This file is part of IDEAS, which uses RePEc data


[ Papers | Articles | Software | Books | Chapters | Authors | Institutions | JEL Classification | NEP reports | Search | New papers by email | Author registration | Rankings | Volunteers | FAQ | Blog | Help! ]

Agricultural Trade Liberalization and Adjustment in Developing Countries

Author info | Abstract | Publisher info | Download info | Related research | Statistics
Author Info
Abbott, Philip
Abstract

Agricultural trade liberalization offers the possibility of substantial income gains and poverty reduction in the developing world. For those gains to be realized, institutional innovations and realizations of export opportunities are crucial. Adjustment policies to foster gains from trade include initiatives to compensate losers, institutional reforms to integrate into the global trading system, and policies which facilitate resource reallocations and especially enhance investment activity, both foreign and domestic. Much can be learned from experience with structural adjustment reforms, in which substantial trade liberalization by developing countries was accompanied by numerous other reforms when successful. Agriculture is important in reforms because of the size of the agricultural sector, and because poverty reduction requires that agricultural investment be part of the overall development strategy. Good governance is key, because experience has shown that the free market left to itself will not bring about the institutional innovation nor provide the public goods necessary for equitable adjustment to occur, but corrupt governments can hinder adjustment. Timing and pace of reforms is also crucial, both to insure that institutional change keeps up with market incentives, and because the macroeconomic environment is crucial to both the need for compensation and the extent of social disruption trade liberalization can bring. The role of trade relative to other development objectives must also be kept in perspective, as meeting WTO rules or compensation schemes can be extremely costly and stall other development initiatives.

Download Info
To download:

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. Information about this may be contained in the File-Format links below. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

File URL: http://purl.umn.edu/15731
File Format: application/pdf
File Function:
Download Restriction: no

Publisher Info
Paper provided by International Agricultural Policy Reform and Adjustment Project (IAPRAP) in its series Policy Reform and Adjustment Workshop, October 23-25, 2003, Imperial College London, Wye Campus with number 15731.

Download reference. The following formats are available: HTML (with abstract), plain text (with abstract), BibTeX, RIS (EndNote, RefMan, ProCite), ReDIF
Length:
Date of creation: 2003
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:ags:iapr03:15731

Contact details of provider:
Web page: http://agadjust.aers.psu.edu/

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its listing, contact: (AgEcon Search).

Related research
Keywords: agricultural trade liberalization; developing countries; structural adjustment; institutional innovation; good governance; investment; International Relations/Trade;

Other versions of this item:

References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
  1. Craig Burnside & David Dollar, 2000. "Aid, Policies, and Growth," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 90(4), pages 847-868, September. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
    Other versions:
  2. Hertel, Thomas W. & Will Martin, 1999. "Would Developing Countries Gain from Inclusion of Manufactures in the WTO Negotiations?," GTAP Working Papers 397, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Department of Agricultural Economics, Purdue University. [Downloadable!]
  3. William Easterly, 2003. "Can Foreign Aid Buy Growth?," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 17(3), pages 23-48, Summer. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  4. Schiff, Maurice & Valdes, Alberto, 2002. "Agriculture and the macroeconomy, with emphasis on developing countries," Handbook of Agricultural Economics, in: B. L. Gardner & G. C. Rausser (ed.), Handbook of Agricultural Economics, edition 1, volume 2, chapter 27, pages 1421-1454 Elsevier. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  5. Anderson, Kym, 2000. "Agriculture, Developing Countries, And The WTO Millennium Round," CEPR Discussion Papers 2437, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  6. Loper, Nathan & Abbott, Philip & Foster, Ken, 2003. "Preferential Trade Of Agricultural Commodities In The Caribbean Basin," 2003 Annual meeting, July 27-30, Montreal, Canada 22018, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association). [Downloadable!]
  7. Kherallah, Mylène & Delgado, Christopher L. & Gabre-Madhin, Eleni Z. & Minot, Nicholas. & Johnson, Michael., 2000. "The road half traveled," Food policy reports 10, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI). [Downloadable!]
    Other versions:
    • Kherallah, Mylène & Delgado, Christopher L. & Gabre-Madhin, Eleni Z. & Minot, Nicholas & Johnson, Michael, 2000. "The road half traveled," Issue briefs 2, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI). [Downloadable!]
  8. J. Michael Finger & Philip Schuler, 2000. "Implementation of Urugauy Round Commitments: The Development Challenge," The World Economy, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 23(04), pages 511-525, 04. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
Full references

Statistics
Access and download statistics

Did you know? Authors registered on the RePEc Author Service receive monthly emails with details about downloads and abstract views of their works.

This page was last updated on 2009-11-26.


This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Department of Economics, College of Liberal Arts and Sciences, University of Connecticut using RePEc data on a server sponsored by the Society for Economic Dynamics.