|
What may happen to the country's mainstay of export, especially, the garment sector, after the year 2004 when the quota protection regime comes to an end has long been an issue of intense debate and general concern. But such debates and concerns from different well-meaning quarters notwithstanding, the largest forum of the stakeholders in the garments sector in the country, Bangladesh Garment Manufacturers and Exporters' Association (BGMEA), had shown enough confidence about tiding over the difficult times without much pain.
According to their view, Bangladeshi garment business has, meanwhile, developed the expertise and experience of not only surviving the challenges posed by the quota-free era, it has also come of age so much so that it is able to compete with the products of the developing and developed countries in the international market. But still it cannot be said that the post-MFA (Multi-Fibre Arrangement) apprehensions were entirely without foundation, for the strength of indigenous RMG products in the face of open competition was yet to be put to real test. On the other hand, the uncertainty caused a lot of social tension because millions of garment workers, their families, the industries and businesses linked to them were to face the music in the event of any failure of the authorities to face up to the challenges thrown by the ensuing contingencies of time.
The dreaded era sans quota protection has already arrived. But the local garment industry has not shown any sign of weakness at least during the last one quota-free month. Oddly enough, one month has hardly passed when heartening developments have been reported from the capital of the USA, which has so long been the largest buyer of Bangladesh's garment products. A bill has been tabled in the US Senate to the effect that Bangladeshi garment products will get duty-free access in the US market." Though it is still not quite certain if the bill so placed in the US senate will ultimately be passed, the event is in itself significant. The BGMEA president has informed the press that the development has been possible as a result of its persistent lobbying among the appropriate political business circles in USA.
All these developments point to the fact that, of all the industries engaged in exporting the goods and services produced at home to the overseas markets, it is the garments sector that has been able to demonstrate a kind of robustness and resilience that other exporters are yet to achieve. On this score, all concerned would do well not to forget the adage that one should never put all one's eggs in one basket. So, allowing the garments to do its bit, the authorities concerned should also focus their attention on other potential sectors of the industry and help those to grow out of their present state of infancy and dependency on the vicissitudes of the times and whims of the international buyers.
Exporters in other sectors of the economy, other than garments, should also be able to demonstrate the kind of confidence that the BGMEA leaders have shown in the face of adversity.
What other commodities does the country have in its basket of exports? Included among the principal commodities are: different agricultural products, jute goods, frozen food, raw jute, petroleum by-products, chemical products, engineering products, tea, leather and leader goods and handicrafts, etc. Of those exportable commodities, agricultural products occupy the largest share. But so far as the non-agricultural products are concerned, garments still contribute the largest amount of export earnings to the national exchequer. As for example, in the 2003-4 fiscal, the country earned to the tune of $6.9 billion from its total exports, of which the garments sector alone brought in around $5.5 billion. Which in other words means that, all other commodities, both agricultural and non-agricultural, together contribute hardly around $1.5 billion to the foreign exchange basket of the economy. What does it amount to when calculated in percentage? One can easily calculate the figure, which would come to hardly around 21 per cent of the total export!
That was the general picture in the sphere of export trade until as late as the last fiscal. Can then those in charge of managing the affairs of trade and commerce afford to remain complacent and continue to bask in the warmth of the success in the garments sector? Departments concerned, for example, the Export Promotion Bureau, often come up with statistics showing how different sectors of the export economy have been faring during different periods in the past. There are statistical figures showing how export earnings have shown a gradual increase over a period of 12 years between 1991 and 2003. As for instance, earning from agricultural products increased by 12.96 per cent in the period under consideration. In a similar fashion, it has been shown that the earning from jute goods increased by 5.16 percent, that from frozen foods 16.55 per cent, from raw jute by 34.34 per cent, petroleum products by 215.45 per cent, chemical products by 50.95 per cent, engineering products by 842.34 per cent and other products by 20.77 per cent.
What was the place of the garment sector in this impressive pageantry of incremental performance of the different sectors of the export economy? The woven and the knitwear together provided only 17.62 per cent (woven garment only 4.28 per cent while knitwear supplying the rest 13.34 of the incremental paperwork) in the entire incremental representation of the export curve over a period of 12 years.
It may appear, on the face of it though, most of the exportable commodities far outstripped the garments sector in their performance over the years. Strangely enough, when it comes to absolute figures of the exports, it will be found how miserably they all pale into insignificance beside the performance of the garment sector. This is certainly reason enough for the promoters and stakeholders of this particular sector (garments) of the economy to rejoice. But then one must also not forget the fears that the whole nation had been in grip of during all the months until the watershed of 2005.
Is it not then time all concerned gave more consideration to the issue of diversifying the options in the country's export trade?
|