Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-mlc7c Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-06T04:57:43.607Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

The Mano River Union

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 November 2008

Peter Robson
Affiliation:
Professor of Economics, University of St. Andrews, Scotland.

Extract

Of the four current schemes for international economic integration in West Africa, the operation of the Communauté économique de l'Afrique de l'Ouest has been recently reviewed, the Economic Community of West African States continues to be widely discussed, while the agreement of the Presidents of Senegal and Gambia in Dakar on 17 December 1981 to establish a Senegambian Confederation, and to develop an economic and monetary union between the two countries, is as yet in its formative stages. This article examines the structure, progress, and potential of the Mano River Union (M.R.U.) about which little has been published.

Type
Articles
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1982

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Robson, Peter, ‘The West African Economic Community: a customs union in quest of an economic community’, Discussion Paper, Department of Economics, University of St. Andrews, 1981.Google Scholar

2 Clapham, Christopher, Liberia and Sierra Leone: an essay in comparative politics (Cambridge, 1976).CrossRefGoogle Scholar

3 Liberia and Sierra Leone had previously been involved in 1964, together with the Ivory Coast and Guinea, in a proposal for a West African Free Trade Area, but this initiative became a victim of political conflict between the two French-speaking countries. See Sesay, Amado, ‘Conflict and Collaboration: Sierra Leone and her West African Neighbours, 1961–80’, in Afrika Spectrum (Hamburg), 1980, pp. 80–2.Google Scholar

1 U.N.C.T.A.D., Report of the United Nations Interdisciplinary Mission to Review the Scope for Inter-Regional and International Co-operation between Sierra Leone and Liberia (Geneva, 1973).Google Scholar

2 Mano River Union Secretariat, The Mano River Declaration and Protocols (Freetown, 1979).Google Scholar

1 Source: World Bank Development Report, 1981 (New York, 1981).Google Scholar

1 Government of Sierra Leone, Development Plan, 1974/5–1978/9 (Freetown, 1974).Google Scholar

2 Ministry of Economic Planning, Government of Liberia, Economic Survey (Monrovia, 1977).Google Scholar

3 Government of Sierra Leone, Annual Plan, 1977–78 (Freetown, 1977).Google Scholar

5 Liberia, , Economic Survey, 1977.Google Scholar

1 U.N.I.D.O., Mano River Union Industry Studies by Sanderson, and Porter, Incorporated (Vienna, 1976).Google Scholar

1 Goods are designated as of ‘local origin’ if they are wholly produced in the area, or – for manufactures using imported materials – if local value-added accounts for at least 35 per cent of the ex-factory price of the finished product.

1 Commonwealth Secretariat, The Mano River Union: an assessment of past performance and some guidelines for the future (London, 1978).Google Scholar

2 Ibid. pp. 135–9.

1 See, however, Mano River Union Secretariat, Appraisal of the Proposals for a Union (Harmonised) – External Tariff Schedule (Freetown, 1976).Google Scholar

1 Lent, G. E., ‘Harmonisation of Investment Incentives for Liberia-Sierra Leone's Joint Economic Development’, Revenue Symposium, Monrovia, 1974, and Commonwealth Secretariat, Report on the Harmonisation of Fiscal Incentives to Industry in the Mano River Union (London, 1979).Google Scholar

1 Economic Commission for Africa, Unrecorded Trade Flows Within ECOWAS (Addis Ababa, 1979).Google Scholar

2 Commonwealth Secretariat, The Mano River Union.

3 Robson, Peter, The Economics of International Integration (London, 1980).CrossRefGoogle Scholar

1 U.N.I.D.O., Mano River Union Industry Studies.

1 Hazlewood, Arthur, Economic Integration: the East African experience (London, 1975).Google Scholar