IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/apu/wpaper/2003-03.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

WTO Negociations on Market Access in Agriculture: a Comparison of alternative Tariff Cut Proposals for the EU and the US

Author

Listed:
  • Jean-Christophe Bureau
  • Luca Salvatici

Abstract

This paper provides a summary measure of the possible new commitments in the area of agricultural 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 20 agricultural commodity aggregates under the actual commitments of the Uruguay Round assuming a specific (Constant Elasticity of Substitution) functional form for import demand. Then, we estimate the deadweight losses implied by each tariff structure in order to assess the benefits of future trade agreements in terms of increased efficiency. We compare the present levels of the TRI with three hypothetical cases: a repetition of the same set of tariff cuts commitments of the Uruguay Round according to the EU proposal, a uniform 36 percent reduction of each tariff, an harmonization ("Swiss") formula based on the US proposal.

Suggested Citation

  • Jean-Christophe Bureau & Luca Salvatici, 2003. "WTO Negociations on Market Access in Agriculture: a Comparison of alternative Tariff Cut Proposals for the EU and the US," Working Papers 2003/03, INRA, Economie Publique.
  • Handle: RePEc:apu:wpaper:2003/03
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www6.versailles-grignon.inra.fr/economie_publique/Media/fichiers/Working-Papers/Working-Papers-2003/Wp_2003_03
    Download Restriction: no

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    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. McDaniel, Christine A. & Balistreri, Edward J., 2002. "A Discussion on Armington Trade Substitution Elasticities," Working Papers 15856, United States International Trade Commission, Office of Economics.
    3. 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.
    4. James E. Anderson & J. Peter Neary, 2003. "The Mercantilist Index of Trade Policy," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 44(2), pages 627-649, May.
    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. John C. Beghin & Jean-Christophe Bureau, 2017. "Quantitative Policy Analysis Of Sanitary, Phytosanitary And Technical Barriers To Trade," World Scientific Book Chapters,in: Nontariff Measures and International Trade, chapter 3, pages 39-62 World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    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. Hugh M. Arce & Kenneth A. Reinert, 1994. "Aggregation and the Welfare Analysis of US Tariffs," Journal of Economic Studies, Emerald Group Publishing, vol. 21(6), pages 26-30, October.
    11. Tatsuo Hatta, 1977. "A Theory of Piecemeal Policy Recommendations," Review of Economic Studies, Oxford University Press, vol. 44(1), pages 1-21.
    12. Lloyd, P J, 1975. "Substitution Effects and Biases in Nontrue Price Indices," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 65(3), pages 301-313, June.
    13. Diao, Xinshen & Elbehri, Aziz & Gehlhar, Mark J. & Gibson, Paul R. & Leetmaa, Susan E. & Mitchell, Lorraine & Nelson, Frederick J. & Nimon, R. Wesley & Normile, Mary Anne & Roe, Terry L. & Shapouri, S, 2001. "Agricultural Policy Reform In The Wto: The Road Ahead," Agricultural Economics Reports 34015, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.
    14. Patrick A. Messerlin, 2001. "Measuring the Costs of Protection in Europe: European Commercial Policy in the 2000s," Peterson Institute Press: All Books, Peterson Institute for International Economics, number 102.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Jean-Christophe Bureau & Luca Salvatici, 2005. "Agricultural trade restrictiveness in the European Union and the United States," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 33(s3), pages 479-490, November.
    2. Himics, Mihály & Britz, Wolfgang, 2016. "Flexible and welfare-consistent tariff aggregation over exporter regions," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 53(C), pages 375-387.
    3. Alessandro Olper & Valentina Raimondi, 2008. "Market Access Asymmetry in Food Trade," Review of World Economics (Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv), Springer;Institut für Weltwirtschaft (Kiel Institute for the World Economy), vol. 144(3), pages 509-537, October.
    4. Listorti, Giulia & Tonini, Axel & Kempen, Markus & Adenauer, Marcel, 2013. "How to Implement WTO Scenarios in Simulation Models: Linking the TRIMAG Tariff Aggregation Tool to Capri," 135th Seminar, August 28-30, 2013, Belgrade, Serbia 160388, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    5. Janine Pelikan & Martina Brockmeier, 2008. "Tariff Aggregation and Market Access: An Empirical Assessment for Canada and the EU," Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue canadienne d'agroeconomie, Canadian Agricultural Economics Society/Societe canadienne d'agroeconomie, vol. 56(4), pages 413-427, December.
    6. Rod Tyers, 2004. "Implicit Policy Preferences and Trade Reform by Tariff Aggregates," ANU Working Papers in Economics and Econometrics 2004-445, Australian National University, College of Business and Economics, School of Economics.
    7. Alessandro Antimiani & Piero Conforti & Luca Salvatici, 2008. "Measuring Restrictiveness of Bilateral Trade Policies: A Comparison between Developed and Developing Countries," Review of World Economics (Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv), Springer;Institut für Weltwirtschaft (Kiel Institute for the World Economy), vol. 144(2), pages 207-224, July.
    8. Maria Cipollina & Luca Salvatici, 2008. "Measuring Protection: Mission Impossible?," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 22(3), pages 577-616, July.
    9. Brockmeier, Martina & Pelikan, Janine, 2006. "Agricultural Market Access: A Moving Target in the WTO Negotiations?," 2006 Annual Meeting, August 12-18, 2006, Queensland, Australia 25428, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    10. Xie, Zhenzhen & Li, Jiatao, 2015. "Demand Heterogeneity, Learning Diversity and Innovation in an Emerging Economy," Journal of International Management, Elsevier, vol. 21(4), pages 277-292.
    11. Martina Brockmeier & Janine Pelikan, 2006. "A Portfolio Theory of International Capital Flows," The Institute for International Integration Studies Discussion Paper Series iiisdp125, IIIS.
    12. Brockmeier, Martina & Pelikan, Janine, 2008. "Agricultural market access: A moving target in the WTO negotiations?," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(3), pages 250-259, June.
    13. repec:wfo:wstudy:31543 is not listed on IDEAS

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Commercial Policy; Trade Negotiations; Agriculture in International Trade;

    JEL classification:

    • F13 - International Economics - - Trade - - - Trade Policy; International Trade Organizations
    • Q17 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Agriculture - - - Agriculture in International Trade

    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:apu:wpaper:2003/03. 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: (Régis Grateau). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/epinrfr.html .

    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.