IDEAS home Printed from
   My bibliography  Save this paper

WTO Negotiations on Market Access in Agriculture: A Comparison of Alternative Tariff Cut Scenarios for the EU and the US


  • Bureau, Jean-Christophe
  • Salvatici, Luca


This paper provides a summary measure of the possible new commitments in the area of market access undertaken by the European Union and the United States, using the Trade Restrictiveness Index (TRI) as the tariff aggregator. Indicators such as the TRI, based on welfare theory, integrate economic behavioural assumptions within a balance of trade framework. We take the 2000 bound tariffs as the starting point and attempt to assess how much liberalisation in agriculture could be achieved in the European Union and the United States as a result of the present negotiations. We compute the index for agricultural commodity aggregates assuming a specific (Constant Elasticity of Substitution) functional form for import demand. The present levels of the TRI under the actual commitments of the Uruguay Round are computed and compared with three hypothetical cases: a repetition of the same set of commitments of the Uruguay Round, a uniform 36 percent reduction of each tariff, an harmonization formula based on the "sliding scale" scheme. This makes it possible to infer how reducing tariff dispersion would help improve market access in future trade agreements.

Suggested Citation

  • Bureau, Jean-Christophe & Salvatici, Luca, 2002. "WTO Negotiations on Market Access in Agriculture: A Comparison of Alternative Tariff Cut Scenarios for the EU and the US," 2002 International Congress, August 28-31, 2002, Zaragoza, Spain 24883, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
  • Handle: RePEc:ags:eaae02:24883

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    1. James E. Anderson & J. Peter Neary, 1996. "A New Approach to Evaluating Trade Policy," Review of Economic Studies, Oxford University Press, vol. 63(1), pages 107-125.
    2. Neary, J Peter, 1998. " Pitfalls in the Theory of International Trade Policy: Concertina Reforms of Tariffs, and Subsidies to High-Technology Industries," Scandinavian Journal of Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 100(1), pages 187-206, March.
    3. repec:ags:nejare:v:29:y:2000:i:1:p:70-80 is not listed on IDEAS
    4. Ingco, Merlinda D., 1995. "Agricultural trade liberalization in the Uruguay Round : one step forward, one step back?," Policy Research Working Paper Series 1500, The World Bank.
    5. Luca Salvatici, 2001. "Trade Distortion Indexes and Applied General Equilibrium Models: The Case of the Common Agricoltural Policy," Working Papers 45, University of Rome La Sapienza, Department of Public Economics.
    6. Bureau, Jean-Christophe & Tangermann, Stefan, 2000. "Tariff Rate Quotas In The Eu," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Northeastern Agricultural and Resource Economics Association, vol. 29(1), April.
    7. Bach, Christian F. & Martin, Will, 2001. "Would the right tariff aggregator for policy analysis please stand up?," Journal of Policy Modeling, Elsevier, vol. 23(6), pages 621-635, August.
    8. Gibson, Paul R. & Wainio, John & Whitley, Daniel B. & Bohman, Mary, 2001. "Profiles Of Tariffs In Global Agricultural Markets," Agricultural Economics Reports 34055, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.
    9. J-C Bureau & L Fulponi & L Salvatici, 2000. "Comparing EU and US trade liberalisation under the Uruguay Round Agreement on Agriculture," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Foundation for the European Review of Agricultural Economics, vol. 27(3), pages 259-280, September.
    10. Josling, Timothy E., 1990. "Of Models and Measures: Some Thoughts on the Use and Abuse of Policy Indicators," 1990: The Environment, Government Policies, and International Trade Meeting, December 1990, San Diego, CA 50880, International Agricultural Trade Research Consortium.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)


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

    Cited by:

    1. Nadia Belhaj Hassine & Magda Kandil, 2009. "Trade liberalisation, agricultural productivity and poverty in the Mediterranean region," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Foundation for the European Review of Agricultural Economics, vol. 36(1), pages 1-29, March.
    2. Bureau, Jean-Christophe & Jean, Sebastien & Matthews, Alan, 2005. "Agricultural Trade Liberalization: Assessing the Consequences for Developing Countries," 2005 International Congress, August 23-27, 2005, Copenhagen, Denmark 24628, European Association of Agricultural Economists.


    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:eaae02:24883. 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). General contact details of provider: .

    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 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.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.