REPUBLIC OF CAMEROON REPUBLIQUE DU CAMEROUN

Peace- Work- Fatherland Paix- Travail- Patrie

UNIVERSITY OF BAMENDA UNIVERSITE DE BAMENDA

FACULTY OF ARTS FACULTEE DES ARTS

P.O. BOX. 39, BAMBILI B.P. 39 BAMBILI, BAMENDA

DEPARTMENT: GEOGRAPHY AND PLANNING

Course Code: GPLA6106

Course Title: Geography and Globalisation

ASSIGNMENT
Globalisation and Trade

PRESENTED BY: 

Mokwe Bea Patrick Junior

Supervisor
Prof. Mbanga Lawrence

1 of 17
 June 2019

Contents
1. INTRODUCTION........................................................................................................................2
2. GLOBALIZATION AND TRADE.............................................................................................3
2.1. Gains From Trade................................................................................................................5
2.2. Case Study of the Black Sea Economic Integration...........................................................6
2.3. Impacts of Free Trade.........................................................................................................9
2.4. Challenges of Transition Countries in Global Trading...................................................10
3. Conclusion...................................................................................................................................12
Bibliography.......................................................................................................................................14

2 of 17
 1. INTRODUCTION

One of the widespread definitions of globalization takes it as an irreversible force, which is

being imposed upon the world by some countries and institutions through which an
increasingly free flow of ideas, people, goods, services, and capital leads to the integration of
economies and societies (IMF, 2002). Economic aspect of the phenomenon refers to the
increasing interdependence of world economies as a result of the growing scale of cross-
border trade of commodities and services, flow of international capital and wide and rapid
spread of technologies. It reflects the continuing expansion and mutual integration of market
frontiers, and is an irreversible trend for the economic development in the whole world at the
turn of the millennium (Shangquan, 2000).

Globalization refers to the growing interdependence of countries resulting from the increasing
integration of trade, finance, people, and ideas in one global marketplace. International trade
and cross-border investment flows are the main elements of this integration. Globalization is
driven by two main factors. One involves technological advances that have lowered the costs
of transportation, communication, and computation to the extent that it is often economically
feasible for a firm to locate different phases of production in different countries. The other
factor has to do with the increasing liberalization of trade and capital markets: more and more
governments are refusing to protect their economies from foreign competition or influence
through import tariffs and nontariff barriers such as import quotas, export restraints, and legal
prohibitions. A number of international institutions including the World Bank, International
Monetary Fund (IMF), and General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT), succeeded in
1995 by the World Trade Organization (WTO) have played an important role in promoting
free trade in place of protectionism (Chaturverdi, 2006).

As an inevitable result of this process the global trade flows benefited from this process
substantially. According to the data from WTO merchandise exports grew more than 8% a
year by 1950s. Although fluctuations and recession were experienced in this expansion period
the increase went on to a degree and the average expansion of world merchandise exports
averaged 6% by 2000s. Although the global figures seems appealing, individual performances
of the countries aren’t so clear because of the deepening in the globalization process which
resulted in national governments’ losing control over their economy and trade which they

3 of 17
tried to keep pace with the change in economic system by deregulating their international
trade barriers through regional trade agreements and economic integrations (Chaturverdi,.
2006).

Regional integration includes a multitude of steps that increase the competitiveness of

participating countries, not just preferential trade access and helps small and remote countries
scale up supply capacity in regional production networks which in turn, allows these countries
to access global markets (Deichmann and Gill, 2008). However the consequences of the
globalization and joining free trade agreements or economic integration are varies from
country to country due to their geographical position, the natural resources they have, their
level of economic development, etc. In this framework considering that it is formed
completely by developing economies, how the globalization process affected international
trade performance of BSEC member states is questioned in this study.

So, the main forces driving global integration have been technological innovation, political
change and economic policy choices. In this way, globalization has benefited from economic
policies favoring deregulation and the reduction or elimination of restrictions on international
trade, foreign investment and financial transactions. Trade opening has been pursued
multilaterally through successive multilateral negotiations, bilaterally and regionally through
preferential trade agreements and unilaterally1. In the case of many developing countries,
early commercial policies had an inward looking focus. But the success of a number of newly
industrializing economies like East Asia with export led growth strategies contributed to a
more general adoption of industrialization policies that recognized the importance of exports
in the process (Chaturverdi, 2006).

2. GLOBALIZATION AND TRADE

A radical transformation of economic life is presented with the process of globalization which
resulted in the generalization of market economy, increase in production, circulation of
information, products, people and capital, implementation of technical systems becomes more
efficient (Dăianu, 2009). Nations are no longer self-sufficient in the global economy and they
are included in trade at different levels to sell what they produce to obtain what they are in
need. The countries usually produce more efficiently in some economic sectors than its trade
partners. As supported by conventional economic theory, eventually trade promotes economic
efficiency and it can be concluded that the globalization of production is contributing to the
globalization of trade (Rodrigue et.al, 2006).

4 of 17
The increase and expansion of the globalization process were the result of a number of
factors. These include the advances in the liberalization of world trade and capital
movements, technological progress that implied a significant decrease in transport and
communication and co-ordination costs. The growing openness of developing and emerging
market economies with special emphasis on large economies such as China and India and
countries of Central and Eastern Europe is also reflected by the acceleration in globalization
process. The strong increases in both activity and international trade flows practiced the
developing and emerging economies reflected this phenomenon to global level (Manteu
2008).

In the last period three trends in world economy can be mentioned to shape globalization
flows. The value of international trade has grown by a factor of 16 times since the late 1970s.
In this regards ongoing growth of international trade, both in absolute terms and in relation to
global national income can be taken as the first trend. The growing role of multinational
corporations is the next since they are taking the lead in international trade particularly in
terms of the share of trade taking place within corporations. And the last is higher relative
growth of trade in Pacific Asia as many economies developed an export-oriented development
strategy that has been associated with imbalances in commercial relations (Rodrigue et.al,
2013). Empirical evidence suggests that globalization has significantly boosted economic
growth in East Asian economies such as China, the Republic of Korea, and Singapore.
However not all developing countries are equally engaged in globalization and it can't be said
that all of them are benefitting from it equally. In fact, except for most countries in East Asia
and some in Latin America, developing countries have been rather slow to integrate with the
world economy (Soubbotina, 2000). Regarding that the inequalities between the developed,
developing and less developed countries the influence of globalization can be questioned.

Current globalization literature cites that pressure of capital mobility, technological progress
and intense market competition describes an irreversible force beyond the influence of
domestic policy makers. In this policy context globalization is often used as a synonym for
greater openness and closely linked to the liberalization of domestic and foreign transactions
(Bairoch and Wright, 1996). Trade between the countries considering comparative advantage
promotes growth, which is attributed to a strong correlation between the openness to trade
flows and the effect on economic growth and economic performance. Likewise capital flows
and their impact on economic growth adhere to each other with a significant relationship
(Pologeorgis, 2010).

5 of 17
International trade is regarded as the engine of growth for long, even going back at least to
Adam Smith. However, during the 20th century, it has not been a very popular one and
instead protectionist theories became dominant and the majority of the developing countries
implemented industrialization policies based on a very limited degree of international
openness for a long time (Edwards, 1993). Conversely after the end of the Second World War
international trade get into a new era in which world merchandise exports grew more than 8%
a year. By 1973 this expansion slowed down a little bit due to the oil price shocks, the burst of
inflation caused by monetary expansion and inadequate macroeconomic adjustment policies,
By 1990s the developments in information technology sector led world trade to a second
expansion period. The average expansion of world merchandise exports averaged 6% in 2000
- 2007 period (WTO, 2008).

2.1. Gains From Trade

Traditional trade theory emphasizes the gains from specialization made possible by
differences among countries. The main contribution of this strand of thought is that
opportunities for mutually beneficial trade exist by virtue of specialization on the basis of
relative efficiency – a country does not have to be better at producing something than its
trading partners to benefit from trade. It is sufficient that it is relatively more efficient than its
trading partners. This insight explains why so many more opportunities to gain from trade
exist than would be the case if only absolute advantage counted. More recent theories point to
other sources of gains from trade not linked to differences among countries, such as
economies of scale in production, enhanced competition, access to a broader variety of goods
and improved productivity (Chaturverdi, 2006)

From an economic perspective, the case for freer trade rests on the existence of gains from
trade and most economists typically agree that there are gains from trade2. The idea that there
are gains from trade is the central proposition of normative trade theory. The gains from trade
theorem states that if a country can trade at any price ratio other than its domestic prices, it
will be better off than in autarky – or self-sufficiency. More generally, the basic gains from
trade propositions are that: a) free trade is better than autarky; b) restricted trade (i.e. trade
restricted by trade barriers) is better than autarky; and, c) for a small country (i.e. a country
too small to influence world prices) free trade is better than restricted trade (Djankov et al,
2007).

6 of 17
The basic propositions about the gains from trade, are not the end of the story3. First, the
divergence between autarky and free trade prices is only an approximate explanation of the
gains from trade. In particular, countries trade to achieve economies of scale in production or
to have access to a broader variety of goods. Also, if the opening-up of trade reduces or
eliminates monopoly power or enhances productivity, there will be gains from trade
additional to the usual ones. Trade may have positive growth effects. So, it could be talk about
the traditional gains from trade and their underlying causes, the gains from trade highlighted
in the more recent trade theories, and the dynamic gains from trade. The robustness of the
theories to changes in their main assumptions is examined. Finally, the empirical evidence
concerning the proposed rationales for international trade is reviewed (Schott, Jeffrey J, 1996)

2.2. Case Study of the Black Sea Economic Integration

Although globalization influence world economy both direct and indirect ways, some of the
most common impression of it is related with international trade. Rodrigue et.al, (2006)
summarizes these impressions as follows;

 Production systems are more flexible and embedded, which encourages exchanges of
commodities and services. Foreign direct investments are commonly linked with the
globalization of production as corporations invest abroad in search of lower production
costs and new markets.
 There is a growing availability of goods and services that can be traded on the global
market.
 Transport efficiency has increased significantly because of innovations and improvements
in the modes and infrastructures. As a result, the transferability of commodities has
improved.
 Integration processes, such as the emergence of economic blocs and the decrease of tariffs
at a global scale, promoted trade. The higher the level of economic integration, the more
likely the concerned elements are to trade. The transactional capacity is consequently
facilitated with the development of transportation networks and the adjustment of trade
flows that follows increased integration

Taken collectively it is clear that globalization is triggering formation of economic

integrations. A vast amount of capital is circulated within the investment system in the
globalizing market system in a relatively short amount of time. Because states lose control
over exchanges and economic development, they hold a reduced its role in its own economy.

7 of 17
Regional trade agreements help nations gradually work towards global free trade through
allowing countries to increase the level of competition slowly and give domestic industries
time to adjust. The increasing membership of less economically developed countries within
the European Union, Southern Common Market, and Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation is
testament to the economic stability offered by regional economic integrations (Collins, 2010).
Another good example for this progress is the establishment of Black Sea Economic
Cooperation (BSEC).

The Black Sea region which hosts crossroads between Asia and Europe, people of different
nationalities, trades, cultures and religions has been the cradle of different civilizations since
ancient times. Being on a specific geography periods of peace and tranquility were followed
by protracted conflicts and wars in the region. However even in that climate the Black Sea
area was well-known for its developed trade relations and contacts (Coutsoukis, 2013).
Collapse of the Soviet Union due to particularly globalization, beside political structure,
economic concept is also changed rapidly and these relations turned into more realistic
attempts. BSEC is found in 1992 and The BSEC Headquarters - the Permanent International
Secretariat of the Organization of the Black Sea Economic Cooperation was established in
1994. Aiming at fostering interaction and harmony among its members, as well as to ensure
peace, stability and prosperity, encouraging friendly and good-neighborly relations in the
Black Sea region, today BSEC serves as a forum for cooperation in a wide range of areas such
as agriculture and agro-industry, banking and finance, combating organized crime, culture,
customs matters, education, emergency assistance, energy, environmental protection,
exchange of statistical data and economic information, healthcare and pharmaceutics,
information and communication technologies, institutional renewal and good governance,
science and technology, SMEs, tourism, trade and economic development and transport for its
12 Member States: Albania, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Bulgaria, Georgia, Greece, Moldova,
Romania, Russia, Serbia, Turkey and Ukraine (BSEC, 1992).

In the establishment phase establishment of a free trade zone in BSEC was projected which
would eventually evolve the organization into a stronger form of integration. However the
uncertainties encountered by the ex-Soviet Bloc members and newly independent states, the
BSEC did not start off by requiring strong commitments from its members towards any kind
of economic integration and it was later agreed that the BSEC would lead to the formation of
a regional organization for economic cooperation in a loosely defined sense. Keeping in view
that many of the member states were centrally planned economies with practically no private

8 of 17
sector development at the time the BSEC was formed and with no well-established links to
global markets, this could be considered natural (Sayan, 2005). On the other hand regarding
the deepening in globalization and the current economic structure of the region much can be
expected. Although the aims set by the BSEC is comprehensive and appealing whether it
fulfils them is questionable. At this point some basic assumptions lying behind economic
integration theory may be helpful. Incekara (1995) summarized the common impact of
economic integrations on national economies under two main categories as static and dynamic
effects;

Static effects

 Trade creation effects; occur when a country in the integration can import from the other
countries in the partnership with a lower cost
 Trade diversion effects; occur when a country in the integration imports from the other
countries in the partnership with a higher cost instead of importing from a country outside
the integration with a lower cost.

Dynamic effects.

 Increase in competition
 Benefit from economies of scale resulting from the expansion of the market
 Increase in investment as a result of expanding market and competition
 The formation of external economies
 Ensuring resource efficiency resulting from free movement of production factors
 Savings in foreign exchange

Taking the assumptions into consideration, it is evident that the BSEC countries are
benefitting from the organization however the degree of it is controversial since there are
significant differences between the economies of the members of BSEC. However the main
motivation behind the establishment of the organization is regional proximity, which would in
turn lead to gains from trade. The production capabilities of the member states are divergent
both in manufacturing and service sectors, and factors of production to enjoy such gains as
well as the natural resources that are unevenly distributed among them. There are cases where

9 of 17
the basic need of a member country can be met by the factors owned by another member
country (Dikkaya and Orhan, 2004).

The private sector is regarded to play a major role in the development of the member
economies of the BSEC and so that it aims provide a favorable economic environment for
business. Economically, BSEC countries had more than 5% of total world trade amounting to
US $300 billion in 2000. Strategically, over 5% of the world population lives in the BSEC
countries and many of them, such as Turkey, are geo-politically important given their
proximity to Europe, the Middle East and Asia. The countries of BSEC are also rich in
strategic resources such as oil, coal and natural gas (Sriram and Bilgin, 2002).

2.3. Impacts of Free Trade

Today we are witnesses that free trade policies have created a level of competition in today's
open market that engenders continual innovation and leads to better products, better-paying
jobs, new markets, and increased savings and investment. Free trade enables more goods and
services at lower prices, thereby substantially increasing their standard of living. Free trade
helps to spread the value of freedom, reinforce the rule of law, and foster economic
development in poor countries. The national debate over trade-related issues too often ignores
these important benefits.

In this way, one of the benefits is that free trade promotes innovation and competition.
Access to a greater variety of goods and services is the purpose of trade.

Free trade is the only type of truly fair trade because it offers consumers the most choices and
the best opportunities to improve their standard of living. It fosters competition, spurring
companies to innovate and develop better products and to bring more of their goods and
services to market, keeping prices low and quality high in order to retain or increase their
market share. Also, free trade spurs innovation. Free trade promotes innovation because,
along with goods and services, the flow of trade circulates new ideas.

Another notice is that free trade disseminates democratic values.

Free trade fosters support for the rule of law. Companies that engage in international trade
have reason to abide by the terms of their contracts and international agreed upon norms and

10 of 17
laws. The World Trade Organization, for example, compels its member countries to honor
trade agreements and, in any trade dispute, to abide by the decisions of the WTO's mediating
body.

Free trade can reduce the opportunities for corruption. In countries where contracts are not
enforced, business relationships fail, foreign investors flee, and capital stays away. It is a
downward spiral that especially hinders economic development in countries where official
corruption is widespread. True economic freedom is possible only under a system of limited
government with a strong rule of law. Trade likewise can falter quickly in countries where
customs officials expect kickbacks at every checkpoint. Free trade, reinforced by the rule of
law, removes such incentives for corruption by spurring economic growth, increasing the
number of better-paying jobs, and ultimately increasing the level of prosperity.

Consecutively free trade fosters economic freedom. The ability to trade freely increases
opportunity, choices, and standards of living. Countries with the freest economies today
generally have adopted a capitalist model of economic development, remaining open to
international trade and investment. Free trade policies can foster development and raise the
level of economic freedom4. Every day in the marketplaces of free countries, individuals
make choices and exercise direct control over their own lives. Poor countries can create an
environment that is friendly to trade and inviting to foreign investors, with this infrastructure
based on economic freedom, assured property rights, a fair and independent judiciary, the free
flow of capital, and a fair system of low taxation.

Another important benefit is that free trade generates economic growth. In this way, the
advantage for poor countries in being able to trade for capital is that the payoff is more
immediate in their private sectors. Foreign investment allows domestic industries to develop
and provide better employment opportunities for local workers. This dynamic makes an
increase in foreign direct investment one of the most important benefits of free trade for
developing nations.

2.4. Challenges of Transition Countries in Global Trading

Transition countries in Central and Eastern Europe and the Baltics have applied for
membership in the European Union, and nearly all transition countries have applied to join the
World Trade Organization (WTO). Membership in the WTO would provide these countries
with protection from substantial barriers, particularly quotas, which still impede their
exporting of so-called sensitive goods to developed countries. Among these goods are

11 of 17
agricultural products, iron and steel, textiles, footwear, and others in which transition
economies may have comparative advantages. Joining the WTO would not only confer rights
on transition economies, it would also require them to meet certain obligations, such as
maintaining low or moderate tariffs and abolishing nontariff barriers ( World Bank ,2002).

A major challenge for transition economies is finding their place in the worldwide division of
labor. In many cases that implies diversifying the structure of exports, particularly to
developed countries.

Higher trade costs form an obstacle to trade and impede the realization of gains from trade
liberalization. Gains from trade depend not only on the tariff liberalization but also on the
quality of infrastructure and related services. Improved infrastructural and logistics services
play an important role in the flow of international trade. They generate enormous wealth by
reducing the costs of trade because of their nondiscriminatory and non-rivalrous
characteristics; and they integrate production and trade across countries.

Trade costs are often cited as an important determinant of the volume of trade. While the
world has witnessed a drastic fall in tariffs over the past two decades, many barriers remain
that penalize trade, among which are both soft and hard barriers. One set of such soft barriers
is dealt with through trade and business facilitation measures. The hard set of barriers, which
are often cited as physical or infrastructure barriers, are dealt with through transport
facilitation measures. The costs created by these barriers can be clubbed together and can be
termed as trade costs that are measured as a mark-up between export and import prices. This
mark-up roughly indicates the relative costs of the transfer of goods from one country to
another.

The reduction of trade costs helps traders to get their goods to market more quickly and
cheaply. Considering the increase in trade interdependency in Asia, as an example, the need
for a better enabling environment to trade has gained high momentum. On the demand side,
the noticeable development is that tariff barrier in Asia has become low as a result of trade
liberalization. On the supply side, rising trade costs are having an adverse impact on trade.
This difference is mainly attributable to global trade structures, regional infrastructure
facilities, logistics systems and the more influential distribution strategies of shippers of
developed countries (United Nations Conference on Trade and Development, 2005).

Trade costs include all costs incurred in getting a product to a final user other than the
marginal cost of producing the good itself, such as transportation costs (both freight costs and

12 of 17
time costs), policy barriers (tariffs and non-tariff barriers), information costs, contract
enforcement costs, costs associated with the use of different currencies, legal and regulatory
costs, and local distribution costs (wholesale and retail). Trade costs are reported in terms of
their ad valorem tax equivalent.

The cost of transportation, marketing, wholesaling and retailing represented an ad valorem

tax equivalent of 900 per cent. Anderson and van Wincoop (2004) commented that the tax
equivalent of representative trade costs for rich countries is 170 per cent. This includes all
transport, border-related and local distribution costs from foreign producer to final user in the
domestic country. Trade costs are richly linked to economic policy. Direct policy instruments
(tariffs, the tariff equivalents of quotas and trade barriers associated with the exchange rate
system) are less important than other policies (transport infrastructure investment, law
enforcement and related property rights institutions, informational institutions, regulation and
language).

Anderson and Richard, (1993), Trade costs have large welfare implications. Current policy-
related costs are often worth more than 10 per cent of national income.

According to the World Bank (2002), for 168 out of 216 trading partners of the United States,
transport cost barriers outweighed tariff barriers. It is estimated that doubling the distance
increases overall freight rates by between 20 and 30 per cent (Hummels, 2001). Time delays
affect international trade. It is estimated that, on average, each additional day that a product is
delayed prior to being shipped reduces trade by at least 1 per cent. Therefore, what follows is
that gains from trade will be more if trade frictions are minimized (Djankov et al, 2006).

Poor institutions and poor infrastructure act as impediments to trade, differentially across
countries. While dealing with barriers to trade, some studies explicitly emphasized the quality
of infrastructure associated with cross-country trade. A country’s infrastructure plays a vital
role in carrying trade. For example, by incorporating transport infrastructure in a two-country
Ricardian framework, some economic authors showed the circumstances under which it
affected trade volume; the transport and communications infrastructure and institutional
quality are significant determinants not only for a country’s export levels but also for the
likelihood of exports (Council for Trade in Services, 2005).

3. Conclusion

13 of 17
Successful participation in the global economy will be increasingly determined by whether a
country maintains high quality, reliable trade infrastructure, whether competition is permitted
to flourish in the logistics services industries, and whether the regulatory environment is
conducive to the relatively frictionless movement of goods and services through the supply
chain. Trade facilitation is not only for developing countries. All countries can benefit from
the reform and continuous improvements of their trade processes. The kinds of reforms that
move countries in the necessary direction do not require formal commitments and obligations
to other countries. Trade facilitation is primarily in the interest of the country implementing
reform. Although security is paramount, it is crucial to understand that there are costs to
security-driven policies, which can hamper trade and curtail economic growth without
necessarily improving security.

Improving the international trading system does not require new multilateral agreement.
Countries can derive gains from the trading system by engaging in reforms often referred to as
trade facilitation.

Also, trade facilitation includes reforms aimed at improving the chain of administrative and
physical procedures involved in the transport of goods and services across international
borders. Countries with inadequate trade infrastructure, burdensome administrative processes,
or limited competition in trade logistics services are less capable of benefiting from the
opportunities of expanding global trade. Companies interested in investing, buying, or selling
in local markets are less likely to bother if there are too many frictions related to document
processing or cargo inspection at customs, antiquated port facilities, logistics bottlenecks, or
limited reliability of freight or trade financing services.

According to recent studies from the World Bank and other international economic
institutions, trade facilitation reforms could do more to increase global trade flows than
further reductions in tariff rates. For many developing countries reducing transportation and
logistics-related costs through trade facilitation reforms would be much more beneficial than
further tariff cuts.

The link between globalization, trade and business can contribute to resolve distributional
issues, because one of the key principles of trade facilitation is transparency. Making trade
regulations and related processes more transparent involves simplifying and clarifying them,
and making them accessible to the greatest possible number of firms and individuals, thereby
increasing their opportunity to trade and take advantage of global market opportunities.

14 of 17
So this relation can be seen as a way to change the circumstances of trade within a country
that give rise to inequalities in opportunities to trade.

Societies which lead to free trade politic create their own economic dynamic, fostering the
source of freedom, opportunities and prosperity that are used by any citizen. It is important to
show the power of principle and its respectation. Tendation is to break up the cycle of poverty
and every country even the poor country to start creating their own dynamic via prosperity.
This era of market globalization could be follow with new problems which answers are in
human ingenuity and innovation, as presenting the outrageous level of flow for people to gain
and realize economic freedom and bigger prosperity.

Bibliography
Anderson Kym and Richard Blackhurst, eds (1993). Regional Integration and the Global
Trading System. New York: St. Martin’s Press.
Anderson, J.E. and E. van Wincoop, (2004). Trade costs, Journal of Economic Literature,vol.
42, No. 3; pp. 691-751
Bairoch, Paul and Kozul-Wright, Richard, (1996). Globalization Myths: Some Historical
Reflections on Integration, Industrialization and Growth in the World Economy,
UNCTAD/OSG/DP/113.
BSEC, (1992). “BSEC at a Glance”,
http://www.bsec-organization.org/Information/Pages/bsec.aspx.
Chaturvedi, S., (2006). ARTNeT Working Paper - Asia-Pacific Research and Training
Network on Trade (ARTNeT), Bangkok.
Chaturvedi, S., (2006). An evaluation of the need and cost of selected trade facilitation
measures: Implications for the WTO negotiations, ARTNeT Working Paper Series,
No. 4, March.
Chaturverdi,S. (2006). Selected trade facilitation measures: Implications for the WTO
negotiations on trade facilitation, working paper.
Council for Trade in Services, (2005). Special Session, Joint Statement on Liberalization of
Logistics Services, communication from Australia and others, TN/S/W/34. World
Trade Organization, Geneva.
Collins, Bennett, (2010). “Does Regionalism Challenge Globalization or Build Upon It?”, E-
International Relations, http://www.e-ir.info/2010/07/29/does-regionalism-challenge-
globalization-or-build-upon-it.
Coutsoukis, Photius, (2013). “Why BSEC”, http://www.photius.com/bsec/bsec.html#about.

15 of 17
 Dăianu, Dana-Codruţa Dudă, (200. “The Impact of Globalization through International
Trade, Annals. Economic Science Series”, International Conference, the Knowledge Society
in the Space of United Europe, May 29th -30th 2009, Vol. XV/2009, pp. 211-215.
Deichmann, Uwe and Gill, Indermit, (2008). “The Economic Geography of Regional
Integration”, Finance and Development, Vol.45, No.4, 45-47.
Dikkaya, Mehmet and Orhan, Mehmet, (2004). “Economies of the Black Sea Economic
Cooperation (BSEC) Countries and their Bilateral Trade”, Journal of Economic and
Social Research, 6 (2), pp. 63-86.
Djankov S., Freund, C. and Cong S. Pham, (2007). Trading on time, working paper.Available
at http://www.doingbusiness.org/MethodologySurveys/ (accessed on 1 October 2007).
Edwards, Sebastian, (1993). “Openness, Trade Liberalization, and Growth in Developing
Countries”, Journal of Economic Literature, Vol. 31, No. 3, pp. 1358-1393.
Hummels, D., (2001).Time as trade barrier, working paper. West Lafayette. Purdue
University
IMF, 2002. Globalization: A Framework for IMF Involvement, 02/01,
https://www.imf.org/external/np/exr/ib/2002/031502.htm.
Incekara, Ahmet, (1995). Globalleşme ve Bölgeselleşme Sürecinde NAFTA ve Etkileri, İTO
Yayınları, Yay. No: 1995-14, Istanbul.
Manteu, Cristina, (2008). “Economic Effects of Globalisation: Lessons from Trade Models”,
Economic Bulletin, Banco de Portuga
Pologeorgis, Nicolas, (2010). “How Globalization Affects Developed
Countries”,http://www.invest opedia.com/articles/economics/10/globalization-
developed-countries.asp
Rodrigue, Jean-Paul, Comtois, Claude and Slack, Brian, (2006). The Geography of Transport
Systems, Routledge, Newyork, pp144.
Rodrigue, Jean-Paul, Notteboom, Theo and Shaw, Jon, (2013). The SAGE Handbook of
Transport Studies, SAGE Publications, London, pp211.
Sayan, Serdar, (2005). “The Effects of the BSEC on Regional Trade Flows”, Agora without
Frontiers, Vol. 10 (4), pp. 334-347.
Schott, Jeffrey J., (1996.ed). The World Trading System: Challenges Ahead.D.C. Institute for
International Economics.
Shangquan, Gao, (2000). “Economic Globalization: Trends, Risks and Risk Prevention”,
Economic & Social Affairs, CDP Background Paper No. 1, ST/ESA/2000/CDP/1,
United Nations.
Soubbotina, Tatyana P., (2000). Beyond Economic Growth an Introduction to Sustainable
Development, the World Bank, Washington, D.C.
Sriram, Ven and Bilgin, Zeynep, (2002). “Regionalism and Emerging Markets: An Analysis
of Turkey's Trade with the BSEC and the EU”, Marmara Journal of European Studies,
Vol: 10, No: 1, pp. 137-161.
United Nations Conference on Trade and Development, (2005). UNCTAD GSP Newsletter,
No. 7, (UNCTAD/DITC/TNCD/MISC/2005/6).
World Bank. (2002).The Economic Import of Trade Facultation Measures: A Development
Perspective in the Asia Pacific.Washington,D.C.

16 of 17
WTO, (2008). “World Trade Report 2008, Trade in a Globalizing World”,
https://www.wto.org/english/res_e/booksp_e/anrep_e/world_trade_report08_e.pdf.
pp15.

17 of 17