IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ags/ecjilt/99768.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Disconnections in US and EU Agricultural Policy and Trade Negotiations: A Transaction Cost Politics Approach

Author

Listed:
  • Young, Linda M.
  • Hansen, Kathleen C.

Abstract

This article investigates aspects of the institutions and decision making processes in the United States and the European Union that affect the coordination of domestic farm programs and trade negotiations for agriculture in each entity. We explore how current institutions and processes contribute to a level of incoherence - or lack of coordination - between domestic farm programs and trade negotiations in the United States. Constructs from transaction cost politics with an emphasis on the decision to delegate authority from the principal to an agent are used to understand how institutional processes affect the coordination of domestic legislation.

Suggested Citation

  • Young, Linda M. & Hansen, Kathleen C., 2011. "Disconnections in US and EU Agricultural Policy and Trade Negotiations: A Transaction Cost Politics Approach," Estey Centre Journal of International Law and Trade Policy, Estey Centre for Law and Economics in International Trade, vol. 12(01), pages 1-17, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:ecjilt:99768
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.99768
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/99768/files/younghansen12-1.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.99768?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. Orden, David & Paarlberg, Robert & Roe, Terry, 1999. "Policy Reform in American Agriculture," University of Chicago Press Economics Books, University of Chicago Press, edition 1, number 9780226632643.
    2. repec:bla:jcmkts:v:45:y:2007:i::p:1-22 is not listed on IDEAS
    3. Carsten Daugbjerg & Alan Swinbank, 2007. "The Politics of CAP Reform: Trade Negotiations, Institutional Settings and Blame Avoidance," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 45(1), pages 1-22, March.
    4. Orden, David & Blandford, David & Josling, Timothy E., 2009. "Determinants of Farm Policies in the United States, 1996-2008," Agricultural Distortions Working Paper Series 50297, World Bank.
    5. Noland, Marcus, 1997. "Chasing Phantoms: The Political Economy of USTR," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 51(3), pages 365-387, July.
    6. Andreas Dür & Hubert Zimmermann, 2007. "Introduction: The EU in International Trade Negotiations," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 45(4), pages 771-787, November.
    7. William D. Coleman & Stefan Tangermann, 1999. "The 1992 CAP Reform, the Uruguay Round and the Commission: Conceptualizing Linked Policy Games," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 37(3), pages 385-405, September.
    8. John Whalley & Colleen Hamilton, 1996. "Trading System after the Uruguay Round, The," Peterson Institute Press: All Books, Peterson Institute for International Economics, number 62, January.
    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. Furtan, William Hartley & Jensen, Maria Skovager & Sauer, Johannes, 2008. "Rent Seeking and the Common Agricultural Policy: Do member countries free ride on lobbying?," 107th Seminar, January 30-February 1, 2008, Sevilla, Spain 6600, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    2. Furtan, William Hartley & Guzel, A. & Karantininis, Kostas, 2007. "The Doha Talks and the Bargaining Surplus in Agriculture," Estey Centre Journal of International Law and Trade Policy, Estey Centre for Law and Economics in International Trade, vol. 8(2), pages 1-17.
    3. Blandford, David & Orden, David, 2008. "United States: Shadow WTO Agricultural Domestic Support Notifications," IFPRI discussion papers 821, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    4. Noland, Marcus, 1996. "Trade, investment, and economic conflict between the United States and Asia," Journal of Asian Economics, Elsevier, vol. 7(3), pages 435-458.
    5. Erjavec, Karmen & Erjavec, Emil, 2015. "‘Greening the CAP’ – Just a fashionable justification? A discourse analysis of the 2014–2020 CAP reform documents," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 53-62.
    6. Mishra, Ashok K. & Moss, Charles B., 2013. "Modeling the effect of off-farm income on farmland values: A quantile regression approach," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 32(C), pages 361-368.
    7. Aukje van Loon, 2020. "The Selective Politicization of Transatlantic Trade Negotiations," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 8(1), pages 325-335.
    8. May, Daniel E., 2012. "Non-Economic Drivers Influencing Farmers' Incentives to Cooperate: Do they Remain Robust through Policy Changes?," Journal of Rural Cooperation, Hebrew University, Center for Agricultural Economic Research, vol. 40(2), pages 1-23.
    9. Luther Tweeten & Carl Zulauf, 2008. "Farm price and income policy: lessons from history," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 24(2), pages 145-160.
    10. Gulati, Sumeet & Mishra, Ashok K., 2003. "An Analysis Of The Government Payment Program In Us Agriculture," Working Papers 15837, University of British Columbia, Food and Resource Economics.
    11. Byron Gangnes & Craig Parsons, 2007. "Have US–Japan Trade Agreements Made a Difference?," Journal of the Asia Pacific Economy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 12(4), pages 548-566.
    12. Conconi, Paola & Perroni, Carlo, 2002. "Issue linkage and issue tie-in in multilateral negotiations," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 57(2), pages 423-447, August.
    13. Jacobs, Keri L. & Thurman, Walter N. & Marra, Michele C., 2011. "How Farmers Bid Into the Conservation Reserve Program: An Empirical Analysis of CRP Offers Data," 2011 Annual Meeting, July 24-26, 2011, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 103675, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    14. Greaney, Theresa M., 2005. "Measuring network effects on trade: Are Japanese affiliates distinctive?," Journal of the Japanese and International Economies, Elsevier, vol. 19(2), pages 194-214, June.
    15. Bruce Gardner, 2008. "Distortions to Agricultural Incentives in the United States and Canada," World Bank Publications - Reports 28185, The World Bank Group.
    16. Grace Skogstad, 2008. "Canadian Agricultural Programs and Paradigms:The Influence of International Trade Agreements and Domestic Factors," Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue canadienne d'agroeconomie, Canadian Agricultural Economics Society/Societe canadienne d'agroeconomie, vol. 56(4), pages 493-507, December.
    17. Orden, David, 2006. "Feasibility of Farm Program Buyouts: Is it a Possibility for US Sugar," 2006 NAAMIC Workshop III: Achieving NAFTA Plus 163884, North American Agrifood Market Integration Consortium (NAAMIC).
    18. John Whalley, 1998. "Why Do Countries Seek Regional Trade Agreements?," NBER Chapters, in: The Regionalization of the World Economy, pages 63-90, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    19. Bellemare, Marc F. & Carnes, Nicholas, 2015. "Why do members of congress support agricultural protection?," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(C), pages 20-34.
    20. Zulauf, Carl R. & Orden, David, 2009. "ACRE in the U.S. Farm Bill and the WTO," Working Papers 51821, International Agricultural Trade Research Consortium.

    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:ags:ecjilt:99768. 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: AgEcon Search (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/esteyca.html .

    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.