The Current Round of Agricultural Trade Negotiations: Should We Bother About Domestic Support?
The current WTO agricultural trade negotiations began in March 2000 and became part of the Doha Development Agenda in late 2001. The previous Uruguay Round reached agricultural agreements in the areas of market access, export competition and domestic support. The current round is seeking agreements under similar headings. The effort to reach agreement over reductions in domestic support to farmers is complicated by a number of factors,for example, the extent to which such support affects production decisions, the wishes of governments to support farmers for pursuing multifunctional outcomes from agriculture, and the categorisation of a myriad of policy instruments into green, blue and amber boxes. These complications pose the risk of considerably extending the negotiations and diverting attention away from other areas of reform. But the sustainability of many domestic support policies depends on trade barriers, and reform of these trade barriers may force governments into reforming domestic support without requiring specific international agreements. We use the GTAP applied general equilibrium model to quantify and analyse a number of trade reform scenarios, with and without specific changes in domestic support. We conclude that substantial trade expansion and welfare gains can be achieved, even when domestic support is excluded from the multilateral agreement. Improved market access makes a far greater contribution to welfare gains than do reforms to domestic policies, and once substantive reforms to border policies have been achieved attention can then be turned to the lower-priority task of reforming domestic support.
Volume (Year): 04. (2003)
Issue (Month): 2 ()
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: Suite 820, 410 22nd Street East, Saskatoon SK, S7K 5T6|
Phone: (306) 244-4800
Fax: (306) 244-7839
Web page: http://www.esteycentre.com/
More information through EDIRC
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.:
- James Rude, 2000. "An Examination of Nearly Green Programs: Case Study for Canada," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 82(3), pages 755-761.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ags:ecjilt:23881. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (AgEcon Search)
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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.
If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.