National Export Strategy
Subtitle:
International Best Practice
Presenter:
Date:
23 January 2013
Countries selected
• Philippines: comprehensive strategy, backed by Export
Development Act
• Jamaica: NES integrated into Vision 2030 Jamaica
• Malaysia: comprehensive strategy, linking Bumiputera
and Women development to special export
programmes
• Uganda: NES revised with assistance from WTO and
ITC; target sector matrix
• Canada: Global Commerce Strategy and federal,
regional, provincial linkages; consultative White Paper
approach
• Ireland: held to be one of world’s most successful
Countries selected continued
• United States:
– Target set by President Obama; federal and state
programmes and need for co-ordination
• United Kingdom:
– Targets set by Cabinet, with highly consultative White
Paper process following for exports
• Australia:
– Resourced-based plus industry: strong focus on Asia
• Chile:
– Also resource-based plus industry; also strong focus on
Asia
Background legislation/strategy
• Philippines: Export Development Act 1994 and 3-year PEDP
against Philippine Development Plan
• Malaysia: Matrade Act and 5-year plan against 3rd Industrial
Master Plan
• Jamaica: NES part of Vision 2030 Jamaica
• Uganda: Statute established Uganda Export Promotion
Board; NES 5-year medium-term
• Ireland: Enterprise Ireland plans against National
Development Plan 2007–2013 and Action Plan for Jobs
Background legislation/strategy
• Canada: Global Commerce Strategy, part of Advantage
Canada at national level; regional and provincial strategies
• USA: National Export Initiative launched by Pres. Obama
2010, President’s Export Promotion Cabinet, NES in 2011
• UK: Plan for Growth 2011 with 6-monthly detailed reportbacks.
• Australia: Australian Trade Commission Act 1985 – Austrade
• Chile: ProChile – agency of Ministry of Foreign Affairs
Strategic export goals
• Philippines:
– Specific export growth (+40%) and value targets
(+US$120 billion) over 3-year plan
– Core product strategies: move up value chain;
capture higher-value processes in global supply
chains and develop product linkages for natural,
organic and certification-enabled products.
– Core market strategies: use FTAs, target highgrowth markets, attract supply chain nodes to
Philippines
Strategic export goals
• Malaysia:
– IMP3 sets specific increase in export value to
RM 1.4 trillion in 2020 (from RM 694 billion in 2011)
– Target sectors, both resource- and non-resource based
– Promoting Malaysian brands (not Brand Malaysian)
– Improving compliance with standards
– Enterprise development, including GLCs and SMEs
– Matrade’s strategic plan 2011-2015 has some 20 initiatives
to implement IMP3 objectives
Strategic export goals
• Uganda:
– NES developed from existing national plans such
as Poverty Eradication Action Plan (PEAP) and
National Trade Policy (NTP).
– NES 2008-2012 set specific export values at US$ 5
billion/year
– Exports to contribute more than 16 % to GDP
– Per capita export ration of US$ 200 by 2012.
Strategic export goals
• Ireland:
– Sector focus: food and beverages; industrial,
clean-tech and life science; and software and
other services
– Enterprise Ireland’s strategies: promoting startups; stimulating innovation; helping to drive
competitiveness; supporting access to finance;
fostering leadership and management capability.
Strategic export goals
• Canada:
– National goals through DFAIT: continue Global Commercial
Strategy by links with emerging and high-growth markets;
branding “Canada”
– Regional and provincial goals: more sector orientated
according to specific resources and needs.
• United States:
– “We will double our exports over the next five years…”
President Obama, launching the NEI in 2010.
Strategic export goals
• United Kingdom:
– Plan for Growth called for: most competitive tax system in
G20; UK one of best places in Europe to start, finance and
grow a business; encourage investment and exports as
route to more balanced economy; created more educated
workforce that is most flexible in Europe
– Chancellor of Exchequer: double exports to
£1 trillion by 2020
– Prime Minister: additional 100 000 UK firms exporting by
2020.
Institutional framework
• Philippines, Malaysia, Jamaica, Uganda, Ireland, UK,
Australia and Chile:
– Central export promotion department/agency reporting to
or part of major government department/ministry such as
International Affairs, Foreign Trade, or Trade and Industry.
– In Philippines, Uganda public/private sector body to
develop plans
– Some, such as Enterprise Ireland and Matrade, are more
commercially orientated than others. NB these regarded as
the more successful TPOs
Institutional framework
• Canada:
– National export promotion body as part of DFAIT based on
Trade Commissioner Service
– Regional development bodies, across several provinces,
such as Atlantic Canada Opportunities Agency (ACOA),
have own programmes and link up to federal and down to
individual provincial agencies
– Provincial government departments/agencies may provide
own information and assistance programmes
Institutional framework
• United States:
– No single export promotion organisation at any level
– Trade Promotion Co-ordinating Committee (TPCC) coordinates federal agencies, mostly federal government
departments
– President’s Export Promotion Cabinet includes key
members of TPCC plus White House advisors; created
additional layer?
– International Trade Administration (ITA) of Dept. of
Commerce lead federal agency in non-farming export
promotion
– Many states have own export development bodies, both
public and private sector
Institutional framework: NES and
FDI
• Philippine Bureau for Export Trade, Jamaican
Promotions Corp., have no specific responsibility for
FDI promotion.
• Ireland: Enterprise Ireland for export development,
Industrial Development Agency for FDI promotion
• Australia and Chile: Austrade and ProChile for NES
and FDI
• Canada: ACOA both NES and FDI
• UK: UK Trade and Investment is responsible for NES
and FDI
Financing NES and programmes
• In all countries, financed at varying levels through
central budgets
• In federal/provincial situations, e.g. Canada, United
States, Australia, additional funding at regional,
provincial, state level
• Developing countries, e.g. Jamaica, Philippines,
Uganda, solicit additional NES funding/assistance
from international and foreign agencies, e.g. ITC and
CBI (Netherlands)
Export development
• Product development:
– Philippines: added-value focus
– Uganda: capacity and added-value; sector matrix
– IDA Ireland: sector focus on high-value and
services
– Canada through regional and provincial agencies,
sector focused
– UK: through centres of excellence and innovation
for advanced manufacturing
– Australia: national and regional programmes;
value-added focused
Export development
• Capacity building:
– Philippines and Uganda: specific capacity-building
per sector
– IDA Ireland: links to tertiary educational
institutions
– Canada through regional and provincial agencies
with links to educational institutions
– UK through educational and training links
– Australia: national and regional programmes and
educational and training links
Export development
• Market development/market access:
– Philippines and Uganda: ensure use of FTAs and
maintain relationships
– Canada: at federal level through DFAIT, negotiate
more FTAs
– UK: encourage more EU EPAs, and open trade
policies
– Australia and Chile: Special programmes focusing
on Asia and other high-growth markets
Priority sectors
• Philippines: IT and BPO, electronics, agribusiness,
minerals, shipbuilding, auto parts, garments, textiles,
homestyle products
• Jamaica: agribusiness, beverages, nutraceuticals,
non-bauxite minerals, arts and crafts, services
• Malaysia: electrical, electronic and ICT; processed
food, biotech and Halaal; professional and business
services; transport, logistics and ,machinery;
defence; packaging
• Uganda: coffee, tea and other agribusiness foods;
cotton and textiles, flowers; services; commercial
crafts; added-value manufactures
Priority sectors
• Ireland: food and beverages; clean-tech and life
sciences; software and services.
• Canada: vary slightly from region to region; include
high value-added and high-tech manufactures; ICT
and other services; renewable energy systems and
products; specialised technologies (ocean, mining, oil
and gas)
• US: focus on criteria, such as export-intensive
sectors; contribution to employment;
competitiveness; integration into global supply
chains
Priority sectors
• UK: advanced manufacturing; construction; digital
and creative industries; health and life sciences;
logistics; mid-sized businesses; professional and
business services; space sector; tourism
• Australia: ICT; agricultural science and food
technology and processing; technology, services and
processing for resources sector; tourism
Exporter development services
• All the TPAs provide a range of services,
including:
– Information
– Advice
– Training
– Promotional activities, such as trade fairs and
trade missions (Matrade emphasises)
– Trade leads, introductions
• Level or depth of service varies according to
resources
Exporter development services
• Delivery methods:
– Website: all use this, with Matrade exceptional
(on-line training, webinars, etc.); Canada and
Austrade excellent cross linkages
– Face-to-face counselling: extensive with ACOA,
Enterprise Ireland, Matrade, UK; also Austrade;
JAMPRO
– Telephone and e-mail: most use this; Matrade has
sms warning service
– Hard-copy publications: usually downloadable
from web site
Cost of services
• Most basic information services free of
charge.
• Specific information free from Matrade,
ACOA, UKTI, ProChile, UEPB, JAMPRO,
Enterprise Ireland and BETP (Philippines)
• Austrade and ITA (US) charge for specialised
information and research services.
Country branding
• Considered important by:
– Philippines (brand to be developed)
– Jamaica: ‘Brand Jamaica’ element in Vision 2030
Jamaica
– Uganda: country image-building; no specific brand
– Canada: positioning as energy supplier of choice
– Chile: ‘Chile: All Ways Surprising’
– Australia: ‘Australia Unlimited’
• Matrade promotes Malaysian individual
brands
Points for consideration from study
• Export initiative led from the top e.g.
President Obama, but also Philippines and
some others
• Top-level co-ordination where several levels of
government involved e.g. President’s Export
Promotion Cabinet in US; ‘Business Canada’
web site linking all government departments
and agencies with export programmes
Points for consideration from study
227 Lange St| Nieuw Muckleneuk| 0181
P.O. Box 11214 | Hatfield | 0028
Tel: (+27) 12 433 9340/1| Fax: (+27) 12 433 9344