BWorld 71, Free trade and higher income

* This is my article in BusinessWorld last Friday.

Among the benefits of free trade, besides having tariffs as low as possible, if not zero, is higher income for the people. There are several ways by which this takes place.

First, free trade expands the choices and options of the local consumers and producers in the economy, both in prices and product quality. Thus, a rice farmer will have more choices where to get his new farm tractor, harvester, and fertilizer and this greatly expands his productivity while reducing crop wastes and losses. Competing suppliers from different countries will offer as low prices and/or better quality as possible to secure more buyers.

Second, free trade creates high levels of goodwill among other countries. Allowing them to export as much as they can at zero or very low tariff rates makes many of them to open up and liberalize their imports from that country or economy. Only goods that can affect public health and safety will be barred or subjected to heavy regulations. Thus, zero or low tariff for shoes, bags and computers but not for guns, bombs, canned food, or medicines with questionable or tainted quality.

Third, free trade invites more foreign visitors and tourists because some products that are heavily taxed and are expensive in their home countries can be found cheaply or abundantly in their destinations. As a result, airlines, hotels, restaurants, malls in the economy expands significantly. Thus, in the case of Hong Kong and Singapore, they import in thousands of containers and “export” in millions or billions of shopping bags when the tourists fly back home to their country.

Here is a sample of economies which have zero or low tariff at most favored nation (MFN) treatment. We will omit discussion about non-tariff barriers (NTBs) at the moment. Three small but dynamic Asian economies lead the pack and two non-EU members, Switzerland and Norway, have lower tariff than the EU average. The Philippines’s tariff rate would approximate the rate of co-members in the ASEAN except Singapore and Brunei. While ASEAN and EU countries have zero tariffs on their co-members in their economic bloc, they impose certain tariffs for other countries outside the bloc (see Table 1).

Japan and the US have also reduced their overall tariff over the past two decades. The Philippines has joined its neighbors in the ASEAN in unilateral trade liberalization but not towards zero rate. It is a mystery why overall tariff has increased after 2006 (4.49% in 2007, 6.48% in 2008, 5.8% in 2009 and 5.62% in 2010). No data is shown in the WB database after 2010.

We now check the income of the countries listed above and added other ASEAN countries. Economies with zero or near zero tariff also have very high per capita income (See Table 2).

There are many other factors of course that explain for the high per capita income of those countries above, like having a rule of law and smaller population. Small population has forced them to open up to global trade via tariff liberalization, otherwise their small volume of consumers and producers will greatly restrict their capacity to expand their income and economic freedom.

The above are lessons for the Philippines and other countries show why pursuing free trade and unilateral liberalization towards zero tariff make a lot of sense. Expanding the economic freedom of their people to have more choices, more options where to buy and sell their various products and services is actually an end in itself.

Protectionism and nationalism are old philosophies that have served their purpose in the last century but will no longer work in the current century and beyond. Governments should learn to take a step back and ease regulation and taxation of trade.

Bienvenido S. Oplas, Jr. is the head of Minimal Government Thinkers and a Fellow of SEANET, both institutes are members of the Economic Freedom Network (EFN) Asia.

---------------

See also:

BWorld 44, Why the Philippines should join the TPP, February 19, 2016 

BWorld 48, On unilateral trade liberalization, March 17, 2016 

BWorld 59, Free trade and Norwegian salmon, May 28, 2016

BWorld 64, The WTO and trade agreements, June 17, 2016 
BWorld 65, PH exports growth from 1960-2014, June 22, 2016

BWorld 68, Criminal justice and Duterte, July 07, 2016 

BWorld 69, Foreign direct investments and Pres. Duterte, July 08, 2016 
BWorld 70, Wind power firms corner billions of FIT money, July 09, 2016

Free Trade 30: Hypocrisy of Opposition to Free Market

A friend, Priscilla Tacujan, wrote a good article published today in the Philippine Star, about economic nationalism in the Philippine Constitution. I shared it in my facebook wall and it attracted a good exchange between me and Stephen P. Cutler, an American security analyst based here in Manila. Posting our exchange with his permission, thanks a lot Steve.

--------

Stephen P. Cutler Nonoy Oplas, thanks for posting. I've heard another, possibly even more damaging effect of the protectionist clauses. The prohibition against foreigners obtaining licenses for professions reduces the growth and skills development brought about by healthy competition. Architects, engineers, lawyers, and the medical profession know that they can be comfortable and complacent in competing only against local talent. They don't have an economic incentive to be among the best in the world. Some strive for that, but the market doesn't reward their efforts since they are too few. Many of the great powers in the world actively seek the honing and sharpening that comes from competitions. That virtually forces improvement among practitioners.

Nonoy Oplas Correct Steve. Lots of hypocrisy in this country, even among the professionals. Filipino doctors and nurses can practice in the US, UK, Canada, Australia, etc. so long as they pass qualifying exams or they get direct hiring, but doctors and nurses there cannot practice here. The same goes for almost all other professions (engineers, dentists, lawyers,...).

On another note, our session in the recently concluded international conference, "Jeju Forum for Peace and Prosperity" in S. Korea, dealt with economic nationalism and why it is wrong, 

Report from our session in Jeju Forum: Economic Prosperity in Asia: Dealing with Economic...

www.efnasia.org

Stephen P. Cutler I recall the loud clamor when a member of the District of Columbia City Council, equivalent to a Kagawad, tried to get more funding for training of people in his district for nursing jobs. He noted that the local hospital wasn't hiring locals, but had to hire a lot of Filipino nurses for the job openings. He was condemned by the Philippine Ambassador and many many others as racist against the Filipinos. If the Councilman had been smart, he'd have asked for an nurse exchange program with the Philippines. That's impossible of course since U.S. people can't be licensed nurses here. That said, the professionals CAN work here, under the guidance and oversight of a locally licensed professional. Thus, the local gets a slice of the fees, and do no real work at all.

Nonoy Oplas Economic protectionism -- against foreign goods and services (professionals) -- is exposed more in our daily lives. Many Filipinos oppose free trade, they want "fair trade" aka protectionism. But many Filipinos benefit from unilateral free trade policy of HK -- no trade negotiations, no hiring of hundreds of trade bureaucrats and trade consultants with hundreds of junkets all over the world (and cost lots of taxpayers money). In HK, all goods are welcome, zero tariff, only local taxes apply. The only goods that are regulated if not prohibited, are those that can harm lives like bombs, guns, poisonous substances, fake medicines, contaminated food and drinks. PH-HK-PH flights could be as high as 30 a day to include flights from NAIA (terminals 1-3), Clark, Cebu, Davao, Iloilo, Kalibo, etc.. The beauty of unilateral free trade yet people lambast free trade.

Stephen P. Cutler Many folks here have such a low opinion of themselves and other Filipinos that they believe we can't compete on the world stage, except for domestic helpers. That's a sad statement, because the underlying foundation is false. Many OFW's in Taiwan and the U.S. and elsewhere are professionals in computers and data management, engineering and so on, and are highly sought after. Free trade will lead to an even more vibrant labor sector. Our people are competent for the world stage. Open it up and let them compete, without having to leave home.

Nonoy Oplas Yes, the enemy within. People who love competition in sports and politics and politicians, yet hate competition in the economy. People who lambast free trade and free market yet hug the free market (if you don't like the price, leave and look for another seller) and bargain prices of Divisoria, Baclaran and tiangge0tiangge. People who lambast capitalism and yet use facebook, twitter and youtube -- ALL are products of capitalism -- for their anti-capitalism paranoia. People who lambast mining and yet do not want to live in caves, who want to enjoy electricity, cell phones, laptops, cars, buses, buildings, etc., ALL of which, zero exception, are products of mining.

That is why I never believe central planning and the central planners. Them in high authority and with PhDs who over-estimate themselves and think they can know and plan things for everybody else. Societies progress because of diversity and spontaneity, innovation and products revolution, never of monotony and central planning.

Meanwhile, here's from our Indian free market friend, Barun Mitra, who was among the discussants in our panel on "Dealing with Economic Nationalism" at the Jeju Forum:

"People trade, companies trade, governments don’t, but governments negotiate trade, and negotiations take many years.

India is not known for manufacturing, more for IT. Perhaps the only country manufacturing automobiles in the 40s after Japan, yet how many Indian car brands do we hear now. Today local car manufacturers survive only because of government support. The infant industry argument only resulted in cronyism.

IT not protected or subsidized, even completely neglected, and they prospered. About 80 percent of our IT products are for exports. Free trade is fair trade. Two sides agree, a win win situation, benefits both buyers and sellers. Economic nationalism is used by politicians to secure themselves. Losers are the people."

Stephen P. Cutler Mitra has some good insights. Tata is a huge company, but doesn't have to go outside India. Tata likely cannot compete with its current product line,which is built for standards that are for the Indian masses, and thus low standard. It doesn't have to be that way.

Go ahead and quote. No problem. Thanks

Nonoy Oplas Thanks Steve. Despite economic protectionism of the PH Constitution, there are some good policies that were innovated, like the FTAA scheme in mining that allows up to 100 percent foreign ownership of mining companies. But the case of Tampakan-SMI shows that while the Consti can be "tweaked", local politicians and bureaucracy, politics of envy, can be a bigger enemy. A company that has passed all the requirements by MGB-DENR, SEC, DTI, BIR, etc., can be stopped from operation by a provincial government.

Also, despite continued consti protectionism, some sectors in the economy simply are not giving up, they grow despite bureaucratism and the politics of envy, PH 1st quarter 2013 growth now the highest among emerging economies and the industrialized world, http://www.interaksyon.com/business/63079/fat-free-economics--economic-growth-and-population-growth

Meanwhile, I am curious -- what is NET inflows of those FDIs? If country A has FDI inflow of $20 B a year but outflow and capital withrawal is $19B, net inflow of only $1B. Compare it with country B with FDI inflow of only $3 B a year but outflow is only $1B or net inflow of $2B. Which is better?

We are always fed with inflows of FDI but we are not fed with outflows. From Priscilla's article, Singapore has inflow of around $60 B a year for 2011-12, India has $30 B a year for 2011-2012. At such FDI inflow, which I think includes portfolio or short, stock market investments, not just long term foreign investments, Singapore should be growing at 6% or more per year. But its growth in 1st Qtr 2013 for instance is only 0.2%. What happened?
--------------

See also:
Free Trade 27: Proposed EU-PH FTA and TRIPS Plus, September 24, 2012 
EMHN 7: Free Trade Improves Public Health, February 26, 2013 
Free Trade 28: Exports and Prosperity, March 11, 2013 
Free Trade 29: The Asian Century, May 28, 2013

EFN Asia 22: Dealing with Economic Nationalism, Jeju Forum

Below is the Rapporteur's Report that I submitted to the organizers of the recently concluded Jeju Forum for Peace and Prosperity 2013. This is posted in the EFN Asia website.

○ Session Outline

Title	Dealing with Economic Nationalism	Session Code	5-A
Time	15:40 – 17:00	Room	A
Moderator: Wan Saiful WAN JAN Presenter: SAM, Rainsy Discussants: CHOI, Byung-il; FENG, Xingyuan; Pham Chi LAN; LIU, Junning; Barun MITRA; Tricia YEOH

○ Key Points by the Presenter

- Economic nationalism is understandable. Early stage of development, there is a need to protect crucial new and small economies, - Cambodia case, probably the poorest of the 10 member Asean countries. There is big disparity in economic development among members. - Asean is creating a free trade zone but it raises lots of concern in Cambodia. It needs a period of time to adopt and prepare before liberalization. - To compete successfully, country needs leadership. Not a matter of ideology but leadership with vision, that promotes national interest, any ideology can promote devt. No prospect for development bec leadership only wants to survive politically. We need to put the house in order first before we face competition. Need physical and social infrastructure. - Cambodia is a banana kingdom with gang and mafia of kleptocracy. One of the world’s most corrupt and underdeveloped countries. - GDP growth of 6% or more is meaningless if the environment is destroyed, social fabric is destroyed due to prostitution and human trafficking, inequitable development. - Free trade can be disruptive and destructive. Cambodia cannot face free trade and free market yet, it must have political democracy first. - Korean ODA for Cambodia is a waste of Korean taxpayers money as human rights is not protected, the gangs and mafia are in power. - Keyword:  political democracy, free market, Cambodia corruption, human rights violation, prostitution

○ Synopsis of Discussants

1. CHOI, Byung-il: - Disagree with Mahathir that countries need protectionism. Economic nationalism is unsustainable. - Many people in Korea complain of imported fish, other food, that we should be self sufficient, but forcing self-sufficiency in food, only few countries can survive. - How to attain econ prosperity, invest in education, liberalize the economy. Good political leadership is also important. 2. Pham Chi LAN: - Protectionist measures rose recently via technical barriers to trade (TBT). Tariffs are going down but various measures like health concerns, environment restrict trade. - Vietnam been a member of the ASEAN since 1995, we experience trade deficit with Asean members plus North Asia, but trade surplus with EU. - FDI about 80 percent coming from East Asia and South East Asia. But mainly for low cost, low tech industries, plus environmental problems. - Asean initiative is good but not enough, E Asian countries need to open up their economies more for Vietnam exports. 3. LIU, Junning: - Economic nationalism is a body of policies that protect certain local interests, requires the imposition of tariffs, restrictions of free trade, Intervention in the name of protecting “national interest”. - Nationalism forces consumers to buy only local producers, trade protectionism, even nationalization of some foreign companies. - Nowadays nationalism is omnipresent especially in dictatorships, currency control. It is costly to consumers because supply of capital, consumer goods becomes higher and costly. - It appeals to national pride, suspicion, fear of foreign goods, but consumers lose. Case of high tariff on foreign made milk. Consumers endure high prices, low or bad, harmful product quality. 4. Tricia YEOH: - Recent growth of Malaysia not at par with neighbors, cost of business is high due to corruption, bureaucracies - 1971 New Economic Policy (NEP) to eradicate poverty, noble, but was meant to protect the Bumiputera, the local elites, the princess of the Earth. It engendered a culture of patronage and cronyism. - Mahathir this morning said the need to protect automotive industry. Such protectionism actually is a waste of government money to protect local industries, bail out of around 69-70 billion Ringgit were lost. - Government role has in the economy has been rising. Previously, private investments was high but since 1998 private investment was less than government investment. - Government-linked corporations(GLCs) account for “approximately 36% and 54% respectively of the market capitalisation of Bursa Malaysia and the Kuala Lumpur Composite Index”. GLCs and GLICs are the major players in the economy. - Malaysian economy is heavily dominated by government, in the areas which are privatised, select individuals are chosen to receive lucrative tenders and contracts. - Cronyism results if government is dominant, give only to friends, monopolies in electricity, telecoms. There is need to remove barriers to trade, make the economy more competitive, control corruption. 5. FENG, Xingyuan: - Trade benefits both players, allows efficient distribution of factors of production. The “infant industry” argument, we should not protect, we will only protect underdevelopment. - Open markets and protection of property rights are key. Also stable currencies to protect foreign investors. - Trade benefits even between unequal economies. President Obama was asking for “balance of trade” with China, meaning China should export less to the US. This is wrong. Trade surplus by China is used to invest and spend by citizens in the US, so deficit is compensated. - US should ask instead that China should open up market in services. - Trade ban campaign of Japanese goods last year, means banning our own development. Like manyJapanese companies are thinking of moving their investments out of China and go somewhere. - Free trade is beneficial to all sides, both buyers and sellers, not only one side. 6. Barun MITRA: - People trade, companies trade, governments don’t, but governments negotiate trade, and  negotiations take many years. - India is not known for manufacturing, more for IT. Perhaps the only country manufacturing automobiles in the 40s after Japan, yet how many Indian car brands do we hear now. - Today local car manufacturers survive only because of government support. The infant industry argument only resulted in cronyism. - India believes industrialization inside, not export orientation, cronyism resulted and it  hurts our own poor people much more than other people - IT not protected or subsidized, even completely neglected, and they prospered. About 80 percent of our IT products are for exports. - Free trade is fair trade. Two sides agree, a win win situation, benefits both buyers and sellers. Economic nationalism is used by politicians to secure themselves. Losers are the people. Sam Rainsy Reactions: - If an economy is poor, unprepared, free trade is destructive. Need for a transitional period to produce positive effects first, before we open up the economy to free trade. - Consider the social and political environment first, control corruption, farmers becoming landless under the name of trade liberalism. Questions 1: Cambodia, how to develop it? 2: What is your vision for prosperity in Cambodia? Sam Raimsy Answer: - First, good leadership and second is education. Cambodia leadership is a mafia, a gang it can destroy a country using liberalism. From communism to democracy, become worse under a mafia. - China and Vietnam, they are socialist but they have developed. They uphold national interest, they have long-term vision. Even non-democrats like Mahathir and Lee Kuan Yew but they have vision. - Education, the war and dictatorships, 3 generations were lost, only low tech investments come. We need to catch up. Barun Answer: - Free trade to be effective and powerful, it has to be unilateral, nothing to negotiate. The most protected industries are also most inefficient, like agriculture. - Pure unilateralism in trade allowed Indian IT to develop, without any government protection. Xingyuan answer. - Look also at HK, low taxes, free trade, there is economic prosperity Choi answer - Protectionism is understandable, to protect the weak, but consider the political economy. - Beneficiaries of nationalism and protectionism are incumbent players. Closing Remarks by German Ambassador to Korea, Rolf Mafael - Building an internal market for asia will build prosperity. - Germany case, global competitiveness, open economy allowed us to survive the recent global financial crisis - Services sector need more liberalization in the EU. We have the same discussion and debate in Europe as you have here on economic nationalism. - Our prosperity depends largely also to our trade with Asia. - Priority is the WTO, multilateral negotiation. - There are indeed social consequences to liberalization, like ensuring labor standards, but this was heavily opposed by many developing countries. - If you step back, 1996-97 vs today, Asia has made big progress. - When the EU-Korea FTA was negotiated, german car industry opposed, but who benefitted later? German car industry, they were able to enter Korean market better. Another beneficiary was the Korean car industry. - Ultimately, customers won in both Korea and Germany. Liberalization will lead to more prosperity

 

○ Policy Implications

- Protection of human rights, controlling corruption, are key for poor economies like Cambodia. - Economic nationalism and protectionism often results in cronyism and corruption, disadvantages the local consumers via higher prices, low quality products and services due to absence or limited competition. - Economic liberalism will benefit consumers, will lead to peace and prosperity. - Unilateral trade liberalization is one option that countries should consider to avoid cronyism, control corruption, directly benefit the people, consumers and producers alike.

○ Rapporteur

Name	Bienvenido “Nonoy” Oplas	Organization/Position	President, Minimal Government Thinkers Inc., Philippines
Mobile Phone	+63 915 8204616	e-mail	minimalgovernment@gmail.com

See also: 

Business 360 7: Jeju Forum for Peace, May 10, 2013 

EFN Asia 19: Chatib Basri as New Finance Minister of Indonesia, May 21, 2013 

Chung ho Kim, Freedom Factory Ltd., May 28, 2013

EFN Asia 20: Liberals Meet Liberals in Seoul, May 29, 2013 

EFN Asia 21: On Think Tank Independence, Jeju Forum, May 31, 2013

EFN Asia 18: Jeju Forum's Economic Panels

* This is my guest post today in the EFN Asia website.

---------

In less than six weeks, I will fly to Seoul, then Jeju, S. Korea, to attend the Jeju Forum for Peace and Prosperity, May 29-31, 2013. The Economic Freedom Network (EFN) Asia will participate in one of the panel discussions on Day 2, and I will be the rapporteur for that panel.

There will be plenty of panel discussions on those 2 1/2 days forum. To accommodate them all, there will be about five simultaneous discussions on each time block. See the list of topics here.

Day 1, May 29, I plan to attend session 1-D, "Cultural Exchange and Tourism Promotion in Asia Pacific Region". To achieve more peace and prosperity in the region and the world in general, mobility of goods and  services/people should be made as free as possible. People will think less of war and conflict provocation if they see the beauty of other places and countries, if they understand the cultural practices in other places and hence, realize the need for more tolerance, to respect diversity among people. Human rights are respected in the process as people learn to be more tolerant of other people's cultural belief and practices, their social and economic aspirations. 

Then on the next panel, I plan to listen to session 2-A, Making Ideas Work: Challenges and Opportunities for Think Tanks in Asia. Many of the co-sponsors and partners of the Jeju Forum are think tanks, government and private. For me, the main purpose of think tanks, Minimal Government Thinkers included, is to explore new ways, more efficient and less costly ways, to attain a particular vision for the country, for the region, and the world. And that vision is a society where people have freedom and a peaceful environment so they can pursue more social and economic prosperity, both for the present and future generations.

Many private think tanks though are constrained by funding. That is why among the biggest think tanks in Asia and the world are government-owned ones, their funding are assured yearly from taxes. One problem here though is that their research agenda and content is subject to explicit or implicit pressure from the politicians and officials of the national government. 

On Day 2 morning, I hope to attend session 3-C, Asia-Pacific Development and the Future of Korean ODA.  I do not believe in the overall effectivity of Official Development Assistance (ODA) as it is a government to government (G2G) transfer of money and resources. If one or both is/are corrupt, then its effectivity in uplifting the lives of poor people in the less-developed country is immediately compromised if not negated. So the main beneficiaries of this G2G transfer are the politicians and officials, employees of the recipient governments. 

I think the best people to people (P2P) transfer of resources is via free trade (goods and services), more foreign investments and tourism. Nonetheless, I have to hear what the speakers have to say on the subject. There could be new things and development in this area. 

Disclosure: I was a former Korea International Cooperation Agency (KOICA) scholar, a two-weeks seminar on "Technology and Policy" in 1996 when I was still working at CPBO, House of Representatives. I enjoyed that seminar, I learned many things, aside from the many trips, hotel transfers, nice food, mountain resort tour, and warm, friendly Korean hosts and tour guides.

Or I might skip this session and attend the session on 3-A, Coping with North Korean Nuclear Quagmire - What Options are Available? I like a quip from a friend in Korea who said, "A dog that barks loud does not bite". Exactly my sentiment, that the war mongering pronouncements by the North Korean leader Kim Jung-Un was more addressed to his countrymen, sort of saying, "My people, we will take on the mighty US and S. Korea militarily, so prepare for more hardships in life." The military confrontation is highly uncertain but economic hardships of the ordinary North Koreans will be a certainty.

A "World Leader's Session" will follow these sessions, before lunch. I think this is where past Prime Ministers or Presidents of some Asian countries will speak in a big plenary hall.

After lunch, I want to hear session 4-A, East Asian Regional Integration with ASEAN as the Driving Force. I think this is a good formulation. East Asia is actually dominated economically by the "big 3" -- China, Japan and S. Korea. But problem is that there are several lingering conflict among them. Like the on-going territorial dispute over small islands between China and Japan, which affects trade and investments on both countries. And the China "big brother" assistance to North Korea, which irritates the people in South Korea. I do not know if previous Japanese colonization of S. Korea is still a bitter memory for ordinary Koreans until now or not.

ASEAN member countries though, have few conflicting issues and have more issues and interests in common. In particular, the ASEAN Free Trade Area (AFTA) that will fully materialize just two years from now, in 2015. ASEAN is about 650 million consumers: About 250 M Indonesians + nearly 100 M Filipinos + nearly 90 M Vietnamese + 68 M Thais + 62 M Myanmars + 30 M Malaysians , these six  countries alone have a combined population of almost 600 M people already. I heard one Malaysian diplomat who defined AFTA as "Agree First, Talk After".

Then, OUR session, the EFN Asia time, from 3:40 - 5:00 pm, session 5-A, Economic Prosperity in Asia: Dealing with Economic Nationalism. The line up of speakers may not have been finalized yet, but a friend from Kuala Lumpur, the President of Institute for Democracy and Economic Affairs (IDEAS), a free market think tank in Malaysia,  Wan Saiful Wan Jan, will be the moderator and I will be the rapporteur.

Wait, is there no inconsistency between session 4-A and 5-A? The former focuses on economic integration while the latter talks about economic nationalism and protectionism? Well, both are realities and happening at the same time. For instance, the Philippine economy will have free trade with its neighbors in the ASEAN but will retain its generally protectionist policy to other countries. 

In a period of global economic uncertainties and financial turmoil, the tendency of many governments is to become more protectionist, restrict imports to "protect local jobs". But what if local jobs and businesses will be more productive if they use cheaper raw materials, machines and capital goods from abroad? And by turning to protectionism, an economy loses the goodwill of other countries that have been its trade partner for many years? These are among the questions and issues that our panel speakers will tackle, directly or indirectly.

In the next round of sessions, I will most likely attend session 6-A, Unraveling the Dynamism of the Asian Economy: Patterns of Cooperation and Conflict in Trade, Finance, and FDI. This will be an appropriate follow up to sessions 4-A and 5-A. Identifying sources of cooperation and conflict -- in trade, finance and foreign direct investments. I would like to believe that in either cases of conflict or cooperation among Asian neighboring economies, the prospect of competition among themselves to attract more foreign trade, more foreign capital and investments, should be in the minds of Asian government officials. This way, they cannot be too rigid and inflexible in their policies to please local players and even local oligarchs. 

Lots of exciting panels to attend and listen to. I am getting more excited to attend the Jeju Forum.

------------

See also:

EFN Asia 14: Conference 2012 Resolution on Populism, November 21, 2012, 

EFN Asia 15: Distortions of Welfare Populism,  January 17, 2013 

EFN Asia 16: Participation in Jeju Forum for Peace 2013, March 19, 2013 

EFN Asia 17: Zubair Malik as President of FPCCI, April 05, 2013

EFN Asia 16: Participation in Jeju Forum for Peace 2013

The Economic Freedom Network (EFN) Asia will be participating in the Jeju Forum for Peace and Prosperity 2013 Conference this coming May 29-31, 2013, to be held at Haevichi Hotel and Resort Jeju, S. Korea. I think this will be the first time that the network  will join this big international conference held yearly in the southern island of Jeju. The Friedrich Naumann Foundation for Liberty (FNF) Korea Office is working with the EFN Asia Secretariat in Bangkok in the network's participation.

This forum was invented in 2001 meant for a regional dialogue to promote peace and prosperity in Asia, the Korean Peninsula in particular. Then it became successful in attracting more regional and international participants, it later became a big international conference held every two years, then made an annual event since 2011.

I have heard and read about this forum in some news reports in the past, but I did not pay much attention to it. I thought it is just an extension dialogue of the famous World Economic Forum (WEF) held annually in Davos, Switzerland.

Early this month, the Regional Programme Officer of FNF for Economic Freedom and Human Rights, Pett Jurapaiboon, invited me to be the rapporteur of one of the panels in the Jeju Forum, and that panel will feature important and known speakers within EFN Asia.  I immediately said Yes to Pett. Well, my batting average for all FNF invites, whether here in Manila or the regional office, has been 100 percent so far. I will be a rapporteur, not speaker, in a panel on Economic Prosperity in Asia : Dealing with Economic Nationalism, to be held in the afternoon of May 30. Thanks much, Pett. I am very excited to attend this big international conference.

My interest in joining this and other regional events like the EFN Asia annual conferences, is simple: learn more how we can achieve regional and global peace and prosperity. Peace and economic prosperity.

Enough of war, armed conflict and militarization of disputes that can be peacefully resolved through diplomacy and serious, honest dialogues. Enough of spending huge amount of taxpayers money to buy heavy instruments of war and destruction.

Enough of economic restrictions and prohibitions that create poverty. If people, rich and poor alike, want to start a food shop ala "carinderia" in the Philippines or a modest housing or big residential condo, so be it. Governments should not put too many regulations, restrictions and taxes for these useful human endeavor that create jobs and provide useful goods and services to the people.

So EFN Asia's chosen topic, dealing with economic nationalism, is timely and important. Economic nationalism and protectionism means only one thing: reduction of choices and options, reduction of human freedom, to choose products and services that can best serve their personal and enterprise needs and priorities. When national governments say to its people, "You cannot buy these goods from other countries at these prices. Better buy only from locally-made products, or buy the imported ones at high prices and limited quantity", that is limiting choice and freedom.

The same way, when national governments also declare to its citizens, "You cannot study or work abroad unless you comply with these requirements..." and list down a dozen prerequisites, taxes and fees to pay as if one is applying to be a criminal abroad, that too, is limiting choice and freedom. Some poor job applicants to work abroad become poorer as they sell some personal and family properties so they can pay those multiple fees and taxes, both to the government and the favored job placement agencies and corporations that were accredited by the government.

The topics in the 2 1/2 days forum are wide. To accommodate those different topics, four to five simultaneous discussions will be held. Here is the list of topics on the afternoon of Day 2, May 30.

I will be writing more updates about this forum in the coming weeks.
-------------

See also:

EFN Asia 12: Day 1 of Conference 2012, November 07, 2012

EFN Asia 13: Welfare Populism and Poverty, November 13, 2012

EFN Asia 14: Conference 2012 Resolution on Populism, November 21, 2012, 

EFN Asia 15: Distortions of Welfare Populism,  January 17, 2013