Book contents
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- List of figures, tables, and boxes
- List of contributors
- Preface
- List of abbreviations
- 1 Introduction
- 2 Agriculture and the trade negotiations: a synopsis
- Part I Experience and lessons from the implementation of WTO agreements
- Part II Interests, options, and objectives in a new trade round
- 6 Agriculture, developing countries, and the Doha Development Agenda
- 7 Where the interests of developing countries converge and diverge
- Part III New trade rules and quantitative assessments of future liberalization options
- Part IV New trade issues and developing country agriculture
- Author index
- Subject index
- References
6 - Agriculture, developing countries, and the Doha Development Agenda
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 27 February 2010
By
Book contents
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- List of figures, tables, and boxes
- List of contributors
- Preface
- List of abbreviations
- 1 Introduction
- 2 Agriculture and the trade negotiations: a synopsis
- Part I Experience and lessons from the implementation of WTO agreements
- Part II Interests, options, and objectives in a new trade round
- 6 Agriculture, developing countries, and the Doha Development Agenda
- 7 Where the interests of developing countries converge and diverge
- Part III New trade rules and quantitative assessments of future liberalization options
- Part IV New trade issues and developing country agriculture
- Author index
- Subject index
- References
Summary
One of the great achievements of the Uruguay Round of trade negotiations was that it brought agricultural policies under much greater multilateral discipline through the new World Trade Organization (WTO). The Uruguay Round Agreement on Agriculture (URAA) converted non-tariff barriers (NTBs) to agricultural imports into bound tariffs. Those bound tariffs were scheduled for phased reductions, as were farm production and export subsidies, between 1995 and 2000 for industrial countries, with developing countries having an extra four years. The URAA required members to return to the negotiating table by 2000.
What are the interests and options of developing countries in the new round of negotiations? This question is pertinent not only because the vast majority of the world's poor are farmers in developing nations, but also because numerous such nations are less than happy with the URAA outcome. Those concerns must be addressed if the new round is to succeed.
Protection rates on agriculture in OECD countries remain huge. What's more, “dirty” tariffication – the setting of bound rates well above applied rates – and the introduction of tariff-rate quotas (TRQs) in the URAA mean that much bigger commitments will be needed this time significantly to reduce agricultural protection. Reforms in other sectors will also influence agriculture in developing countries, not least because including them in the negotiating agenda can counter farm protectionist lobbies. Adding new issues such as genetically modified organisms (GMOs) to the agriculture agenda could complicate matters by diverting attention from traditional market access issues.
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- Agriculture and the New Trade AgendaCreating a Global Trading Environment for Development, pp. 113 - 135Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2004
References
2000. “Agriculture's ‘Multifunctionality’ and the World Trade Organization,” Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, 44(3), 475–94CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, , , and , 1997. “Economic Growth and Policy Reforms in the Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation Region: Trade and Welfare Implications by 2005,” Asia-Pacific Economic Review, 3(1), 1–18Google Scholar
Anderson, K. and Y. Hayami, 1986. The Political Economy of Agricultural Protection, Boston, London and Sydney: Allen & Unwin
, , and , 2001. “Agriculture and the World Trade Organization: Next Steps,” Review of International Economics, 9(2), 192–214CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Anderson, K., C. Nielsen, S. Robinson, and K. Thierfelder, 2001. “Estimating the Global Economic Effects of Genetically Modified Organisms,” chapter 4 in P. Pardey (ed.), The Future of Food: Biotechnology Markets and Policies in an International Setting, Washington, DC: International Food Policy Research Institute
and , 1999. “Impact of East Asia's Growth Interruption and Policy Responses: The Case of Indonesia,” Asian Economic Journal, 13(2), 205–18CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and , 1993. “More on Welfare Gains to Developing Countries from Liberalizing World Food Trade,”Journal of Agricultural Economics, 44(2), 189–204CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cottier, T. and P. C. Mavroidis (eds.), 1998. State Trading in the Twenty-First Century, Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press
Elbehri, A., M. D. Ingco, T. W. Hertel, and K. Pearson, 2004. “Liberalizing Tariff Rate Quotas: Quantifying the Effects of Enhancing Market Access,” chapter 10 in this volume
Francois, J. F., 1999. “Approaches to Agricultural Policy Model Construction,” paper presented at the UN Conference on Trade and Development workshop on Agricultural Policy Modeling, 24–25 March, Geneva
Francois, J. F., 2004. “Market Access Liberalization in the World Trade Organization 2000 Negotiations,” paper presented at the World Bank Conference on Agriculture and the New Trade Agenda from a Development Perspective, 1–2 October, Geneva
Francois, J. F. and W. Martin, 1998. “Commercial Policy Uncertainty, the Expected Cost of Protection, and Market Access,” Discussion Paper, Tinbergen Institute, Erasmus University
and , 1995. “Trade Wars and Trade Talks,” Journal of Political Economy, 103(4), 675–708CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Henson, S., 1998. “Regulating the Trade Effects of National Food Safety Standards,” Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development Workshop on Emerging Trade Issues in Agriculture, 25–26 October, Paris, oecd.org/agr/trade/
Hertel, T. W. (ed.), 1997. Global Trade Analysis: Modeling and Applications, Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press
Hertel, T., K. Anderson, J. Francois, B. Hoekman, and W. Martin, 2004. “The Global and Regional Effects of Liberalizing Agriculture and Other Trade in the New Round,” chapter 11 in this volume
Hertel, T. W. and W. Martin, 1999. “Developing Country Interests in Liberalizing Manufactures Trade,” paper presented at the World Bank's Conference on Developing Countries and the Millennium Round, 19–20 September, Geneva
Hillman, A. L. and P. Moser, 1995. “Trade Liberalization as Politically Optimal Exchange of Market Access,” in M. Canzoneri et al. (eds.), The New Transatlantic Economy, Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press
Hudec, R. E., 1998. “Does the Agreement on Agriculture Work? Agricultural Disputes After the Uruguay Round,” International Agricultural Trade Research Consortium Working Paper, 98-2, Department of Applied Economics, University of Minnesota
1996. “Tariffication in the Uruguay Round: How Much Liberalization?,” The World Economy, 19(4), 425–47CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ingco, M. D., 1997. “Has Agricultural Trade Liberalization Improved Welfare in the Least-Developed Countries? Yes,” Policy Research Working Paper, 1748, World Bank, Washington, DC, April
Ingco, M. D. and F. Ng, 1998. “Distortionary Effects of State Trading in Agriculture: Issues for the Next Round of Multilateral Trade Negotiations,” Policy Research Working Paper, 1915, World Bank, Washington, DC
and , 1998. “On the Need for More Economic Assessment of Quarantine Policies,” Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, 41(4), 525–44Google Scholar
Josling, T. S. and A. Rae, 2004. “Options for Enhancing Market Access in a New Round,” chapter 9 in this volume
Josling, T., S. Tangermann, and T. K. Warley, 1996. Agriculture in the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade, London: Macmillan and New York: St Martin's Press
Mahe, L. P. and F. Ortalo-Magne, 1998. “International Co-Operation in the Regulation of Food Quality and Safety Attributes,” in Proceedings of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development Workshop on Emerging Trade Issues in Agriculture, 25–26 October, Paris, oecd.org/agr/trade
Martin, W. and L. A. Winters (eds.), 1996. The Uruguay Round and the Developing Countries, Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press
Nielsen, C. and K. Anderson, 2001. “Genetically Modified Organisms, Trade Policy, and Welfare in Rich and Poor Countries,” in K. Maskus and J. Wilson (eds.), Quantifying Trade Effects of Technical Barriers: Can it be Done?, Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press
Roberts, D., 1998. “Implementation of the World Trade Organization Agreement on the Application of Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures: The First Two Years,” Working Paper, 98-4, Department of Applied Economics, University of Minnesota, May
Roberts, D. and K. DeRemer, 1997. “Overview of Foreign Technical Barriers to US Agricultural Exports,” ERS Staff Paper, 9705, US Department of Agriculture, Washington, DC, March
Schiff, M. and A. Valdés, 1992. The Political Economy of Agricultural Pricing Policy, 4, A Synthesis of the Economics in Developing Countries, Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press
Skully, D. W., 1999. “The Economics of Tariff-Rate Quota Administration,” International Agricultural Trade Research Consortium Working Paper, 99-6, University of Minnesota, May
Snape, R. H., 1987. “The Importance of Frontier Barriers,” in H. Kierzkowski (ed.), Protection and Competition in International Trade, Oxford: Basil Blackwell
- 2
- Cited by