Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-cjp7w Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-19T02:36:35.065Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Trade and Environment Debate: Relevant for Southern Agriculture?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 April 2015

Mary A. Marchant  and
Nicole Ballenger
Mary A. Marchant
Affiliation:
University of Kentucky
Nicole Ballenger
Affiliation:
National Research Council on leave from the Resources and Technology Division, ERS.UDSA
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This paper introduces and briefly discusses the economics of two important trade and environment policy issues--international harmonization of environmental standards and the use of trade measures for environmental purposes. Both issues are likely to generate lively international debate among environmentalists, industry representatives, and trade negotiators over the next few years. As the international community seeks new multilateral rules in these areas, agricultural producers will want to know how they will be affected. Thus, this paper also examines the potential impacts of environmental policy on the competitiveness of commodities unique to the Southern region of the United States.

Keywords

TradeEnvironmentAgricultureSouthern region
Type
Invited Papers and Discussions
Information
Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics , Volume 26 , Issue 1 , July 1994 , pp. 108 - 128
Copyright
Copyright © Southern Agricultural Economics Association 1994

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

Anderson, Kym. “Trade Liberalization and the Environment,” in The Greening of World Trade Issues, eds. Anderson, Kym and Blackhurst, Richard. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 1992.Google Scholar
Ballenger, Nicole, Krissoff, Barry, and Beattie, Rachel. “Trade Agreements and Incentives for Environmental Quality: A Western Hemisphere Example.” Agribusiness; An International journal, forthcoming.Google Scholar
Baumol, William and Oates, William. The Theory of Environmental Policy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1988.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Breman Cotton Exchange. “Investigation of Chemical Residue on Raw Cotton.” April 1993.Google Scholar
Charnovitz, Steve. “Exploring the Environmental Exception in GATT Article XX.” Journal of World Trade. 25(1991):37–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
“Economic Impacts of Reduced Pesticide Use on Oranges” in Economic Impacts of Reduced Pesticide Use on Fruits and Vegetables, eds. Knutson, R. D., Hall, C.R., Smith, E.G., Cotner, S.D., and Miller, J.W.. chapter 3. Texas A&M University, Sept. 1993.Google Scholar
The Economist. “Trade and the Environment: The Greening of Protectionism.” February 27, 1993.Google Scholar
Ferguson, Walter and Padula, Armand. Economic Effects of Banning Methyl Bromide for Soil Fumigation. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service, Resources and Technology Division, Agricultural Economic Report No. 677, March 1994.Google Scholar
Gardner, Bruce L.The Impacts of Environmental Protection and Food Safety Regulation on U.S. Agriculture. Agricultural Policy Working Group. September, 1993.Google Scholar
Gooden, Dewitt T. and Palmer, Gary K.. “Tobacco Pesticide and Maleic Hydrazide Residue on Flue-Cured Tobacco,” in The Marketing of U.S.-Produced Tobacco: Burley and Flue-Cured, ed. Marshall, J. Paxton, pp. 6–9. Tobacco Marketing Cost Study Committee, Aug. 1990.Google Scholar
International Trade Task Force. Proceedings of the Competitive Position of Southern Agriculture in a World Economy. Mississippi State: Southern Rural Development Center, May 1987.Google Scholar
Johnson, Harry G. “Optimal Trade Intervention in the Presence of Domestic Distortions,” in International Trade: Selected Readings, ed. Bhagwati, Jagdish N.. Cambridge: The MIT Press, 1981.Google Scholar
JTN The International Text. “‘Organic Cotton’ Gains Popularity.” #468(Nov. 1993.):pp. 14–15.Google Scholar
Ludeman, Rodney D. and Wooton, Ian. “Cross-Border Externalities and Trade Liberalization: The Strategic Control of Pollution.” Unpublished paper, University of Western Ontario, June 1992.Google Scholar
Marchant, Mary A., and Ruppel, Fred J.. “The Impacts of Lesser Developed Countries (LDCs) on Southern Region Agricultural Exports.” Agricultural and Resource Economics Review. 22:1(1993):71–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Markusen, James R. “International Externalities and Optimal Tax Structures.” Journal of International Economics. 5(1975):15–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McCalla, A.F. and Josling, T.E.. Agricultural Policies and World Markets. New York: Macmillan Publishing Co., 1985.Google Scholar
Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development. Agricultural and Environmental Policy Integration: Recent Progress and New Directions. Paris, France: 1993.Google Scholar
Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development. Agricultural and Environmental Policies Opportunities for Integration. Paris, France: 1989.Google Scholar
Palmer, Gary K. and Gooden, Dewitt T.. “Evaluation of Factors influencing Maleic Hydrazide (MH) Residue on Burley Tobacco Offered for Sale,” in The Marketing of U.S.-Produced Tobacco: Burley and Flue-Cured, ed. Marshall, J. Paxton, pp. 1–5. Tobacco Marketing Cost Study Committee, Aug. 1990.Google Scholar
Panagariya, Arvind, Palmer, Karen, Oates, Wallace, and Krupnick, Alan. “Toward an Integrated Theory of International Trade and Environmental Policies.” Paper presented at the American Economics Association Meetings, Anaheim, California, January 1993.Google Scholar
Pearce, David W. and Turner, R. Kerry. Economics of Natural Resources and the Environment. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press, 1990.Google Scholar
Rice Council. “Trade Policy Issue/Barrier Worksheet.” May 1993.Google Scholar
Robertson, David. “Trade and the Environment: Harmonization and Technical Standards,” in International Trade and the Environment, ed. Low, P.. Washington, DC: The World Bank, 1992.Google Scholar
Parr, Rosson C. III, Harris, Harold M. Jr., and Benson, Geoffrey A., editors. Southern Agriculture in a World Economy. Mississippi State: Southern Rural Development Center, June 1988.Google Scholar
Ford, Runge C.. Freer Trade, Protected Environment: Balancing Trade Liberalization and Environmental Integrity. New York: Council on Foreign Relations Press, 1994.Google Scholar
Sumner, Daniel A. “The Competitive Position of Southern Commodities: Some Trends and Underlying Forces.” Southern Journal of Agricultural Economics. 18(July 1986):49–59.Google Scholar
Sutton, John D, editor. Agricultural Trade and Natural Resources: Discovering the Critical Linkages. Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner Publishers, 1988.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
U.S. Congress. “Tuna and the GATT.” CRS Report for Congress 91-666 ENR. Congressional Research Service, Washington, D.C., December 10, 1991.Google Scholar
U.S. Congress, Federal Register. 54(June 9, 1989):24661–64.Google Scholar
U.S. Congress. Trade and Environment: Conflicts and Opportunities. OTA-BP-ITE-94. Office of Technology Assessment, Washington, D.C., May 1992.Google Scholar
U.S. Dept. of Agriculture. U. S. Export Sales. Foreign Agricultural Service, Washington, DC: various issues.Google Scholar
U.S. Dept. of Agriculture. Foreign Agricultural Trade of the United States (FATUS). Economic Research Service, Washington, D.C.: various issues.Google Scholar
U.S. Dept. of Agriculture. Cotton Annual Report. Foreign Agricultural Service, Washington, D.C., 1993.Google Scholar
U.S. Dept. of Agriculture. Agricultural Statistics, 1992. National Agricultural Statistics Service, Washington, D.C., 1992.Google Scholar
U.S. Dept. of Commerce, Bureau of the Census. Agricultural Atlas of the United States. 1987 Census of Agriculture. Vol. 2 Subject Series. Washington, D.C: AC87-S-1, June 1990.Google Scholar
U.S. Trade Representative. Foreign Trade Barriers. Washington, D.C.: various years.Google Scholar
United Nations, Food and Agriculture Organization. Trade Yearbook. Rome, Italy: various issues. Washington Post. December 31, 1993.Google Scholar
Washington Rice Letter. “Rice and Environmentalism.” V18#11, June 26, 1992.Google Scholar
Webb, Alan and Gudmunds, Karl. PS&D VIEW '91 Users Manual and Database. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service, November 1991.Google Scholar
World Resources Institute. World Resources 1992-93: Toward Sustainable Development. Oxford University Press, 1992.Google Scholar
World Bank. World Development Report 1992: Development and the Environment. Oxford University Press, 1992.Google Scholar