1,720,990 research outputs found
Agriculture, Trade, and the WTO in South Asia
No full textHistorically, industrialized countries
dominated trade negotiations from the establishment of the
General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) through the
lengthy Uruguay Round (UR) negotiations in the 1980s and
1990s. These negotiations established the World Trade
Organization (WTO)-the GATT's successor
organization-and formulated the UR Agreement on Agriculture
(AoA). Even though developing countries possibly have the
most to gain from a substantial reduction of existing export
subsidies and removal of other trade impediments (Gorter,
Ingco, and Ruiz 2000; Ingco 1995), these countries have been
the most powerless, and the most ineffective. This is why it
is imperative that developing countries, particularly those
in South Asia, seize the moment to actively participate in
this process of shaping a more globally integrated economic
environment and to convey, for instance, their experience
from implementing the reduction commitments and the effect
of those commitments under the URAoA, the consequence of
Special and Differential (S&D) Treatment, and their
concerns regarding food security and the environment and the
possible negative effects of the execution of the reform
program. The new round, it is hoped, will cover broader
issues, with established deadlines and room for tradeoffs
Agriculture, Trade, and the WTO : Creating a Trading Environment for Development
No full textDeveloping countries have an enormous
stake in the new round of World Trade Organization (WTO)
negotiations, taking place now, and scheduled to be
completed by January 1, 2005. Their full participation in
the global trading system could lift and additional 300
million people our of poverty by 2015. Since 1970, these
countries have increased their share in all trade, from
one-quarter to one-third. Most of these gains, however, have
come from increased exports of manufactured goods, which
primarily benefit the middle-income developing countries.
Agricultural products, historically the more important
exports for poor countries, have lagged far behind. The main
reason for this is the protection - in the form of subsidies
and other support, running at roughly U$S 1 billion per day
- afforded agriculture in industrial countries. This is more
than six times all development assistance. This report
contains results of region-specific studies that will prove
a vital resource for policymakers, analysts, and others
working in the development field. It provides answers to
questions such as, What lessons were learned from the
Uruguay Round? What is the relationship between trade
liberalization, and rural poverty? And, What is the role of
the international development community in fostering a
trading system that will result in development? The authors
argue that only by reshaping the world's trading
system, and reducing the barriers to trade, can truly global
expansion take place
Agricultural Trade Liberalization in a New Trade Round : Perspectives of Developing Countries and Transition Economies
No full textThis discussion paper contains seven
studies, designed to a) review, and assess the impact of the
implementation of the Uruguay Round (UR) Agreement on
Agriculture, and, b) to analyze the key issues, interests,
and options for developing countries in the new World Trade
Organization's (WTO) round of multilateral trade
negotiations in agriculture. Six regional case studies are
presented: Sub-Saharan Africa, South Asia, Latin America,
Eastern Asia, Central and Eastern Europe, and industrial
countries. A quantitative analysis of the dynamics of
multilateral liberalization in food, and agricultural trade
is also presented. Among some of the key conclusions, it is
suggested that much preparatory work was achieved in
bringing agriculture fully into the multilateral trading
system during the UR, and, a significant achievement was the
development of a broad framework for reductions in
trade-distorting policies. The UR was also successful in
negotiating reduced volumes of subsidized exports, and in
providing at least, minimum levels of access to markets.
There were, however, a number of limitations in both what
was agreed to, and in how the Agreement in Agriculture has
actually been implemented, as the analyses show that the
work achieved during the UR, will be of limited value,
unless market distortions in agriculture can be reduced
substantially. If liberal agricultural trade is to succeed,
its limitations should be addressed, and policy induced
distortions to agricultural production, be substantially reduced
Agriculture and the WTO : Creating a Trading System for Development
No full textThis publication explores the key issues
and options in agricultural trade liberalization from a
developing country perspective. Chapters cover market
access, domestic support, export competition, quota
administration methods, food security, biotechnology,
intellectual property rights, agricultural trade under the
Uruguay Round Agreement on Agriculture (URAA), and many
other subjects, always focusing on the question of how the
outcome of the World Trade Organization (WTO) negotiations
can be made pro-development. Material is covered in summary
and in comprehensive detail with supporting data tables,
text boxes, figures, and a detailed table of contents. Many
chapters have a substantial bibliography, listings of online
resources, and tables summarizing the major points of WTO
member country proposals that deal directly with each
chapter topic
Agricultural trade liberalization in the Uruguay Round : one step forward, one step back?
Get PDFAfter evaluating the Uruguay Round's impact on agriculture and border protection in the next decade, the author concludes that while there was significant reform of the rules - particularly the conversion of nontariff barriers into tariffs and the reduction and binding of all tariffs - in practice, trade will probably be liberalized less than expected. The objective of the Round was to reverse protectionism and remove trade distortions. This may not be achieved in practice, at least not until further reductions are carried out in future rounds of negotiations. The major exception to this conclusion is in high-income Asian countries, where protection for major commodities will be significantly reduced. The tariffication and binding of all tariffs on agricultural products represents a significant step forward. Liberalization is implicit because countries are prohhibited from arbitrarily raising tariffs to new higher levels. But many of the newly established tariffs are so high in many countries as to effectively prohibit trade. Patterns of liberalization vary considerably by commodity and by country. Generally, the extent of liberalization was diminished by binding tariffs to the base period of 1986-88, when border protection was at a high point. In most OECD countries, this was worsened by"dirty tariffication:"the new base tariffs offered even greater protection than the nontariff barriers they replaced. Even after the commitments to tariff reductions in the Round, the ad valorem measure of the final binding tariffs will remain higher than the average rate of protection in 1982-93. A number of developing countries in East Asia, Latin America, and the Middle East chose to lock in prior liberalization efforts on some products. But for most commodities, there will be little actual liberalization, since most developing countries chose to bind their tariffs at a maximum level. Even when countries reduced already-bound rates, bound tariffs remained significantly higher than current applied rates, giving countries the flexibility to raise tariffs later. The high level of bound tariffs may allow countries to apply variable tariffs below the bound level, thus failing to stabilize tariffs and improve market access. Moreover, the Round did not touch many of the worst distortions in developing countries, such as import subsidies, export taxes, state-trading monopolies, and domestic policies that implicitly tax agriculture.Trade Policy,Environmental Economics&Policies,Economic Theory&Research,Export Competitiveness,Rules of Origin,Trade Policy,Rules of Origin,TF054105-DONOR FUNDED OPERATION ADMINISTRATION FEE INCOME AND EXPENSE ACCOUNT,Environmental Economics&Policies,Economic Theory&Research
Is rice becoming an inferior good? Food demand in the Philippines
Get PDFWhat are the prospects for demand for the main foodstuffs, particularly rice, in the Philippines? Countries which have traditionally consumed rice as the basic staple such as Japan, the Republic of Korea, and Taiwan are eating more wheat and wheat products. There is also a shift towards increased consumption of meats, dairy products, vegetable oils, and fruits and vegetables. A recent study found rice to be an inferior good in Japan, Taiwan, Malaysia, Singapore, Thailand, and Nepal. In this paper, the demand for cereals in the Philippines is analyzed. Instead of assuming separability, an alternative specification of the linear Almost Ideal Demand System (LA/AIDS) which includes rice, wheat, maize, meat, fish, fruits and vegetables, other foods, and non-food commodities for the Philippines is estimated using time-series data from 1961 to 1988. The effects of urbanization and dynamic factors such as habit formation in consumption are also considered in the empirical analysis. Then using the estimated parameters, the demand and income elasticities are estimated over the sample period. The parameters are used to generate baseline projections of cereal demand to 2000. Some policy implications and concluding remarks are given in the final section.Environmental Economics&Policies,Economic Theory&Research,Crops&Crop Management Systems,Food&Beverage Industry,Agricultural Research
Distortionary effects of state trading in agriculture : issues for the next round of negotiations
Get PDFThe Uruguay Round agreements on agriculture were intended to move member countries toward a fair and market-oriented agricultural trading system. By progressively reducing domestic government support and export subsidies, converting nontariff barriers to tariffs, and reducing barriers to market access, members were committed to reducing distortions in world agricultural trade and in preventing new distortions from arising. But state trading enterprises with monopoly power or exclusive rights in agricultural trade in major products are still prevalent in both industrial and developing countries. In many countries, the operations of these state trading agencies tend in practice to nullify the intended objectives of the concessions on market access reached in the Uruguay Round. And there are still significant price distortions in trade in products subject to state trading.Economic Theory&Research,Markets and Market Access,Payment Systems&Infrastructure,Environmental Economics&Policies,Rules of Origin,TF054105-DONOR FUNDED OPERATION ADMINISTRATION FEE INCOME AND EXPENSE ACCOUNT,Economic Theory&Research,Environmental Economics&Policies,Access to Markets,Markets and Market Access
Has agricultural trade liberalization improved welfare in the least-developed countries? Yes
Get PDFThe author evaluates the progress in agricultural liberalization -and the welfare effects for least-developed and net food-importing countries- as a result of agricultural price shocks resulting from the Uruguay Round. She findsthat: (1) The changes in welfare are significantly affected by the structure of trade and distortions in the domestic economy. (2) Although many economies are hurt by increases in world prices, losses in terms of trade are small relative to total GDP. Only in a few countries does the estimated welfare change constitute more than 1 percent of GDP. (3) In several countries, the distortion effects are significantly larger than the terms-of-trade effects. In some cases, the distortion effects work in opposition to the terms-of-trade effects and are large enough to reverse the sign of the net welfare change. In short, removing policy distortions could convert the small loss in terms of trade to potential gains. But many least-developed, net food-importing countries did not use the Round to support domestic efforts at trade reform. As most studies show, most gains from multilateral liberalization come from the countries'own liberalization efforts, so countries that failed to liberalize their trade policy lost the opportunity for gains.Payment Systems&Infrastructure,Environmental Economics&Policies,Economic Theory&Research,Trade Policy,Transport and Trade Logistics,TF054105-DONOR FUNDED OPERATION ADMINISTRATION FEE INCOME AND EXPENSE ACCOUNT,Economic Theory&Research,Trade Policy,Access to Markets,Environmental Economics&Policies
- …
