
It
is exhilarating to be in this city. Berlin is undergoing
a process of historical transformation which is
propelling it towards the political and cultural centre
of Germany - a united Germany within a united
Europe. The skyline is dominated by scaffolding and
cranes, physical manifestations of the birth of a new
capital and a new century. So this is an exciting place
and an exciting time, and I am very grateful for the
invitation to join you here. This
transformation of Germany is of course occurring against
the backdrop of a much wider transformation in the world
economy. Today I want to talk about how this economic
transformation is being driven by the increasingly
borderless flow of services - and the knowledge,
information and ideas embodied in these services. How
technology is making this borderless economy possible
- even inevitable. And how new international
economic institutions, rule-based like the WTO, are
becoming central to managing a world where economic
systems, cultures and peoples have never been more
interconnected and interdependent.
What
we are witnessing today is the realization of Marshall
McLuhan's prediction in the 1960s that "electronic
interdependence would create the world in the image of a
global village". Thousands of miles of fibre optic
cables now join oceans and continents together, as do the
millions of sound waves and electromagnetic signals that
crisscross the atmosphere above our planet. Twenty-four
hours-a-day this global network carries the world's
business contracts, currency transactions, medical
information, and educational resources, instantaneously
across time zones, borders and cultures.
This
interconnected economy is influencing more than
productivity growth. It is making knowledge a more
important production factor than labour, raw materials,
or capital. It is shaping a new and more equitable
relationship between the developed and the developing
world. And perhaps most dramatically, it is creating the
closest thing yet to a single, borderless global economy
- an economy which will have profound implications
for the way national systems operate in the future.
Already
we see the trend towards freer global trade in
traditional goods sectors - with almost sixty per
cent of world trade scheduled to be tariff free early in
the next century. But is in the services sector where the
potential for global free trade is by far the greatest.
Rapid advances in digital and communications technologies
are creating the possibility of borderless electronic
trade in key services sectors - erasing many of the
limitations of time and space. Just down the road
- within a few years - we can see the prospect
of telecommunications, even across the Atlantic, becoming
almost a free commodity. The cost of computing power has
fallen dramatically since 1960, bringing it within the
reach of millions of ordinary people. 50 million personal
computers were sold in 1995, as compared with 35 million
cars. The Internet is the most powerful symbol of these
developments: it has been steadily doubling in size every
year since it was invented a quarter of a century ago and
will clearly become a global market in its own right.
Just
as the globalization of trade and investment has changed
the way goods and raw materials are produced throughout
the world, the advent of a borderless, electronic economy
promises to transform the services sector - a sector
which now accounts for more than 70 per cent of GDP in
many OECD countries and 50 per cent in some developing
countries. It was once thought that most services were
difficult - or even impossible - to trade
because "exporting" required a presence in
foreign markets. Now, thanks to the micro-chip and fibre
optics, any service which can be digitized and
transmitted electronically can be produced and delivered
almost anywhere in the world in a matter of seconds.
Let
me take a moment to underline four broad characteristics
of this emerging borderless services economy:
-
the first is its increasing indifference to geography,
distance and time. Transaction costs for consumers and
businesses will fall rapidly as many steps that intervene
between buyer and seller - distribution, sales,
retailing - are compressed. Perhaps the most
significant result of the development of electronic
commerce will be the falling barriers and costs to market
entry. Starting a new business will be much easier
- allowing a far greater number of suppliers to
enter a market. Small and medium-sized enterprises
- as well as large multinational corporations -
will now be full participants in the global marketplace.
Businesses in developing countries can now overcome many
of the obstacles of infrastructure, capital, and
transportation which limited their economic potential in
the past. And in the end, consumers all over the world
will benefit from this growing global competition.
-
second, services industries - especially financial
services, telecommunications and transport - are
creating the reality of a global infrastructure for the
world economy; an infrastructure which is greatly
facilitating the adjustment of old industries and the
development of new ones. A good example is the emergence
of a truly global financial system - the result of
technological advances and market liberalization -
which will allow many developing countries to continue
their growth trajectory, and to further narrow the gap
with the developed world.
-
third, and perhaps most important, the global services
economy will be a knowledge-based economy -and its
most precious resource will be information and ideas.
Unlike the classical factors of production - land,
labour and capital - information and knowledge are
not bound to any region or country but are almost
infinitely mobile and infinitely capable of expansion.
This knowledge-driven economy is not replacing other
economic activities - factories and farming are not
going to disappear, software is not going to substitute
for the food we eat or the cars we drive. But technology
is changing the way we produce things - sometimes in
quite dramatic ways. Take the example of the German
automobile industry which has almost completely
reinvented itself over the last several years by
introducing advanced information technologies, robotics
or computer-aided design into the production process
- to the point where automobile production often
seems closer to a services or "ideas-based"
industry than traditional manufacturing.
-
these changes lead to a fourth characteristic: the
borderless technology's potential to equalize relations
between countries and regions, because of its capacity to
open the way to free and equal access to information and
knowledge for every country, every region in the world.
The gap between the richest and the poorest countries is
still unacceptably wide, but the economic and
technological means to close the gap are already in place
- and I believe that many developing countries will
be able to leap-frog phases of industrial development
which in the North have taken decades to accomplish.
This
free market of information and knowledge will have social
and political ramifications that go far beyond economics.
Doctors are utilizing tele-medicine to administer
off-site diagnoses to patients in need. Students across
the world are discovering vast stores of information via
the World Wide Web.
In
the WTO we are also building electronic bridges to a
wider world - using the Internet and our new
Information Technologies For Development Project to
deliver, with the collaboration of the World Bank,
technical assistance, trade data, training, and
interactive policy support to the least-developed
countries which most need to be integrated into the
global economy.
These
are not predictions for some far-off future - such
changes are already underway now, today. Already we are
witnessing a significant shift in economic power towards
the South - a shift that will have as dramatic an
impact on world politics as the collapse of the Berlin
Wall. And this shift will be beneficial to developed and
developing countries alike. The World Bank projects that
developing countries will grow by 5 to 6 per cent a year
between now and 2020. This means that the developing
countries will almost double their share of world output,
from around 16 per cent in 1992, to 30 per cent in 2020.
What these numbers demonstrate, among other things, is
the accelerating pace of development. The first
industrialized country, the U.K., took 58 years to double
its per capita living standards; the U.S. took 47 years;
Germany, 43 years; and Japan 34 years. But from 1966,
Korea took just 11 years; Chile 10 years; and China 9.
And these distances continue to shrink. Ten developing
countries, accounting for almost a third of the world's
population - or over 1.5 billion people - more
than doubled their average per capita income levels
between 1980 and 1995.
The
rôle of the WTO is essential to the increasingly
borderless, interconnected world. What the WTO
- like the GATT before it - provides is a force
for increased liberalization within a framework of
international law, based on consensus, with an
enforcement capacity, so that these economic and
technological changes can unfold in a balanced, equitable
and constructive way. From this perspective, one of most
important contributions of the Uruguay Round to the
current economic order - and one of the most
significant changes to world trade rules since the
inception of GATT in 1948 - was to bring services
trade liberalization within the multilateral system.
There
have been three major negotiations since the end of the
Uruguay Round in what we call the infrastructural
services - financial services, telecommunications
and transport. Let me take a moment to outline the state
of play in financial services - the key priority for
the WTO in the coming weeks.
The
objective of the financial services negotiations is to
achieve real improvements in access to markets.
Essentially, this means the right for foreign investors
to operate on equal competitive terms with national
companies in national markets. It also means the removal
of unnecessary restrictions on the cross-border supply of
financial services - restrictions which will, in any
event, become increasingly anomalous in a world of
borderless, electronic commerce. And it means protecting
equity rights already achieved in these markets.
Negotiations
on this subject under the General Agreement on Trade and
Services (GATS) have a chequered history. Both in 1993,
and at the end of resumed negotiations in the Summer of
1995, the level of commitments negotiated was thought by
the United States insufficient to justify opening
their own huge market to all WTO Members on an
most-favoured-nation basis.
Fortunately,
I believe that an agreement is now at hand. Ninety-five
countries have already made provisional market access
commitments on financial services in the two previous
negotiations, and in the negotiations which are due to
end on 12 December we shall see improvements or new
commitments made by something like 40 countries. The
number and the quality of the commitments negotiated are
essential for a positive outcome. But it is equally
essential that we firmly anchor the financial services
sector in general in the multilateral system of rules and
procedures. We cannot afford continuing doubt about the
commitment of the major powers to multilateralism in this
fundamental services sectors.
Many
ask about the possible effects of the recent turbulence
in financial markets in Asia on the WTO negotiations to
liberalize financial services. Partly these reports
spring from confusion about the distinction between
liberalization of market access - which is our
aim - and deregulation - which is not. They are
quite different, and the GATS explicitly recognizes not
only the right of all governments to regulate financial
markets but their absolute freedom to take whatever
prudential measures that are necessary to safeguard the
integrity of those markets. Macro economic policy and
monetary controls are not being negotiated under the
umbrella of the WTO. I am greatly encouraged by the
insistence of all participants in the negotiations that
recent events in the markets have not shaken either their
belief in liberalization or the commitment to this
negotiation.
I
am also greatly encouraged because of the important
successes which the WTO has already achieved this year.
We have demonstrated that we can negotiate and
successfully conclude a path-breaking agreement to free
global telecommunications services - a subject which
had been thought politically unripe and technically too
demanding to be negotiated effectively in the Uruguay
Round. On 15 February of this year 69 countries,
accounting for over 90 per cent of global
telecommunications revenue, committing themselves to
competition in markets which had until recently been
regarded as natural monopolies - where it made no
sense to envisage competition, let alone foreign
competition.
In
this same year we have also reached an agreement to
eliminate tariffs on information technology products.
Together with basic telecommunications, this adds up to a
volume of trade equivalent to that in agriculture, cars
and textiles combined. These agreements symbolize the
rapid advance of the information-based economy, which is
blurring the distinction between services and
manufacturing sectors.
One
last word on a final element of the global infrastructure
I referred to above - transport services. I mention
them as a reason for looking forward, not because these
are triumphs to report. Negotiations on maritime
transport which ended in the Summer of 1995 were
unsuccessful; indeed neither the European Union nor the
United States have accepted any market access commitments
in this sector. The air transport industry is also
something of an exception, because most aviation services
were excluded from the coverage of the agreement
- which may help to account for the fact that it can
cost more to fly from Berlin to Geneva than from Berlin
to New York.
No
doubt we are living through a deep and rapid transition
towards a very different world. No doubt there are
serious short-term and structural problems affecting the
current world economy: such problems must be dealt with
decisively and with a spirit of cooperation by national
governments and by international institutions. There are
so many signs of uncertainty and apprehension in both
advanced and developing countries revolving around
unemployment.
However,
the world in which we live is not static, but highly
dynamic in the extent and pace of change. We are all of
us aboard a fast-moving train - yet there is a
worrying tendency in many countries to look back
nostalgically on the old economy we are leaving behind,
with its many problems of adjustment and transition,
while ignoring the new economic landscape we are rapidly
entering into.
This
is a mistake. It is a mistake to ignore that fact that
world trade - such a powerful engine of economic
growth - is on track to doubling within one decade.
That world output and resources are projected to double
within twenty years. And that the rate of growth of
developing countries will likely be double of that of
developed countries well into the next century. Moreover,
as these developing countries rise economically, their
demand for advanced country products is also rising
- a demand which will become more and more a
stimulus to growth and job creation in the industrialized
world as well.
As
a matter of fact, the employment situation is not the
same in every advanced country. In the United States, for
instance, the advent of new technologies is creating more
jobs - and more highly paid jobs - than it is
destroying; in other words, behind the downsizing there
is an even more powerful process of upsizing taking
place.
It
is also fascinating to see that the political faultline
that ran through two centuries of world politics is
suddenly disappearing. Today, the real debate is not
between Right and Left politics, but right and wrong
policies - a point eloquently made by British Prime
Minister Tony Blair when he observed that ours is "a
generation that claims education, skills and technology
as the instruments of economic prosperity and personal
fulfilment, not old battles between state and
market".
We
cannot underestimate the reality of our interdependence
and the inevitability of globalization. Trade will
continue to grow as a share of national GDP as our
economies become increasingly intertwined - from an
average of 7 per cent in 1950, to 22 per cent today, to
an estimated 50 per cent by 2020.
There
is an artificial, even surreal, quality to the current
debate over globalization - a yearning for a past
which cannot be recreated and a stubborn refusal to
embrace a future which offers so many people so much hope
for a better life. The truth is that today - because
of the enormous advances of new technologies and trade
liberalization - we have the chance of offering to
every nation, including least-developed countries, the
possibility of equal access to education and information,
thus creating the conditions for a society based on
equality of opportunity. Never before have we had such
opportunities, in a context where the market, in all its
different forms, dominates the evolution of the global
economy. Never before has a generation had so many
economic and technological opportunities to create a
better world. If we live up to this challenge we will
enjoy a full share of these unprecedented opportunities.
This
is why we need to develop a new message of confidence for
our publics: a message about the extraordinary
opportunities - and not just the risks - which
our present age of global transformation offers. Is these
any rational alternative to this ongoing process of
global change? Should we stop technological progress
- somehow halt the development of faster airplanes
and computers, or arrest the worldwide spread of
televisions, faxes, and cellular telephones? Should we
consider closing our borders to exports from developing
countries while keeping their borders open for our
exports? Should we seek to slow down or even stop the
industrialization of billions of people, and at the same
time maintain our own growth and security unaltered? Even
if we stop their products, can we also stop their
migration towards our countries?
The
only rational answer is no.
We
do not want to conjure up a divided world, which would
not be characterized by rules-based international
cooperation, but by power-based anarchy. Protectionism
would be the result, and we know that protectionism
- even if it were possible in our ever-more
interconnected world - leads to economic and
political nationalism. Instead of inventing the future,
where liberalization of services and their progress will
have a crucial rôle, we would risk a return to the past,
with its conflicts and its tragedies. What we need is
just wisdom and courage.
|