IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/globus/v8y2007i1p99-117.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Declining Indian Agricultural Trade in an Unequal World

Author

Listed:
  • Akram A. Khan

    (Akram A. Khan is Associate Professor—Agricultural Science, AEBM Department, Aligarh Muslim University, Aligarh. E-mail: akramakhan27@yahoo.com)

  • Nazli Bano

    (Nazli Bano is a Research Fellow, Agricultural Economic & Business Management, F/O Agricultural Sciences, Aligarh Muslim University, Aligarh. E-mail: nazli_alig@yahoo.com)

Abstract

The Uruguay Round established rules that were expected to improve market access for agricultural products and reduced export subsidies and domestic support payments as an opportunity to level the playing field. Major global economic benefits were predicted from the establishment of WTO and Agreement on Agriculture (AoA). But what has happened since the Uruguay Round? Industrialized countries systematically use sub-sidies to skew the benefits of agricultural trade in their favour. The overall level of support to agriculture in these countries has fallen very little. What does free trade mean in a context where the world's largest ex-porter of dairy produce, the EU, is providing subsidies in excess of US $300 billion a year? India is the num-ber one producer of milk and yet cannot compete. The European Union and the United States have invented a category of support—known as the Green Box and the Blue Box in WTO talks—deemed to be decoupled from production and therefore exempt from cuts in subsidies. The persistence of high trade barriers as well as regulatory controls related to food safety and environment make trade rules unfair. The overall feeling is that AoA is an ‘unequal treaty’ as high support continues in OECD countries. There is no level playing field. Agricultural surpluses in rich countries, generated through protection and subsidies and then dumped onto world markets, have hurt agricultural development in developing countries. Developing countries as a whole are projected to increase their net imports of cereals for all purposes to a total of more than 200 million tonnes of net annual imports from the developed countries by 2020. Developing countries like India will become net agricultural importers. It is argued that the Uruguay Round agreements did not go far enough in reducing trade barriers in developed countries, to have a significant impact. It did, however, establish a framework for negotiating further reductions in support. The Doha Round offers the opportunity to level a tilted playing field. Equally important is India improving its own agricultural policies. For years we have discriminated against agriculture.

Suggested Citation

  • Akram A. Khan & Nazli Bano, 2007. "Declining Indian Agricultural Trade in an Unequal World," Global Business Review, International Management Institute, vol. 8(1), pages 99-117, February.
  • Handle: RePEc:sae:globus:v:8:y:2007:i:1:p:99-117
    DOI: 10.1177/097215090600800107
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/097215090600800107
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/097215090600800107?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Tyers,Rod & Anderson,Kym, 2011. "Disarray in World Food Markets," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521172318.
    2. Delgado, Christopher L. & Rosegrant, Mark W. & Steinfeld, Henning & Ehui, Simeon K. & Courbois, Claude, 1999. "Livestock to 2020: the next food revolution," 2020 vision briefs 61, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    3. Henson, Spencer & Loader, Rupert, 2001. "Barriers to Agricultural Exports from Developing Countries: The Role of Sanitary and Phytosanitary Requirements," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 29(1), pages 85-102, January.
    4. Rosegrant, Mark W. & Agcaoili-Sombilla, Mercedita C. & Perez, Nicostrato D., 1995. "Global food projections to 2020: implications for investment," 2020 vision discussion papers 5, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    5. Merlinda D. Ingco, 2003. "Agriculture, Trade, and the WTO : Creating a Trading Environment for Development," World Bank Publications - Books, The World Bank Group, number 15208, December.
    6. Hans Binswanger & Ernst Lutz, 2003. "Agricultural trade barriers, trade negotiations and the interests of developing countries," Chapters, in: John Toye (ed.), Trade and Development, chapter 8, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    7. Martin,Will & Winters,L. Alan (ed.), 1996. "The Uruguay Round and the Developing Countries," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521586016.
    8. Balassa, Bela & Schydlowsky, Daniel M, 1972. "Domestic Resource Costs and Effective Protection Once Again," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 80(1), pages 63-69, Jan.-Feb..
    9. Delgado, Christopher L. & Rosegrant, Mark W. & Meijer, Siet, 2001. "Livestock To 2020: The Revolution Continues," 2001: International Trade in Livestock Products Symposium, January 2001, Auckland, New Zealand 14560, International Agricultural Trade Research Consortium.
    10. Daphne S. Taylor & Truman P. Phillips, 1991. "Food-Pricing Policy in Developing Countries: Further Evidence on Cereal Producer Prices," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 73(4), pages 1036-1043.
    11. Josling, Tim & Tangermann, Stefan, 1999. "Implementation of the WTO Agreement on Agriculture and Developments for the Next Round of Negotiations," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 26(3), pages 371-388, August.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Bernard Hoekman & Kym Anderson, 2000. "Developing-Country Agriculture and the New Trade Agenda," Economic Development and Cultural Change, University of Chicago Press, vol. 49(1), pages 171-180.
    2. Kym Anderson, 2003. "Measuring Effects of Trade Policy Distortions: How Far Have We Come?," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 26(4), pages 413-440, April.
    3. Will Martin & Kym Anderson, 2007. "The Doha agenda and agricultural trade reform: the role of economic analysis," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 37(s1), pages 77-87, December.
    4. Randhir, Timothy O. & Hertel, Thomas W., 2000. "Trade Liberalization as a Vehicle for Adapting to Global Warming," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 29(2), pages 159-172, October.
    5. Anderson, Kym, 2004. "Setting the Trade Policy Agenda: What Roles for Economists?," Working Papers 14574, International Agricultural Trade Research Consortium.
    6. Will Martin & Kym Anderson, 2006. "Agricultural Trade Reform and the Doha Development Agenda," World Bank Publications - Books, The World Bank Group, number 6889, December.
    7. Pingali, Prabhu, 2007. "Westernization of Asian diets and the transformation of food systems: Implications for research and policy," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(3), pages 281-298, June.
    8. Will Martin & Aaditya Mattoo, 2010. "The Doha Development Agenda: What's on the table?," The Journal of International Trade & Economic Development, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 19(1), pages 81-107.
    9. Alan Matthews, 2000. "The WTO agricultural trade negotiations after Seattle," Trinity Economics Papers 20005, Trinity College Dublin, Department of Economics.
    10. Anderson, Kym & Martin, Will & van der Mensbrugghe, Dominique, 2013. "Estimating Effects of Price-Distorting Policies Using Alternative Distortions Databases," Handbook of Computable General Equilibrium Modeling, in: Peter B. Dixon & Dale Jorgenson (ed.), Handbook of Computable General Equilibrium Modeling, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 0, pages 877-931, Elsevier.
    11. Berger, Jurij & Dalheimer, Bernhard & Brümmer, Bernhard, 2021. "Effects of variable EU import levies on corn price volatility," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 102(C).
    12. Antimiani, Alessandro, 2004. "A New Index to Evaluate the Effective Protection: An Application in a CGE Context," Conference papers 331191, Purdue University, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Global Trade Analysis Project.
    13. Kym Anderson, 2016. "Contributions Of The Gatt/Wto To Global Economic Welfare: Empirical Evidence," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 30(1), pages 56-92, February.
    14. Kym Anderson, 2005. "Agricultural trade reform and poverty reduction in developing countries," Chapters, in: Sisira Jayasuriya (ed.), Trade Policy Reforms and Development, chapter 9, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    15. Scott, Gregory J. & Rosegrant, Mark W. & Ringler, Claudia, 2000. "Global projections for root and tuber crops to the year 2020," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 25(5), pages 561-597, October.
    16. Michalopoulos, Constantine & Ng, Francis, 2013. "Developing country trade policies and market access issues : 1990-2012," Policy Research Working Paper Series 6463, The World Bank.
    17. Yongzheng Yang, 2000. "Food Embargoes against China: Their Likelihood and Potential Consequences," Asia Pacific Economic Papers 304, Australia-Japan Research Centre, Crawford School of Public Policy, The Australian National University.
    18. Barry Popkin & Shu Wen Ng, 2007. "The nutrition transition in high‐ and low‐income countries: what are the policy lessons?," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 37(s1), pages 199-211, December.
    19. Anderson, Kym & Martin, William J. & Valenzuela, Ernesto, 2007. "Long Run Implications of WTO Accession for Agriculture in China," 2007: China's Agricultural Trade: Issues and Prospects Symposium, July 2007, Beijing, China 55025, International Agricultural Trade Research Consortium.
    20. Robinson, Sherman & Mason d'Croz, Daniel & Islam, Shahnila & Sulser, Timothy B. & Robertson, Richard D. & Zhu, Tingju & Gueneau, Arthur & Pitois, Gauthier & Rosegrant, Mark W., 2015. "The International Model for Policy Analysis of Agricultural Commodities and Trade (IMPACT): Model description for version 3:," IFPRI discussion papers 1483, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:globus:v:8:y:2007:i:1:p:99-117. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.imi.edu/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.