IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/ajagec/v92y2010i3p698-712.html

How Do Agricultural Policy Restrictions on Global Trade and Welfare Differ Across Commodities?

Author

Listed:
  • Johanna L. Croser
  • Peter J. Lloyd
  • Kym Anderson

Abstract

For decades the world's agricultural markets have been highly distorted by government policies, but differently for different commodities such that a ranking of weighted average nominal rates of assistance across countries can be misleading as an indicator of the trade or welfare effects of policies affecting global markets. This article develops two theory-based indicators, drawing on the recent literature on trade restrictiveness indexes. It estimates those indicators for each of 28 key agricultural commodities from 1960 to 2004, based on a sample of 75 countries that together account for more than three-quarters of the world's production of those agricultural commodities. Copyright 2010, Oxford University Press.

Suggested Citation

  • Johanna L. Croser & Peter J. Lloyd & Kym Anderson, 2010. "How Do Agricultural Policy Restrictions on Global Trade and Welfare Differ Across Commodities?," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 92(3), pages 698-712.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:ajagec:v:92:y:2010:i:3:p:698-712
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/ajae/aaq025
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version below or

    for a different version of it.

    Other versions of this item:

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Kym Anderson & Johanna Croser, 2011. "Novel indicators of the trade and welfare effects of agricultural distortions in OECD countries," Review of World Economics (Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv), Springer;Institut für Weltwirtschaft (Kiel Institute for the World Economy), vol. 147(2), pages 269-302, June.
    2. 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.
    3. Urban, Kirsten & Brockmeier, Martina & Jensen, Hans Grinsted, 2015. "Evaluating the Effect of Domestic Support on International Trade: A Mercantilist Trade Restrictiveness Approach," Conference papers 332615, Purdue University, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Global Trade Analysis Project.
    4. Peter J. Lloyd & Johanna L. Croser & Kym Anderson, 2009. "Global Distortions to Agricultural Markets: New Indicators of Trade and Welfare Impacts, 1955 to 2007," School of Economics and Public Policy Working Papers 2009-13, University of Adelaide, School of Economics and Public Policy.
    5. Anderson, Kym, 2009. "Political Economy of Distortions to Agricultural Incentives: Introduction and Summary," Agricultural Distortions Working Paper Series 50306, World Bank.
    6. Pham Van Ha & Hoa Thi Minh Nguyen & Tom Kompas & Tuong Nhu Che & Bui Trinh, 2015. "Rice Production, Trade and the Poor: Regional Effects of Rice Export Policy on Households in Vietnam," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 66(2), pages 280-307, June.
    7. 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.
    8. Anderson, Kym & Croser, Johanna, 2010. "How Much Do Agricultural Policies Restrict Trade? Comparing Trade Restrictiveness Indexes," World Bank - Economic Premise, The World Bank, issue 4, pages 1-7, March.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • F13 - International Economics - - Trade - - - Trade Policy; International Trade Organizations
    • F14 - International Economics - - Trade - - - Empirical Studies of Trade
    • Q17 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Agriculture - - - Agriculture in International Trade
    • Q18 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Agriculture - - - Agricultural Policy; Food Policy; Animal Welfare Policy

    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:oup:ajagec:v:92:y:2010:i:3:p:698-712. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/aaeaaea.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.