IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/fpr/ifprid/822.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Japan: Shadow WTO Agricultural Domestic Support Notifications

Author

Listed:
  • Godo, Yoshihisa
  • Takahashi, Daisuke

Abstract

"The purpose of this paper is to provide a comprehensive review of Japan's agricultural domestic policy since 1995 in the context of the current international negotiations in the WTO Doha Round, which has as one aim further reductions of trade-distorting support among member countries. An overwhelming majority of farmers in Japan own small plots of rice paddy fields and earn their living mainly on their off-farm income. They go out into rice paddy fields in their spare time as a subsidiary business. Traditional small farming communities are powerful voting groups that seek to maintain their political power. By exerting political pressures on the authorities, farmers can obtain large returns through the manipulation of farmland use regulations, even though such manipulation causes social harm by preventing efficient land use. These inefficiencies in land use are a major reason why Japan is the only country whose food self-sufficiency rate keeps declining in spite of its heavy agricultural protection. In this sense, Japan is in sharp contrast to European and North American countries, where heavy agricultural domestic supports have resulted in an increased output of agricultural commodities and subsequent distortions in international markets. Apparently, Japan's attitude towards agricultural domestic policy reform is one of compliance with the WTO, which requests member countries to reduce their Aggregate Measure of Support (AMS) through trimming trade-distorting (amber box) support and/or transforming traditional-type agricultural subsidies to decoupled-type ones. Japan reduced its amber box support by nearly 80 percent between 1995 and 2000. This drastic reduction is mainly attributable to Japan's removal of rice from the amber box in 1998. In addition, following the WTO's principle of decoupling, Japan launched an extensive agricultural subsidy reform in 2007. This paper, however, shows the ironical realities of Japanese agricultural policy. Neither a sharp reduction of amber box support nor Japan's 2007 reform necessarily mean there will be a reduction of trade-distorting effects. On the contrary, the 2007 reform may in fact stimulate domestic rice production. In 2007, Japan's AMS is as little as 18 percent of its commitment level from the Uruguay Round WTO agreements. In addition, this paper projects that Japan's overall trade-distorting support (OTDS) for 2013 will be 469 billion yen, which is much less than the limit of 1,635 billion yen that is proposed in the modalities under discussion in July 2008 for the WTO Doha Round. Thus, the WTO Doha Round negotiations on domestic support policy are unlikely to restrict Japan's domestic agricultural support policy." from authors' abstract

Suggested Citation

  • Godo, Yoshihisa & Takahashi, Daisuke, 2008. "Japan: Shadow WTO Agricultural Domestic Support Notifications," IFPRI discussion papers 822, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
  • Handle: RePEc:fpr:ifprid:822
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.ifpri.org/sites/default/files/publications/ifpridp00822.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Chad E. Hart & John C. Beghin, 2004. "Rethinking Agricultural Domestic Support under the World Trade Organization," Center for Agricultural and Rural Development (CARD) Publications 04-bp43, Center for Agricultural and Rural Development (CARD) at Iowa State University.
    2. Yoshihisa Godo, 2007. "The Puzzle of Small Farming in Japan," Development Economics Working Papers 21897, East Asian Bureau of Economic Research.
    3. Yoshihisa Godo, 2007. "The Puzzle of Small Farming in Japan," Asia Pacific Economic Papers 365, Australia-Japan Research Centre, Crawford School of Public Policy, The Australian National University.
    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. David Blandford & Ivar Gaasland & Roberto Garcia & Erling Vårdal, 2010. "How Effective are WTO Disciplines on Domestic Support and Market Access for Agriculture?," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 33(11), pages 1470-1485, November.
    2. Daisuke Takahashi, 2009. "Quantitative evaluation of the Japanese rice policy reforms under the WTO agreement on agriculture," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 29(2), pages 712-725.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Godo, Yoshihisa, 2012. "Evaluation of Japanese Agricultural Policy Reforms Under the WTO Agreement on Agriculture," 2012 Conference, August 18-24, 2012, Foz do Iguacu, Brazil 125102, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    2. Godo, Yoshihisa, 2012. "Evaluation of Japanese Agricultural Policy Reforms Under the WTO Agreement on Agriculture," 2012 Conference, August 18-24, 2012, Foz do Iguacu, Brazil 125101, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    3. Godo, Yoshihisa, 2009. "The Changing Political Dynamics of Japanese Agricultural Cooperatives," 2009 Conference, August 16-22, 2009, Beijing, China 51400, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    4. Sawako Shigeto & Lionel Hubbard & Philip Dawson, 2008. "On farmland prices and rents in Japan," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 39(1), pages 103-109, July.
    5. Jun Ikeda, 2007. "The Flow of Funds through a Government – A Case Study on Japan," Governance Working Papers 21902, East Asian Bureau of Economic Research.
    6. Takahashi, Daisuke & Honma, Masayoshi, 2009. "Evaluation of the Japanese Rice Policy Reforms under the WTO Agreement on Agriculture," 2009 Conference, August 16-22, 2009, Beijing, China 51421, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    7. Will Martin & Kym Anderson, 2006. "Agricultural Trade Reform and the Doha Development Agenda," World Bank Publications - Books, The World Bank Group, number 6889, December.
    8. Butault, Jean-Pierre & Bureau, Jean-Christophe, 2006. "WTO Constraints and the CAP: Domestic Support in EU-25 Agriculture," Working Papers 18879, TRADEAG - Agricultural Trade Agreements.
    9. Keith Walsh & Martina Brockmeier & Alan Matthews, 2005. "Implications of Domestic Support Disciplines for Further Agricultural Trade Liberalization," The Institute for International Integration Studies Discussion Paper Series iiisdp99, IIIS.
    10. Takahashi, Daisuke, 2012. "The distributional effect of the rice policy in Japan, 1986–2010," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(6), pages 679-689.
    11. Matthews, Alan, 2014. "Food Security and WTO Domestic Support Disciplines Post-Bali," Price Volatility and Beyond 320204, International Centre for Trade and Sustainable Development (ICTSD).
    12. Acmoody, Jacob & Balagtas, Joseph Valdes & Gray, Allan W., 2006. "Farm Level Incidence of the U.S. Farm Policy Proposal to the WTO," 2006 Annual meeting, July 23-26, Long Beach, CA 21260, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    13. Daisuke Takahashi, 2009. "Quantitative evaluation of the Japanese rice policy reforms under the WTO agreement on agriculture," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 29(2), pages 712-725.
    14. Philippidis, George & Hubbard, Lionel J. & Renwick, Alan W., 2006. "A CGE Analysis of the Harbinson Proposal: Outcomes for the EU25," Working Papers 45992, Scotland's Rural College (formerly Scottish Agricultural College), Land Economy & Environment Research Group.
    15. Dobson, William D., 2005. "Free Trade Agreements and The Doha Round of WTO Negotiations -- Implications for the U.S. Dairy Industry," Discussion Papers 37464, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Babcock Institute for International Dairy Research and Development.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Japan's agricultural support; WTO Doha Round; WTO compliance; Notification of domestic support; trade;
    All these keywords.

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:fpr:ifprid:822. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    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 bibliographic 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.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ifprius.html .

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.