|
Newsletter:
May 2005
Post-MFA Scenario :
Opportunities and Challenges World trade in textiles and
clothing amounted to US $ 385 billion in 2003, of which textiles accounted
for 43% (US $ 169 bn) and the remaining 57% (US $ 226 bn) for clothing. The
United States and European Union alone accounted for more than half of the
almost $400 billion in world imports of textiles and clothing in 2003, and
developing countries for almost two-thirds of world exports. Import Trends in USA In 1990, restrained or MFA
countries contributed as much as 87% (US $ 29.3 bn) of total US textile and
clothing imports, whereas Caribbean Basin Initiative (CBI), North American
Free Trade Area (NAFTA), Africa Growth and Opportunity Act (AGOA) and ANDEAN
countries together contributed 13% (US $ 4.4 bn). Thereafter, there has been
a decline in exports by restrained countries; the share of preferential
regions more than doubled to reach 30%
(US $ 26.9 bn) of total imports by USA. The composition of imports
of clothing and textiles by USA in 2003 was 80% (US $ 71 bn) and 20% (US $
18 bn), respectively. Asia was the principal sourcing region for imports of
both textiles and clothing by USA. Latin American region stood at second
position with a share of 12% (US $ 2.2 bn) and 26% (US $ 18.5 bn),
respectively, for textiles and clothing imports, by USA. Import Trends in EU
EU overtook USA as the world’s largest market for textiles and clothing. Intra-EU trade accounted for about 40% (US $ 40 bn) of total clothing imports and 62% (US $ 32.5 bn) of total textile imports by EU. Asia dominates EU market in both clothing and textiles, with 30% (US $ 30 bn) and 17% (US $ 8 bn) share, respectively. Central and East European countries hold a market share of 11% (US $ 11.3 bn) in clothing and 7.5% (US $ 4 bn) in textiles imports of EU. As regards preferential
suppliers, the growth of trade between EU and Mediterranean countries,
especially Egypt and Turkey, was highest in 2003. As regards individual
countries, China accounted for little over 5% (US $ 2.8 bn) of EU’s
imports of textiles and over 12% (US $ 12.4 bn) of clothing imports. Import Trends in Canada Amongst the leading suppliers of textiles and clothing to Canada, USA had the highest share of over 31% (US $ 8.4 bn), followed by China (21% - US $ 1.8 bn) and EU (8% - US $ 0.6 bn). India was ranked at fourth position and was ahead of other exporters like Mexico, Bangladesh and Turkey, with a market share of 5.2% (US $ 0.45 bn). Potential Gains
It may be noted that clothing sector would offer higher gains than the textile sector, in the post MFA regime. Countries like Mexico, CBI countries, many of the African countries emerged as exporters of readymade garments without having much of textile base, utilizing the preferential
tariff arrangement under the quota regime. Besides, countries like
Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, and Cambodia emerged as garment exporters due to cost
factors, in addition to the quota benefits. Thus, it may be concluded that
these countries are likely to lose their market share in the future
scenario. Resource Based AdvantagesIt may be said that
countries like China, USA, India, Pakistan, Uzbekistan and Turkey have
resource based advantages in cotton; China, India, Vietnam and Brazil have
resource based advantages in silk; Australia, China, New Zealand and India
have resource based advantages in wool; China, India, Indonesia, Taiwan,
Turkey, USA, Korea and few CIS (Commonwealth of Independent States)
countries have resource based advantages in manmade fibers. In addition, China, India,
Pakistan, USA, Indonesia have capacity based advantages in the textile
spinning and weaving. China is cost competitive with regard to manufacture
of textured yarn, knitted yarn fabric and woven textured fabric. Brazil is
cost competitive with regard to manufacture of woven ring yarn. India is
cost competitive with regard to manufacture of ring-yarn, O-E yarn, woven
O-E yarn fabric, knitted ring yarn fabric and knitted O-E yarn fabric. According to Werner
Management Consultants, USA, the hourly wage costs in textile industry is
very high for many of the developed countries. Even in developing economies
like Argentina, Brazil, Mexico, Turkey and Mauritius, the hourly wage is
higher as compared to India, China, Pakistan and Indonesia. Winners & Losers
From the above analysis, it
may be concluded that China, India, Pakistan, Taiwan, Hong Kong, Brazil,
Indonesia, Turkey and Egypt would emerge as winners in the post quota
regime. The market losers in the short term (1-2 years) would include CBI
countries, many of the
sub-Saharan African countries, Asian countries like Bangladesh and Sri
Lanka. The market losers in the
long term (by 2014) would include high cost producers, like EU, USA, Canada,
Mexico, Japan and many east Asian countries. The determinants of increase /
decrease in market share in the medium term would however depend upon the
cost, quality and timely. India and China
It is estimated that in the
short term, both China and India would gain additional market share
proportionate to their current market share. In the medium term, however,
India and China would have a cumulative
market share of 50%, in both textiles
and garment imports by USA. It is estimated that India would have a market
share of 13.5% in textiles and 8% in garments in the USA market. With regard
to EU, it is estimated that the benefits are mainly in the garments sector,
with China taking a major share of 30% and India gaining a market share of
8%. The potential gain in the textile sector is limited in the EU market
considering the proposed further enlargement of EU. It is estimated that
India would have a market share of 8% in EU textiles market as against the
China’s market share of 12%. Critical Factors that Need AttentionApart from low cost labour, other factors that are having impact on final consumer cost are relative interest cost, power tariff, structural anomalies and productivity level. It is also noted that countries that would emerge as globally competitive would have significantly consolidated supply chain. Manufacturers need to
sharpen their competitive edge by lowering the cost of operations through
efficient use of production inputs and scale operations. Besides, there are
needs for rationalization of charges, levies related to usage of export
logistics to remain cost competitive. Logistics and supply chain would also
play a crucial role as timely delivery would be an important requirement for
success in international trade. Technology would play a lead role to improve quality and productivity levels. Internationally, trading in textile and garment sector is concentrated in the hands of large retail firms. Majority of them are looking for few vendors with bulk orders and hence opting for vertically integrated companies. This would also bring down the turn around time and improve quality. Industry players should also improve upon their soft skills, viz., design capabilities, textile technology, management and negotiating skills. In addition, the industry needs to invest for creating brand equity, supply chain management and apparel industry education. The need of the hour therefore is to evolve a well chalked out strategy, aimed at improvement in the levels of productivity and efficiency, quality control, faster product innovation, quick response to changes in consumer preferences and the ability to move up in the value chain by building brand names and acquiring channels of distribution. Conclusion
It is believed the quota
regime has frozen the market share, providing export opportunities even for
high cost producers. Thus, in the free trade regime, the pattern of imports
in the quota countries would undergo changes. The issues that would govern
the market share in the post quota regime would eventually be productivity,
raw material base, quality, cost of inputs, including labour, design skills
and operation of economies of scale. It is believed that quotas, by limiting the supply of goods have kept export prices artificially high. Thus, it is estimated that there would be price war in the post quota regime, with competitive price cuts. It is assumed that quota
restrictions would continue beyond 2005 in various forms. There would be
non-tariff barriers as well. Standards related to health, safety,
environment, quality of work life and child labour would gain further
momentum in international trade in textiles and clothing. |