Documenti di Didattica
Documenti di Professioni
Documenti di Cultura
I. Introduction
Special Economic Zones (SEZs) are defined as geographical areas, governed by one oversight management body, that offer special trade incentives to firms who choose to physically locate within them. Many countries employ their own variations of these special enclaves, and in doing so use their own terminology to describe them. For example, Mexico refers to its zones as maquiladoras, Ghana, Cameroon, and Jordan have industrial free zones, the Philippines calls its economic zones special export processing zones, and Russia has free economic zones. Despite the differences in nomenclature, each SEZ operates to increase trade throughout its respective region by offering special trade incentives to stimulate local and foreign investment within the region. The first modern special economic zone was created in Puerto Rico in 1942. Since then, 135 countries, many of them emerging markets, have developed over 3,000 zones. Their development has helped to improve global trade relations and has created over 70 million jobs and hundreds of billions of dollars in trade revenue. Special Economic Zones are generally implemented to meet fiscal, social, and infrastructure policy rationales. The most important fiscal goal of an SEZ is to facilitate economic growth through the use of reduced tariffs and more efficient customs controls. They are also essential tools for companies seeking to cut costs and improve inventory efficiency, and they help developing nations rework poor, inefficient trade policies and dilapidated or non-existent infrastructure. Part II of this Briefing Paper describes the different types of SEZs available to host countries, Part III and IV discuss the physical and regulatory characteristics of these zones, Part V describes the different incentives associated with SEZs, Part VI addresses the public and private nature of SEZ development and oversight, and Parts VII and VIII review the advantages and disadvantages of using an SEZ as a trade tool.
provide the same degree of tax benefits or regulatory leniency. They instead provide a functional advantage to investors seeking to capitalize on the economies of scale that a geographic concentration of production and manufacturing can bring to a trade region. These zones are beneficial to a host country, if they are successful, because the host country does not have to provide reduced tariffs or regulations but it still benefits from increased trade to the region. Hybrid EPZs are also geographically delimited zones, but they are broken down into specialized zones that cater to specific industries. In a hybrid EPZ, all industries use the general zones central resources, but each industry also operates within its own zone created to streamline specialized processes unique to those industries. An example is the Lat Krabang Industrial Estate in Thailand where all investors have access to the general trade area, but within it is a specialized, exportprocessing zone that only certain export-based investors may utilize. Sometimes these specialized areas are actually fenced off, while other times they are fully integrated within the general SEZ area.
C. Enterprise Zones
Enterprise Zones not only provide manufacturing or production benefits like other SEZs, but they also provide unique benefits of local, centralized development efforts. They are generally created by national or local governments to revitalize or gentrify a distressed urban area. The Empowerment Zone in Chicago is an example of an Enterprise Zone. It was created to revitalize certain south and west Chicago neighborhoods and bring trade to the area by increasing public safety, providing better job training, creating affordable housing, and fostering cultural diversity. If a specific industry is well suited for growth in an enterprise zone, it may take on characteristics of an EPZ or a hybrid EPZ, but the Zones purpose in promoting trade is secondary to its goal of gentrification and revival. These zones use greater economic incentives than EPZslike tax incentives and financial assistanceto revitalize the area by bringing trades into the zone that will spur organic, localized development and improve local inhabitants quality of life. This organic growth model assumes that improvement of a regions industry and trade begins at the individual neighborhood level.
D. Single Factories
Single Factories are special types of SEZs that are not geographically delineated, meaning they dont have to locate within a designated zone to receive trade incentives. They instead focus on the development of a particular type of factory or enterprise, regardless of location. A host countrys goal in utilizing a single factory model is to create specialization in a specific industry. A country that desires to create an export concentration in a specific industry would use a single factory model to promote trade and growth in just that industry, giving each factory specializing in that trade economic incentives. One of the most notable single factory examples is the maquiladora in Mexico. Here, factories specialize in the importation of foreign merchandise on a temporary basis where workers assemble or manufacture specific goods and then ship them out to other nations.
E. Freeports
Some zones specialize more in human capital goods and services such as call centers and telecommunication processing rather than manufacturing-based industries. Freeports are typically very expansive zones that encompass many different goods and service-related trade activities like travel, tourism, and retail sales. The variation of products and services available to a Freeport cause them to be more integrated with the host countrys economy. Most encourage a fully integrated life on-site for those who work in the Freeport, as opposed to just using the SEZ for manufacturing, production and shipping. Examples of these zones can be found in India and the Philippines where large military bases have been converted into Freeports that now function as specialized cities.
Koreas International City on the island of Cheju is another example of a Freeport in use. People live and work on the island and use the Freeport as a draw for high technology, tourism, and financial products industries.
F. Specialized Zones
In addition to Enterprise Zones and Freeports, Specialized Zones have been established to promote highly technical products and services unique to an industry. Many of these zones focus on the production and promotion of science and technology parks, petrochemical zones, highly technical logistics and warehousing sites, and airport-based economies. For example, Dubai Internet City is a specialized zone that focuses solely on the development of software and internet-based services. The Labuan Offshore Financial Centre in Malaysia is another example of a specialized zone that caters mostly to the development of off-shore financial services.
Some of the incentives now offered by many SEZ programs include provisions for commercial and professional activities, allow zone developers to supply utilities to the zone, allow for private instead of public development, and relax minimum export requirements and labor and environmental laws. In contrast, older regulations only provided incentives for government-developed SEZs that focused on traditional manufacturing activities. Even though the benefits of these more lenient regulations have helped to draw global corporations looking for cost-effective ways to grow businesses and improve a host countrys total foreign trade revenue, they sometimes come at the expense of government control and oversight over economic development. For example, once private development of SEZs was allowed, host governments lost a certain amount of day-to-day control over SEZ operations. SEZ approval processes have also changed over time. Many SEZs were originally approved by a single government board using an arduous approval process that cost a great deal of time and money. The burdensome process frustrated investors and often thwarted plans to bring new business to the host country. Today, many SEZs are approved by a more streamlined registration process in which applications meeting specified criteria are generally approved systematically. Indias recent regulatory reforms provide an example of the changes that some countries have adopted to streamline SEZ regulation. In 2000, India introduced formal regulations for SEZ development within the country to overcome the originally unclear, politically based procedures for SEZ implementation. However, these new regulations were still too cumbersome and confusing for foreign investors to follow, so in 2005, India reformed its SEZ regulations in a new SEZ Act of India that provided for quicker approvals and more transparent management of SEZs to promote exports and FDI in India. The new Act provides a regulatory environment that governs standards like SEZ size, development and oversight. Once the proposed SEZ meets the Acts criteria of proper proposal submission, financial requirements, and certification of sufficient utility access, an SEZ can be set up anywhere in the country. Like other aspects of special zones, each zone has its own unique regulatory body. Some zones, like the Philippines, use one governing board like the Philippine Economic Zone Authority to oversee all activities within the zone. Other zones use multiple bodies to oversee unique aspects of regulation, planning, and promotion of SEZs like Indias three-tier administration consisting of a Board of Approval, a Unit Approval Committee, and a Zone Development Commissioner to oversee the SEZ Act and ensure its proper implementation. There are advantages and disadvantages to both systems. Single governing boards overseeing every aspect of an SEZ have ultimate authority, as there is no other body to endorse its decisions. These circumstances provide no other authority check or idea generation. On the other hand, governing bodies with multiple boards can help balance control and decisions, but can run into differing points of views and conflicts of interest that slow down or totally obstruct an SEZ proposal, or frustrate successful SEZ operations.
V. SEZ Incentives
The purpose of an SEZ is to provide global corporations with an incentive to invest in the development and infrastructure of a foreign country through the use of a tax-friendly environment. Reducing a companys income taxes will have a direct positive benefit on earnings, allowing the investing company to profit from its foreign investment within the SEZ. Most of the benefits that investors look for in an SEZ are economic benefits such as tax holidays, reduced tax-rates, and duty-free imports. Some of these benefits are permanent and last as long as the investor does business in the SEZ, but other economic benefits are reduced over time. For instance, Indias new SEZ Act allows for a corporate income tax holiday that is gradually reduced from 100% tax abatement to 0% over 15 years, but Namibia has promoted its SEZ using a 100%, 99-year tax abatement. Not all benefits are financial, however. Procedural benefits like quicker customs processing and reduced regulatory requirements on labor and environmental policies also lure corporations to SEZs.
The SEZs host country government also benefits when a corporation chooses to locate within its SEZ location. To the extent that taxes are not completely abated, a host country earns income tax revenue from the corporate earnings within the country. It also earns income from import duties if not totally abated and charges on zone output levels. Depending on who actually oversees the SEZ the government or a private entity, or boththe operator also earns fees on land and facility leases within the zone. In-zone benefits are not the only benefits derived from investment in an SEZ. The improved infrastructure and quality of life that result from successful SEZs improve the surrounding regions economy. For example, the Shenzhens growth from a sleepy fishing village to an economic powerhouse has provided its citizens with more opportunities for employment and better access to services than the fishing village was able to provide before the establishment of the SEZ. These SEZ benefits do not come without costs, however. The host government or private operator of the zone usually incurs its own costs of oversight and administration of the zone. Costs of ensuring that those outside the zone do not use the SEZs economic or regulatory benefits is also a high cost of oversight for any SEZ. The developer of the SEZ also has the enormous task and cost of developing the infrastructure needed to attract foreign investors, because insufficient means of transporting SEZ-processed goods to their destinations dilutes the SEZs overall economic benefits. Often, the high costs of infrastructure development are absorbed by a host government desperate to attract foreign investment. The government might subsidize the cost of development in order to lure a developer into the region. Therefore, before a host country approves an SEZ development, it must weigh the benefits that an SEZ might bring to the country in trade revenues against the total costs of SEZ implementation, including the cost of construction and long-term operation.
for infrastructure development (roads, utilities, etc.), local country expertise, and additional financial support. Local governments also aid in assembling the large land acreages needed to create a geographically-based SEZ. For example, the Pomeranian Special Economic Zone is a unique SEZ development in Poland that has been created using an assemblage of public land and existing infrastructure along with new private construction by global investors. This kind of public-private partnership helps reduce costs for both parties and improves the economic returns of the SEZ. Both parties benefit from the initial resources each provides to the development, and also from the others long-term involvement in SEZ. The developer earns the right to market and use the SEZs tax incentives and regulatory benefits to grow its investment, while the government attracts international businesses that provide FDI revenue and investing expertise to the host country.
by providing infrastructure capital and tax subsidies must ensure that they recover their costs in doing so. Some SEZ developments have cost the host country more to build than they bring in trade revenues, negating the benefits the trade region brings to the country. Some academics have referred to this practice as a race to the bottom. For example, Namibia offered greater economic and regulatory concessions to foreign investors than its neighboring countries of South Africa and Madagascarin the form of 99-year tax exemptions, water and electricity subsidies, and relaxed labor standardsas a way to compete for SEZ investors. While Namibia eventually won the contract, it did not result in an overall social or economic net benefit to the country. This kind of strategy produced a downward spiral in SEZ conditions across the continent as South African countries competed with each other by promoting reduced regulation and increased economic incentives. As a result, foreign investors reaped all the benefits of the competition while the host countries absorbed all the costs. Indirect costs of SEZ development should also not be overlooked. New and economically profitable SEZ areas can still cause social problems if they develop at the expense of the surrounding nonSEZ areas. An SEZ development can socially cannibalize its surroundings, diverting valuable resources into the SEZ that those living on the outside depend on to survive. These resources can be as simple as grocery stores and medical facilities and as complicated as high-tech jobs. The bottom line is that the creation of an SEZ development to better one sector of a countrys economy at the expense of another will widen the gap between the more prosperous living within SEZ areas and the poor living outside the SEZ, hindering the true net gain of the development. Poor labor standards are also a prevalent problem in SEZ developments. The alluring volume of international trade traffic, combined with the other relaxed custom, taxation, and environmental standards, leads many zones to overlook proper labor requirements that keep employees safe, healthy, and competitive. High traffic trade zones are most cost-effective when they employ lowskilled, low cost assembly-line workers. Historically, many of these employees have been paid extremely low wages to do repetitive skills in pollution-filled environments. Host country governments also have been known to suppress unions and workers rights groups to prevent employees from demanding better conditions. Not surprisingly, some of the most successful SEZs in China were actually totally exempt from national labor laws when they were first created in the 1980s. Zimbabwe and Namibia also excluded provisions of their nations labor acts when they initiated national EPZ laws in the early 1990s, drawing immediate criticism from the global human rights community. Namibia claimed that the avoidance of labor standards was absolutely necessary in drawing much needed foreign investment into the economically depressed country. Maquiladoras in Mexico are also very well known for their abhorrent labor conditions, including poor working environments, inadequate training, use of hazardous materials, and lack of knowledge about protective equipment. Gender inequality and the exploitation of female workers is another unfortunate product of SEZ development. Females originally accounted for 6070% of the SEZ workforce because many companies regard women as better suited for the repetitive textile- and electronic-based manufacturing industries that made up much of the initial SEZ work, but that percentage tends to decrease as product complexity increases. In Malaysia, for example, where technology is a large part of SEZ industries, currently 40% of the workers are women, down from 60% twenty years ago when its SEZs generally catered to simpler manufacturing based industries. Women are often separated from the male employees, used as lower-skilled workers to reduce production costs, and given fewer rights than their male counterparts. Fortunately, the labor standards in some countries are improving slowly as a result of their adoption of International Labor Organization standards. These standards are critical to prevent abuses, and foreign investors have been increasingly mandating quality labor management practices as a prerequisite to doing business with a host country.
IX. Conclusion
There is not one best way to establish an effective and financially profitable SEZ. Many countries have developed their own unique trade units to capitalize on their own laws, customs, resources and trade practices. Some of these developments have been successful, like the Shenzhen Village SEZ in China. Others, like those in Namibia, have failed because they were not financially profitable, or because the social, environmental, or political costs impeded their overall success. These successful and unsuccessful SEZs should serve as models for host countries seeking to develop new SEZs. The complexities involved with the development and management of an SEZ require that a new host country thoroughly understand all of the risks and rewards before implementation. SEZs can provide great investment benefits by luring companies with tax incentives and new technologies, but some of
these benefits might now be outweighed by the economic, social, and environmental costs.