Bilateralism in Agriculture when Countries use Distorting Domestic Policies
A recent theoretical research proved that countries always have an incentive to deviate from global free trade when international markets are oligopolistic and when governments are politically biased. This result suggests that global free trade in agriculture (GFTA) cannot be reached as political bias and market power have both been identified. According to May (2011), bilateral agreements could eventually be used as alternative political tools to reach GFTA. This article extends the work of this author to determine whether bilateralism could also lead to GFTA in a realistic world where governments use distorting domestic policies to protect their agricultural sector.
|Date of creation:||02 Sep 2011|
|Date of revision:|
|Contact details of provider:|| Web page: http://www.eaae.org|
More information through EDIRC
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.:
- Furusawa, Taiji & Konishi, Hideo, 2007.
"Free trade networks,"
Journal of International Economics,
Elsevier, vol. 72(2), pages 310-335, July.
- Reimer Jeffrey J & Stiegert Kyle, 2006. "Imperfect Competition and Strategic Trade Theory: Evidence for International Food and Agricultural Markets," Journal of Agricultural & Food Industrial Organization, De Gruyter, vol. 4(1), pages 1-27, September.
- Brent Hueth & Philippe Marcoul, 2006. "Information Sharing and Oligopoly in Agricultural Markets: The Role of the Cooperative Bargaining Association," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 88(4), pages 866-881.
- Goyal, S. & Joshi, S., 1999.
"Bilateralism and free trade,"
Econometric Institute Research Papers
EI 9953-/A, Erasmus University Rotterdam, Erasmus School of Economics (ESE), Econometric Institute.
- Steve McCorriston, 2002. "Why should imperfect competition matter to agricultural economists?," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Foundation for the European Review of Agricultural Economics, vol. 29(3), pages 349-371, July.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ags:eaae11:114657. 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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.