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.:
- Taiji Furusawa & Hideo Konishi, 2003.
"Free Trade Networks,"
2003.55, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei.
- 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.
- 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.
- Sanjeev Goyal & Sumit Joshi, 2006.
"Bilateralism And Free Trade,"
International Economic Review,
Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 47(3), pages 749-778, 08.
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.