|
1.1 This is the 5th
quarterly report of the project titled “Comparative Study of Competition
Regimes in Select Developing Countries of the Commonwealth” being supported by
the Department for International Development, UK. The project, popularly known
as 7-Up, is being implemented by CUTS, Jaipur. Its purpose is to do a
comparative study of competition regimes in seven developing countries of the
Commonwealth. The countries which have been chosen for the study are:
-
India
-
Pakistan
-
Sri Lanka
-
Kenya
-
South Africa
-
Tanzania
-
Zambia
1.2 The main
objectives of the Project are:
To conduct
evaluation of existing competition legislation and its implementation on few
basic principles such as budgets, composition and structure of the authority;
-
To identify typical
problems and suggest solutions, including on the basis of practices elsewhere;
-
To suggest ways
forward to strengthen existing legislation and institutions dealing with
competition issues;
-
To assess capacity
building needs of the government, its agencies and the civil society;
-
To develop
strategies for building expertise among the competition agency officials,
practitioners and civil society;
-
To help build
constituencies for promoting competition culture by actively involving civil
society and other influential entities during this exercise; and
-
To create an
advocacy group at national and international levels to pursue the necessary and
required reforms.
1.3 7-Up Project is
running in its sixth quarter now. In the first quarter of the Project,
primarily the preliminary activities were completed. Partners were identified
in each of the seven project countries. An international advisory body named as
Project Advisory Committee was formed to guide the project implementation and
an Operational Strategy Note was prepared to give a micro picture of the
process and methodology involved over the period of two years of the Project
duration. As a first step to achieve the goals of the project, the partners
prepared a preliminary country paper to give a brief description of the existing
competition law and other regulations, market position, socio-economic
characteristics, etc. in each of these countries. A comparative analysis of
these papers was made by Prof. Rakesh Basant, the core-researcher of the
Project as well as by CUTS.
1.4 In the second
quarter, the Project was formally launched at a meeting held in Jaipur, India
in the month of December 2000. The meeting was attended by the project partners
and various experts, competition practitioners, former and present executives
of various international and regional organisations and competition authorities
of different countries, including Australia, Brazil, South Africa, Zambia,
India.
1.5 The research
methodology and strategies for the implementation of the Project were discussed
and a comprehensive questionnaire including questions on issues related to
institutional framework of competition authority in the project countries was
prepared. Guidelines were set for the formation of a National Reference Group
comprising of various stakeholders for the advocacy component of the Project. A
preliminary list of proposed members of NRG for India was prepared by CUTS and
was circulated to all partners in other countries as a model to enable them to
prepare lists for their respective countries.
1.6 The third
quarter, possibly the most crucial quarter in the first phase of the project,
covered activities related to research, formation of the National Reference
Group and preparation of the Phase-I country report. The researchers got the
questionnaires filled from the concerned authority and collected all the
relevant data. This data was then put into a draft country report for which a
format was suggested by the core researcher of the Project and was sent to the
partners. This report was to be discussed at the NRG meeting. The partners
finalised the members of their NRG, which included representation from all
stakeholders. The dates of the NRG meetings were also decided during this
period.
1.7 The fourth
quarter was the last quarter of Phase I of the Project. During this period, NRG
meetings were organised and the Phase-I country reports were prepared in each
project country, in a particular format, which were given to all partners and
the format was prepared by Rakesh Basant, the core researcher of the project.
These Phase-I country reports were compiled and collated to form Draft Phase-I
Report. A synthesis report was also prepared. The Phase-I culmination meeting
was also held in the first week of September. This marked the beginning of Phase-II
of the Project.
1.8 The previous
quarter i.e. the fifth quarter, was the first quarter of the Phase-II of the
project. During this period 2nd NRG meetings were held to discuss
the revised country reports and to finalise the case studies for the second
phase. The following is a brief report on the progress of the project
activities during the fifth quarter i.e. September-November 2001of the project.
Some of the activities that took place in early December have also been covered
in the report.
BACK
TO CONTENTS
2.1.1 Phase-I
country reports were discussed in the Phase-I Culmination meeting, which was
organised on 7–8 September 2001. It was discussed by the partners, researchers
and the Advisory committee that Phase-I country reports should be revised and
researchers must go again to the competition authority to get some additional
information.
Revised Phase-I
country reports have already been received and sent to Rakesh Basant to prepare
the Synthesis Report. A need was felt to discuss the Revised Phase-I country
reports at country level and thus Second NRG meetings were organised in all the
project countries, except India. Revised Phase-I Country reports are also
available at the CUTS website. http://cuts-international.org/7up-country-report-index.htm
2.1.2 The synthesis
report prepared by Rakesh Basant was also revised once again in the light of
the revised Phase-I country reports as well as the additional information
collected by the country researchers.
2.2.1 In Phase-II
of the project, it was proposed to have three case studies in each country with
important cross-border implications.
2.2.2 The three
studies are as follows:
CA investigation of
an international merger: Coca Cola/ Cadbury Schweppes, wherever possible. In
case the merger was not investigated by the CA, an economic analysis of the
merger would be carried, while if the merger did not take place in the country,
some other international merger would be studied.
Cement: This would
be a sectoral study and will involve studying the competition concerns in the
sector from all possible angles.
Any case to be
decided by partners but preferably in the service sector with some cross-border
implications.
2.2.3 The partners
have already collected substantial information on the first case study chosen
in most of the countries.
2.3.1 The project
completed its first year in September and also Phase-I of the project. The
Phase-I Culmination meeting was held on 7-8th September, 2001in Goa,
India. The meeting involved:
sharing phase-I
country report of each project country;
-
discussion on the
compiled and comparative analysis of all these reports;
-
lowlights and
highlights of the Phase-I;
-
brainstorm on
shaping the Phase-II; and
-
workshop on
understanding cross-border competition concerns
2.3.2 International
experts from various organisations such as the UNCTAD, WTO, OECD, European
Commission, World Bank, Consumers International, International Development
Research Centre also participated as resource persons, besides partners and
researchers, to take stock of the progress of the project and share their
experiences about the subject. Following are the brief highlights of the
meeting.
2.3.3 The Meeting
presented the results of the first year of the Project which examined and
compared the domestic competition regimes of India, Pakistan, Sri Lanka, South
Africa, Kenya, Zambia and Tanzania. The study focused on how the differences in
economic structure and policies of these countries affect their competition
policy requirements. The project revealed the importance of a vibrant consumer
movement for the meaningful enforcement of competition law. However, most of
the project countries lack consumer awareness of these issues.
2.3.4 “What emerged
as a very crucial recommendation, is that the consumer movements in developing
countries must be strengthened if competition policy is to be implemented
effectively” noted Mr Pradeep S Mehta, secretary general of CUTS. “Consumer
awareness of competition issues is vital to create a vibrant national
competition culture that will stimulate equitable growth”.
2.3.5 The Meeting
launched the second phase of the project which will examine cross-border
competition concerns such as international cartels and the effects of
cross-border mergers and acquisitions in developing country markets. The second
phase is expected to generate valuable insight into developing country interests
in relation to multilateral discussions on these issues.
2.3.6 “India would
be the first country to support a multilateral competition arrangement that
made the UNCTAD Competition Rules and Principles a binding agreement,”said Dr V
S Seshadri, Joint Secretary, Ministry of Commerce, at one of the sessions on
the international scenario on competition policy. However, he opposed the EU’s
thrust for multilateral competition policy at the WTO, saying it would not be
in the interest of developing countries. The discussion of new issues at the
WTO could only come after progress was made on implementation issues. He said
the WTO Working Group on Trade and Competition Policy was overstepping its
mandate by discussing multilateral competition policy rather than establishing
whether there is a concrete relationship between trade and competition policy.
Before negotiating multilateral competition policy at the WTO, he said that
developing countries needed to have enough experience with competition policy
at the domestic level to understand its pros and cons.
2.3.7 Reacting to
this, Stefan Amarasinha of European Commission observed that EU has learnt from
Uruguay Round experience and hence, is proposing ‘flexibility’ and
‘progressivity’ as two elements that are not reflected in the traditional set
of special and differential treatment. Furthermore, it is not proposing
harmonisation of competition laws.
2.3.8 Frederic
Jenny, Chairman of the WTO Working Group on Trade & Competition Policy,
said that the Project would facilitate much needed communication between
competition authorities and trade officials on competition abuses which affect
trade and vice versa. Jenny emphasised the unique role of CUTS in bridging the
gap between competition officials and other stakeholders.
2.3.9 Emphasising
the main objective of UNCTAD of a more efficient and more equitable world
economy through a competition-rules-based globalisation process, Philippe
Brusick, Head of Competition and Consumer Policy Branch, UNCTAD, commended the
achievements and future role of the project in strengthening the competition
culture in all the project countries.
2.3.10 The Meeting
launched the second phase of the project which will examine cross-border
competition concerns such as international cartels and the effects of
mega-mergers in developing country markets. The second phase is expected to
generate valuable insight into developing country interests in relation to
multilateral discussions on these issues. A brief report (draft) on the
proceedings of the meeting is also attached as Annexure A
2.3.11 This
opportunity was also utilised to have two fringe meetings in the context of the
7-Up Project. One was a meeting of the partners, researchers and the
consultants on the 6th September. It was a full day meeting, one
half of which was devoted to take stock of the problems faced during the
implementation of the first phase of the Project and the possible solutions in
order to avoid them in the second phase.
2.3.12 The second
half of the meeting on 6th September focused on Phase II of the
Project. Further, to have a closer look at Phase II, another meeting of the
same group (partners, researchers and advisers) was organised after lunch on 8th
September. On the basis of these meetings, an action plan for Phase II was
drafted and has been sent to the consultants for their comments. It would be
sent to partners and researchers as soon as it is finalised.
2.3.13 A meeting
with the Project Advisory Committee was organised in the evening of the 8th
September. The purpose of this meeting was to discuss the substantial issues
that had emerged during the Phase-I culmination meeting and to clear the way
forward. It was a brief meeting and some important issues were discussed and
resolved.
2.3.14 This
opportunity was also used to seek views of different experts and donors on the
proposed International Centre for Economic Regulation that CUTS would like to
set up. The CUTS ICER would be working on the areas of competition policy,
sectoral regulation and consumer protection in South Asia and Sub-Saharan
Africa. It would be a unique institution in these regions taking a
multi-stakeholder approach in all its training, research and other activities.
The need for a centre on competition and regulatory issues in the developing
world was revealed by the 7-Up project.
2.3.15 It was
pointed out that there are quite a few institutions providing training for
government officials and agency personnel in the areas of regulation and
competition. However, demand for these services is high. They also tend to have
a narrow institutional focus (either law or economics). It was suggested that
the CUTS centre should try not to replicate the work that is already being done
but should seek to find niches in the market, to complement rather than
replicate.
2.4.1
CUTS organised an International Symposium on Competition Policy and Consumer
Interest in Geneva on 12th and 13th October 2001,
supported by International Development Research Centre (IDRC), Canada. Among
others, many of PAC as well as project partners attended the seminar. CUTS
utilised this opportunity to discuss about the progress of the 7-Up project and
organised a fringe meeting on 12th evening at Geneva to take stock.
2.4.2
In this meeting Phase-I Country reports and Phase-II Questionnaire were
discussed. The revised Phase-I Country report format was discussed and there
was agreement on the same. It was felt that if certain additional information
is incorporated in the country reports, they would be complete documents by
themselves. It was decided that one synthesis paper and a separate paper for
each country would be published.
2.4.3
It was also decided that if there were some interesting result from the survey
then it could be included in the Phase-I reports, if partners liked. The
suggested format for reporting the NRG meeting outcome was also discussed in
the meeting and everybody agreed to it. Minutes of the meeting is attached as Annexure B
2.5.1 The mid term
review meeting was organised on 16th December in Jaipur, India. It
was a closed meeting of only the partners, researchers and consultants. The
primary objective of the meeting was to take stock of the Phase-I reports and
to plan the methodology of case studies to be taken up during phase-II.
2.5.2 The synthesis
report as revised by the core researcher was presented in the meeting. The
status of each of the country reports was also discussed and further actions
needed in terms of these reports were also suggested. The meeting was also
utilised to recast the plan for the rest of the project period in general and
next quarter in particular.
2.5.3 Towards the
end of the meeting, the Doha Declaration was also discussed briefly. It was
observed that the Phase-II of the 7-Up Project could provide inputs for
discussions at the WTO since it deals mainly with cross border competition
issues. It was also suggested that the Phase-II NRG meetings should discuss the
WTO/Doha concerns and report them in detail. The analysis of these reports
would then help in providing necessary inputs. Further details of the meeting
are provided in Annexure C.
2.6.1 Phase-II of
the Project also involves organising NRG meetings in the project countries.
Most of the project countries organised their NRG meeting in the first week of
November, with the exception of South Africa, India and Pakistan.
2.6.2 The meeting
was held on 31st October in Kenya, on 2nd November in Sri
Lanka and on 8th November in Lusaka. South Africa NRG was held on 26th
November and Pakistan’s meeting was held on 8th December. The Indian
NRG would be organised on 11-12th January 2002.
2.6.3 The NRG
meetings discussed the Phase-I country reports, Phase-II questionnaires and the
three case studies to be taken up during Phase-II of the Project. The meetings
were able to decide the third case study, which was left open in the action
plan for the country partners to decide in consensus with the members of the
NRG. Most of these meetings were also attended by CUTS staff.
2.6.4 The meetings
were quite successful and reports of the proceedings would be sent by the
partners soon. A particular format for preparing the reports of these NRG
meetings was sent to partners and researchers for ensuring uniformity in the reports.
2.7.1 During this
period, the country partners had organised their second National Reference
Group Meetings. CUTS’ staff: members visited some the project countries to
attend the NRG meetings as well as to review the progress of the project.
2.7.2. K. S. Sajeev
visited Tanzania (5th November) and Zambia (8th November)
to attend the NRG meetings.
2.7.3 Pradeep S
Mehta visited South Africa for their NRG Meeting that was organised on 26th
November. He also visited Lusaka to review the progress of the project.
2.7.4 David Ongolo,
the country researcher for Kenya is also playing an advisory role in
implementing the project in the African countries. He visited Lusaka on 22nd
November to attend the NRG meeting there.
BACK
TO CONTENTS
3.1 As per the
Project Agenda, two periodical newsletters are being published during the
project duration. One is a bi-monthly electronic newsletter called ‘7-UpDate’
and the other is a quarterly hard copy newsletter titled ‘ReguLetter’. The
project partners are required to send inputs for these newsletters on a regular
basis. During the fifth quarter of the Project, the fourth issue of ReguLetter
and the sixth issue of 7-UpDate were published. Copies are enclosed vide Annexures D and E. The Project Team has
prepared lists of electronic as well as postal addresses for the purpose of
reaching out to target audience with these newsletters. The mailing lists are
being updated on a regular basis.
3.2 The purpose of
this newsletter is to provide a forum, in particular to the civil society, to
understand the issues clearly and promote a healthy competition culture in the
world. It covers developments relating to competition policy and economic
regulations
3.2.1 The fourth
issue of the newsletter (No.4 September 2001) has been published. It is a
28-page newsletter and carries a brief description of the progress of the 7-Up
Project, news on industrial restructuring, corporate governance, financial
sector, utilities and an article on the competition regime of Zambia. The
leader on the cover spoke about international cartels and tackling them. The
issue also carries a brief synthesis report on the NRG meetings of the seven
countries. The third installment of the featured paper, the Global Competition
Review survey, “Rating the Regulators” focused on six more competition
authorities from around the world. The survey appraises the abilities, and
assesses the efficiency of some of the most important national and
supra-national agencies shaping the business environment of the 21st
century. This issue (fourth) also carries some interesting stories like, EC
tough on Cartels, Price caps on Electricity, and a longer story named Microsoft
Vignettes.
3.2.2 About four
thousand copies of this newsletter were published, keeping in view its
increasing demand. These copies have been distributed to various stakeholders
in India as well as abroad such as competition authorities, regulatory
authorities, consumer organisations, media persons, intergovernmental
organisations, etc. It was also circulated to the project partners, country
researchers, members of the advisory committee and at an International
Symposium at Geneva, Switzerland, on 12-13th October, 2001
3.2.3 The next
issue of ReguLetter is scheduled to be published in the last week of December
and planning for the same has already been done. Writing work for the issue has
been completed and it would go for printing soon. The core team is receiving
inputs from the project partners on a fairly regular basis.
3.3 7-UpDate, the
electronic newsletter has been designed to update various players in the
project and other target audience on the project progress, in addition to
reporting interesting news items, which have been reported across the globe on
competition and other related issues.
3.3.1 The seventh
issue of this e-newsletter was circulated during this period. It covered a
brief description of the progress of the 7-Up Project. It also carried some
viewpoints on Vitamin Cartels and the proposed settlement in Microsoft
antitrust case.
3.3.2 Steps have
already been initiated for the eighth issue, which is scheduled to be
circulated in the first week of January 2002.
3.4 There was a
demand from the project countries as well as other countries, to bring out a
booklet on competition policy and law in a simple language. Accordingly a
monograph was prepared by CUTS and published under the project. The purpose of
this monograph is to introduce competition policy and law to consumer and other
activists and general public. This publication aims to generate awareness that
could be helpful for a lay person to identify anti-competitive practices in the
market place, and is annexed herewith as Annexure
F
3.5 The name of
7-Up project has generated lot of curiosity about the project and suggestions
came from different quarters to publish a brochure to introduce the project.
The brochure has been published and being distributed across the world. It was
also felt that since a significant component of the project is competition
advocacy, bringing out a poster on competition policy would help in raising
awareness on the issue. A poster has been published accordingly. Both the
brochure and the poster are attached to this report. Annexure G
3.6 ‘CUTS’ has
initiated a forum called “CompetitiOnline Forum” (competitionlineforum@yahoogroups.com
) to stimulate online discussion on various issues related to competition law
and policy at national, regional and international level. The forum is
providing a platform for interested parties to air their views, share
information and join in online discussions.
3.7 There are
around 120 members in this Forum, which includes representatives of research
institutions, NGOs, consumer activists, competition authorities, media,
academia, etc. from all over the world and the list is expanded and updated
regularly. The existing recipients are also forwarding the information to their
contacts. Discussions have already started on issues like effectiveness of
competition authorities, multilateral competition policy and various other
issues that have emerged from the 7-Up Project.
3.8 The members are
also posting news-items, press releases, etc. relating to competition issues,
at this forum.
BACK
TO CONTENTS
4.1 As mentioned in
our previous progress report, the project has already started showing its impact
in the 7-Up countries, both direct and indirect. Competition policy and law
have been a little known area even in countries like India and Pakistan whose
experiences with such policy and law have been fairly long. But now there is an
increasing awareness on competition law and policy in all these countries. The
major contributing factor to this has been the NRG meetings that were held in
these countries. In fact in Pakistan, there was a strong demand from the NRG
members to make it a permanent body that will lobby with the government on
competition and consumer issues. Although it was one of the motives behind
forming the NRGs, it is encouraging to note that such a proposal came
spontaneously in the meeting rather than being pushed by the project implementers.
4.2 Another
interesting aspect of this growing awareness is that, it is not limited to the
project countries only. It is having some spillover effects in other developing
countries also. Moreover, the project is being considered as first such study
in the developing world. Hence CUTS has been receiving queries from different
places, on competition issues in the context of developing countries. For
instance an American researcher wanted some information on competition policy
and law in some African countries. He approached us for the same and we were
able to provide him with the required information.
4.3 In India, CUTS
has been providing inputs to the new Competition Bill which has already been
placed in the parliament. The bill has been referred to the Standing Committee
of the parliament which is now discussing it with different groups of
stakeholders. Considering CUTS’ work in the area of competition policy, the
Consumer Coordination Council (CCC), the apex consumer organisation in India,
has requested CUTS to represent the consumers before the committee. CUTS has
used this opportunity to share the learning of the project with the law-makers
of the country. Due to our lobbying, the Government is considering some major
provisions like leniency programme and whistle-blower protection in the Act,
which are not in the original bill.
4.4 Similarly, in
Sri Lanka also a new bill is under consideration and the NRG meeting there
pondered over the various aspects of the bill and came out with many important
suggestions. It is expected that the government there would give due
considerations to those suggestions.
4.5 In Pakistan the
growing awareness on competition issues has led to demand for a thorough review
of the competition law, if not a new law, as people there feel that the
existing law is not good enough in the changing scenario both within the
domestic economy and outside. A similar concern has been raised in Kenya also
and people feel drastic changes are required in the existing competition law. The
NRG in Kenya has also raised the demands of a comprehensive consumer protection
law and better regulatory mechanisms. The government is seriously considering
them.
4.6 A comprehensive
consumer protection law is under consideration in Zambia also. Zambia
Competition Commission celebrated a “Competition Day” to raise awareness on
competition issues among the people. The project had a direct contribution to
this celebration. CUTS published 10 posters and five booklets for the Zambia
Competition Commission on their request for this day.
4.7 In Tanzania,
there is a good competition law. However, the implementation of the law has
been slow and inadequate. The project has been able to raise the awareness on
the law as well as usefulness. It has also been recognised that one of the main
factors for poor implementation of the law there is the total absence of a
consumer movement in the country. A strong need has been felt, particularly
within the civil society to launch a consumer movement in the country. In this
regard they have also solicited technical and other assistance from CUTS.
4.8 Another notable
development in Tanzania that took place as a result of the 7-Up project
findings, is that the Foreign Investment Advisory Service (FIAS) of the World
Bank has launched a project there to assist the government in its effort to
attract more foreign direct investment and maximise its impact on the economy.
The main focus of the project would be to analyse the relationship between
competition policy and anti-competitive practices and FDI. The FIAS team sought
cooperation from CUTS and its partner organisation in Tanzania in implementing
their project. The FIAS team from World Bank also attended our 2nd
NRG meeting in Tanzania and found it extremely useful and a good base to launch
their project for practical purposes as they got all the important stakeholders
together.
4.9 In South
Africa, where a good competition law and enforcement mechanism are already in
place, the existing consumer movement, although not very strong, has resolved
to take up competition issues more seriously. There has also been a demand for
a comprehensive consumer protection law in the country.
4.10 CUTS was
invited for a regional conference on competition law & policy that was held
in the end of November in Kampala and organised by COMESA and International Law
Institute of Uganda. They requested for a special presentation on the 7-Up
project in the conference, which was done by Mr. Mehta. Because of the
experience that CUTS gained through the 7-Up project, COMESA secretariat has
sought CUTS cooperation in formulating their regional competition policy as
well as strengthening the competition regimes across COMESA countries.
4.11 CUTS organised
an international symposium on “Competition Policy & Consumer Interest in
the Global Economy”, in Geneva on 12-13th October. The programme was
sponsored by the International Development Research Centre (IDRC), Canada.
4.12 The audience
of the programme was made of two main target groups: civil society
organisations from developing countries and representatives from the permanent
missions of the WTO. In the symposium, the participants were unanimous in
expressing their concerns in growing cross-border anti-competitive practices in
general and international cartels in particular. They also felt the need to
have a multilateral competition framework to check the menace, however, there
was no unanimity whether the WTO would provide the best platform to have such a
framework.
BACK
TO CONTENTS
5.1 A project of
such nature, comprising several countries, would certainly involve some
problems and changes during the course of its implementation. During the period
under review, the following problems were encountered:
5.2 Follow-up with
partners: The most time consuming and difficult task is to follow-up with
partners and to coordinate various activities in such a way that all project
countries move together. To organise the NRG meetings in these countries in
succession was very important so that one person could attend them all.
Finally, all meetings were organised one after the other and were almost
attended by CUTS staff.
5.3 The 2nd
NRG Meetings in Zambia remained inconclusive mainly because the researcher was
not able to finalise the report and another meeting was convened after a couple
of weeks. The South Africa report could not be revised the way it was expected
as no additional information could be procured from the competition
authorities. Similar problem was faced in Pakistan also. The Indian researcher
could not revise the report as he was badly engaged with some other activities
that put him out of station for long period. Eventually the 2nd NRG
meeting had to be postponed which will now be held on 11-12th
January 2002.
BACK
TO CONTENTS
6.1 The period from
December to February 2002 would primarily focus on the case studies to be
conducted. However, before that an analysis of the phase-II questionnaires
would be done in order to find out the general level of awareness in these
countries on competition issues. A basic framework for the case studies,
particularly the first case study on an international merger has already been
prepared.
6.2 The
Synthesis Report for Phase-I would be further revised. This will be done by
the core researcher after comments are received from CUTS and the consultants.
The partners will also go through the draft synthesis report especially their
part and give comments and suggestions by the last week of December 2001.The
report is likely to be finalised by mid-January 2002.
6.3 The
Revised Phase-I Country Reports have been received from all the countries
except India. The report would be revised on the basis of the additional
information collected on Phase-I questionnaires. This would be done by 7th
January 2002. In case of Zambia and Pakistan the reports have been revised, but
would be further revised by the end of December 2001. For other countries, the
core researcher and CUTS would go through the reports for final comments. No
major revisions are expected in these reports.
6.4 Case
Studies for Phase II: The action plan of Phase-II mentioned three case
studies to be taken up during phase-II of the project. The first one is the
international merger of Coca Cola- Cadbury Schweppes; the second is the study
of the cement sector and the third is case study of any sector to be decided by
the partners, but preferably in the service sector. Most of the country would
follow this scheme. However, in some countries the Coca Cola-Cadbury Schweppes
case is not applicable and hence would study some other case. The first and the
second case studies are likely to be completed by the sixth quarter. The drafts
for all the three case studies, however, should be ready by 31st
March, 2002.
6.5 Phase-II
Questionniares: These have been received from India, Tanzania and Sri
Lanka. The other partners need to send the filled up questionnaires (soft/hard
copies). A brief analysis of these questionnaires should also be done to find
out the general level of awareness in these countries on competition issues.
6.6 Report on
the process of 7-Up: It was decided at the Goa meeting and was revisited in
Geneva that a report on the process part of the project, giving details of the
methodology adopted for research, problems faced, solutions found, etc., should
be prepared by all project partners. This was discussed again at this meeting
and it was thought that it would be a very useful document for future work.
South Africa has already done such a report and comments and suggestions are
invited from other partners.
6.7 Publication of Reports: With the
finalisation of the Phase-I country reports and the Phase-I Synthesis Report in
January 2002, the first phase of the project would come to an end. All these
reports are likely to be published by the sixth quarter of the project.
BACK
TO CONTENTS
|
