IDEAS home Printed from
   My bibliography  Save this paper

European Union: Shadow WTO agricultural domestic support notifications


  • Josling, Tim
  • Swinbank, Alan


"The notification of the level of domestic support to the World Trade Organization (WTO) is intended to reflect compliance with obligations entered into at the time of the Uruguay Round. WTO members have often been slow to provide notification of domestic support levels. This makes the process of notification less useful as an indicator of the degree to which changes in policy have or have not benefited the trade system as a whole and exporting countries in particular. The notification of domestic support in the E.U. illustrates the value of a measure that reflects current policies and can therefore act as a basis for negotiation of further disciplines where these are necessary. The E.U. has made major changes in its Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) over the period since 1992 when the MacSharry reforms were implemented. Payments originally notified in the blue box (related to supply control) have over time been changed until in their present form they are unrelated to current production or price levels, and hence can satisfy the criteria for the green box. The E.U. has therefore much more latitude in trade talks to agree to reductions in the allowable trade-distorting support. This paper reproduced the E.U. notifications relating to 2003/04 and extends these with official statistics to the year 2006/07. It then projects forward the components of domestic support until the year 2013/14, based on forecasts of future production and estimates of policy parameters. The impact of a successful Doha Round is simulated, showing that the constraints envisaged in the WTO draft modalities document of May 19, 2008, would be binding by the year 2013, at about the time the next budget cycle in the E.U. starts. Without the Doha Round constraints, further reform might still happen for domestic reasons, but the framework provided by the WTO for domestic policy spending would be less relevant. In that case, much could hinge on the legitimacy of the Single Farm Payment system under the current rules governing the green box." from authors' abstract

Suggested Citation

  • Josling, Tim & Swinbank, Alan, 2008. "European Union: Shadow WTO agricultural domestic support notifications," IFPRI discussion papers 809, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
  • Handle: RePEc:fpr:ifprid:809

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    1. Richard Bennett & Uma Kambhampati & Stephen Morse & Yousouf Ismael, 2006. "Farm-Level Economic Performance of Genetically Modified Cotton in Maharashtra, India," Review of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 28(1), pages 59-71.
    2. Benjamin Crost & Bhavani Shankar & Richard Bennett & Stephen Morse, 2007. "Bias from Farmer Self-Selection in Genetically Modified Crop Productivity Estimates: Evidence from Indian Data," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 58(1), pages 24-36, February.
    3. Matin Qaim & Arjunan Subramanian & Gopal Naik & David Zilberman, 2006. "Adoption of Bt Cotton and Impact Variability: Insights from India," Review of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 28(1), pages 48-58.
    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. Alan Swinbank, 2009. "EU Policies on Bioenergy and their Potential Clash with the WTO," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 60(3), pages 485-503.

    More about this item


    Agricultural policies; WTO Doha round; WTO compliance; notification of domestic support; India agricultural support policies; Globalization; Markets; CAP;

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:


    Access and download statistics


    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:fpr:ifprid:809. 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: (). 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.

    We have no references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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.