IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/eaa135/160371.html

The EU Meat Market and the Doha Round at a Glance

Author

Listed:
  • Banović, Marija
  • Ševarlić, Miladin M.

Abstract

Meat market has always had a special attention due to repeating crises and confidence breakdowns. Even though global meat trade has grown in the past decades, driven mainly by gains in poultry and pig meat originating from developing regions, many countries that produce and consume meat still remain disconnected by trade. Trade barriers, as sanitary and protectionist standards, have heavily influenced meat market. Sanitary standards related to animal diseases, food safety concerns and health issue awareness mostly identify those countries that are “free” and those that are “not free” of potential risks. Although sanitary barriers can inhibit trade flows they protect against the spread of serious diseases and other risks that can break animal production. On the other hand, protectionist barriers in the form of tariffs and tariff-rate quotas designed as domestic support may distort international markets and prevent significant potential trade in meats. The EU occupies an important position in the world meat market due to its export performance drawn from subsidies and sanitary and protection barriers that have been the focus of strong criticism by some developed and developing countries, among others. The Doha round has had an ambitious call in lowering protectionist barriers and achieving substantial improvements in market access and reductions of export subsidies and in tradedistorting domestic support. Yet, major protectionist barriers linger even so and the average global meat tariffs are higher than the average tariffs for other agricultural goods. Furthermore, these developments in trade liberalization and market access seem not to be only precondition for trade to occur as well as only answer to meat crisis.

Suggested Citation

  • Banović, Marija & Ševarlić, Miladin M., 2013. "The EU Meat Market and the Doha Round at a Glance," 135th Seminar, August 28-30, 2013, Belgrade, Serbia 160371, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
  • Handle: RePEc:ags:eaa135:160371
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.160371
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/160371/files/02-Banovic_%20Sevarlic%20-%20EAAE%20135.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.160371?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. Kym Anderson & Will Martin, 2005. "Agricultural Trade Reform and the Doha Development Agenda," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 28(9), pages 1301-1327, September.
    2. Giovanni Anania & Jean-Christophe Bureau, 2005. "The negotiations on agriculture in the Doha Development Agenda Round: current status and future prospects," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 32(4), pages 539-574, December.
    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. Anania, Giovanni, 2007. "Multilateral Negotiations, Preferential Trade Agreements and the CAP. What's Ahead?," Working Papers 7283, TRADEAG - Agricultural Trade Agreements.
    2. Moon, Wanki, 2011. "Is agriculture compatible with free trade?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 71(C), pages 13-24.
    3. Arne Melchior, 2006. "The Most and the Least Favoured Nations: Norway's Trade Policy in Perspective," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 29(10), pages 1329-1346, October.
    4. Kym Anderson, 2005. "On the Virtues of Multilateral Trade Negotiations," The Economic Record, The Economic Society of Australia, vol. 81(255), pages 414-438, December.
    5. Bardsley, Douglas K. & Bardsley, Annette M., 2014. "Organising for socio-ecological resilience: The roles of the mountain farmer cooperative Genossenschaft Gran Alpin in Graubünden, Switzerland," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 98(C), pages 11-21.
    6. Tomasz Iwanow & Colin Kirkpatrick, 2007. "Trade facilitation, regulatory quality and export performance," Journal of International Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 19(6), pages 735-753.
    7. Allexandro Mori Coelho & Maria Lúcia L. M. Pádua Lima & Samir Cury & Sergio Goldbaum, 2006. "Impacts Of The Proposals For Tariff Reductions In Nonagricultural Goods (Nama)," Anais do XXXIV Encontro Nacional de Economia [Proceedings of the 34th Brazilian Economics Meeting] 121, ANPEC - Associação Nacional dos Centros de Pós-Graduação em Economia [Brazilian Association of Graduate Programs in Economics].
    8. Baldassarre,Alessio & Calà,Valerio Ferdinando & Carullo,Danilo & Dudu,Hasan & Fusco,Elisa Marie & Giacobbe,Pasquale & Orecchia,Carlo, 2023. "Simulating the Effect of Business Tax Abolition through a New Regional CGE Model : Evidencefrom Italy," Policy Research Working Paper Series 10387, The World Bank.
    9. Mark Weisbrot & Jake Johnson, 2010. "The Gains From Trade: South American Economic Integration and the Resolution of Conflict," CEPR Reports and Issue Briefs 2010-27, Center for Economic and Policy Research (CEPR).
    10. Mohamed Hedi Bchir & Sébastien Jean & David Laborde, 2006. "Binding Overhang and Tariff-Cutting Formulas," Review of World Economics (Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv), Springer;Institut für Weltwirtschaft (Kiel Institute for the World Economy), vol. 142(2), pages 207-232, July.
    11. Cipollina, Maria & Salvatici, Luca, 2007. "EU and developing countries: an analysis of preferential margins on agricultural trade flows," Working Papers 7219, TRADEAG - Agricultural Trade Agreements.
    12. Carlos Azzoni & Jonathan Brooks & Joaquim Guilhoto & Scott McDonald, 2007. "Who in Brazil Will Gain from Global Trade Reforms?," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 30(10), pages 1568-1593, October.
    13. Miet Maertens & Liesbeth Colen & Johan F. M. Swinnen, 2011. "Globalisation and poverty in Senegal: a worst case scenario?," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 38(1), pages 31-54, March.
    14. Jensen, Hans G. & Yu, Wusheng, 2006. "Reforming Agricultural Domestic Support of the EU in the Doha Round: Measurement, Feasibility, and Consequences," Conference papers 331491, Purdue University, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Global Trade Analysis Project.
    15. Brockhaus, Jan & Kalkuhl, Matthias & Kozicka, Marta, "undated". "What Drives India’s Rice Stocks? Empirical Evidence," 2016 Annual Meeting, July 31-August 2, Boston, Massachusetts 235659, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    16. Tokarick, Stephen, 2007. "Evaluating the Robustness of Trade Restrictiveness Indices," Conference papers 331652, Purdue University, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Global Trade Analysis Project.
    17. Lofgren, Hans & Diaz-Bonilla, Carolina, 2006. "Economywide Simulations of Ethiopian MDG Strategies," Conference papers 331488, Purdue University, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Global Trade Analysis Project.
    18. Houssein Guimbard & David Laborde Debucquet & Cristina Mitaritonna, 2009. "A Picture of Tariff Protection Across the World in 2004 MAcMap-HS6, Version 2," Working Papers 2009-22, CEPII research center.
    19. Boussard, Jean-Marc, 2006. "Consequences of price volatility in evaluating the benefits of liberalisation," MPRA Paper 4467, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    20. Reza Siregar & Ramkishen Rajan, 2006. "Models of Equilibrium Real Exchange Rates Revisited: A Selective Review of the Literature," Centre for International Economic Studies Working Papers 2006-04, University of Adelaide, Centre for International Economic Studies.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:ags:eaa135:160371. 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/eaaeeea.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.