the further agglomeration of economic activity in
certain regions-to an extent that is unlikely to be reversed
completely by subsequent countrywide liberalization. 2)
Restrictions on foreign ownership (temporary in most sectors
but more durable in telecommunications and life insurance)
may dampen the incentives of foreign investors to improve
firm performance. 2) Improved prudential regulation and
measures to deal with the large burden of non-performing
loans on state banks are necessary to deliver the benefits
of liberalization in financial services. And in basic
telecommunications and other network-based services,
meaningful liberalization will be difficult to achieve
without strengthened pro-competitive regulation. |
---|