Editing Tariff (section)

===Free trade and poverty===
In an [[op-ed]] article for ''[[The Guardian]]'' (UK), [[Ha-Joon Chang]] argues that economic downturns in Africa are the result of free trade policies,<ref name="theguardian.com">{{cite news |url=https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2012/jul/15/africa-industrial-policy-washington-orthodoxy |title=Africa needs an active industrial policy to sustain its growth |first=Ha-Joon |last=Chang |date=15 July 2012 |access-date=14 April 2019 |newspaper=The Guardian |archive-date=29 November 2018 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20181129130744/https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2012/jul/15/africa-industrial-policy-washington-orthodoxy |url-status=live}}</ref><ref name="newtimes.co.rw">{{cite web |author=<!--Not stated--> |url=http://www.newtimes.co.rw/section/read/202574 |title=Why does Africa struggle to industrialise its economies? &#124; The New Times &#124; Rwanda |publisher=The New Times |date=2016-08-13 |access-date=2019-10-07 |archive-date=2020-06-07 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200607031858/https://www.newtimes.co.rw/section/read/202574 |url-status=live}}</ref> and elsewhere attributes successes in some African countries such as [[Ethiopia]] and [[Rwanda]] to their abandonment of free trade and adoption of a "developmental state model".<ref name="newtimes.co.rw"/>

Some commentators argue that poor countries and regions that have succeeded in achieving strong and [[sustainable growth]] are those that have become [[mercantilism|mercantilists]], not free traders: China, South Korea, Japan, Taiwan.<ref>{{cite web |last=Krugman |first=Paul |date=31 December 2009 |title=Blog: Macroeconomic effects of Chinese mercantilism |url=https://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/12/31/macroeconomic-effects-of-chinese-mercantilism/ |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200330031741/https://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/12/31/macroeconomic-effects-of-chinese-mercantilism/ |archive-date=30 March 2020 |access-date=14 June 2023 |work=[[The New York Times]]}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |last=Pham |first=Peter |date=March 20, 2018 |title=Opinion: Why Do All Roads Lead To China? |url=https://www.forbes.com/sites/peterpham/2018/03/20/why-do-all-roads-lead-to-china/ |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230503024727/https://www.forbes.com/sites/peterpham/2018/03/20/why-do-all-roads-lead-to-china/ |archive-date=2023-05-03 |access-date=2023-06-14 |website=Forbes}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |last=Subramanian |first=Arvind |date=January 25, 2011 |title=Opinion: Learning from Chinese Mercantilism |url=https://piie.com/commentary/op-eds/learning-chinese-mercantilism |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230430024010/https://www.piie.com/commentary/op-eds/learning-chinese-mercantilism |archive-date=30 April 2023 |access-date=14 June 2023 |website=[[Peterson Institute for International Economics]]}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |author=Professor Dani Rodik |date=June 2002 |title=After Neoliberalism, What? |url=http://drodrik.scholar.harvard.edu/files/dani-rodrik/files/after-neoliberalism-what.pdf |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170214104123/http://drodrik.scholar.harvard.edu/files/dani-rodrik/files/after-neoliberalism-what.pdf |archive-date=2017-02-14 |access-date=2018-09-29}}</ref>

The 'dumping' policies of some countries have also largely affected developing countries. Studies on the effects of free trade show that the gains induced by WTO rules for developing countries are very small.<ref name=Gains>{{cite journal |last1=Ackerman |first1=Frank |title=The Shrinking Gains from Trade: A Critical Assessment of Doha Round Projections |journal=Research in Agricultural and Applied Economics |series=Working Paper No. 05-01 |date=2005 |doi=10.22004/AG.ECON.15580 |s2cid=17272950}}</ref> This has reduced the gain for these countries from an estimated {{US$|long=no|539 billion}} in the 2003 LINKAGE model{{Further explanation needed|date=November 2024}} to {{US$|long=no|22 billion}} in the 2005 GTAP model. The 2005 LINKAGE version also reduced gains to 90 billion.<ref name=Gains/> As for the "[[Doha Round]]", it would have brought in only {{US$|long=no|4 billion}} to developing countries (including China...) according to the GTAP model.<ref name=Gains/> However, it has been argued that the models used are actually designed to maximise the positive effects of trade liberalisation, that they are characterised by the absence of taking into account the loss of income caused by the end of tariff barriers.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://fordschool.umich.edu/rsie/workingpapers/Papers476-500/r489.pdf |title=Computational Analysis of Multilateral Trade Liberalization in the Uruguay Round and Doha Development Round |date=December 8, 2002 |author=Drusilla K. Brown |author2=Alan V. Deardorff |author3=Robert M. Stern |author-link2=Alan Deardorff |access-date=November 18, 2018 |archive-date=September 22, 2017 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170922013707/http://fordschool.umich.edu/rsie/workingpapers/Papers476-500/r489.pdf |url-status=live}}</ref>