Abstract

Maritime transport costs significantly impede international trade. This article examines why these costs are so high in some countries and quantifies the importance of two explanations: restrictive trade policies and private anticompetitive practices. It finds that both matter, but the latter have a greater impact. Trade liberalization and the breakup of private carrier agreements would lead to an average of one-third lower liner transport prices and to cost savings of up to US dollar 3 billion on goods carried to the United States alone. The policy implications are clear: there is a need not only for further liberalization of government policy but also for strengthened international disciplines on restrictive business practices. The authors propose an approach to developing such disciplines in the current round of services negotiations at the World Trade Organization (WTO). Document type: Book

Abstract

For the economy to attain its full potential, the Philippines requires an efficient water transport system. However, this is presently not the case. The domestic shipping industry is characterized by high costs, low quality of service, and a poor safety record. Logistics cost accounts for 24-53 percent of wholesale price, while shipping and port handling cost around 8 percent of wholesale price and 5 percent of retail price. Philippine domestic shipping is generally more expensive than in Malaysia or Indonesia, 2 other archipelagos. Moreover, it is more expensive to transport goods between 2 Philippine ports than between 2 Philippine ports via an international port. In the East Asia region, the Philippines trails behind its neighbors in various logistics performance and connectivity indices. For instance, in liner shipping connectivity, the Philippines ranked 66th out of 157 countries in 2013, and performs the worst among a group of East Asian comparators. Delays in shipment, slow cargo handling, and frequent accidents are the top complaints of businesses. In the East Asia Region, the Philippines has the highest absolute casualty rate and this is 40 percent higher than the second ranked country, Indonesia. On average, there are 228 ships involved in accidents and 303 casualties per year in the Philippines. In seeking to enhance competition in the delivery of domestic shipping services, this assessment has therefore focused particularly on measures that would increase the opportunities and incentives for new players to enter the market, and for existing operators to expand or vary the services they offer.

Abstract

The purpose of this policy note is to present reform options on cabotage liberalization. The goal of cabotage liberalization is to help i) foster more competition in the domestic shipping industry, ii) reduce shipping cost, and iii) improve efficiency, maritime services, and safety standards. These, together with complementary reforms in domestic shipping and ports, can help enhance consumer and producer welfare through lower consumer prices, higher household real income, timely delivery of goods, and ultimately, job creation and poverty reduction through greater market access. This policy note on cabotage is organized as follows. Part one provides an overview of the domestic shipping industry and discusses the key issues that it faces. Part two discusses the underlying reasons for the industry’s inefficiency. Part three discusses the concept of cabotage, the cost and benefit of cabotage liberalization, and the cabotage regimes of the Philippines and of selected countries. Part four closes with a discussion of reform options.