IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/fpr/mtiddp/75.html

Domestic support to agriculture in the European Union and the United States: policy developments since 1996

Author

Listed:
  • Gopinath, Munisamy
  • Mullen, Kathleen
  • Gulati, Ashok

Abstract

In this study, we outline the farm policy changes in the European Union, EU, and the United States, US, since 1996 and compare their levels of support under various policies. The producer support estimates for the EU are more than twice that of the US, although the value of EU agricultural production is only 30% more than the US production value. In the EU, reductions in the intervention (support) prices for cereals, oilseeds and beef sector have been compensated by increased direct payments, i.e., payments based on historical acreage and yield or animal head counts. In 1996, the US eliminated target prices and deficiency payments for major crops, and acreage set-sides for supply control. They have been replaced with fixed and emergency payments. However price floors (loan rate with deficiency payments) have been retained for major crops. The sugar and dairy sector policies of the EU and the US have undergone few changes since 1996....The initial EU and US agricultural proposals for the Doha round focused on reducing market access barriers and export subsidies, but refrained from limiting domestic support measures. Developing countries' effective opposition to these proposals led to the collapse of the 2003 WTO Ministerial Meeting at Cancun, Mexico. The recently announced Doha Work Program proposes complete elimination of export subsidies and significant reductions in market access barriers. In the case of domestic support, developing countries' views such as the reductions in product and non-product specific de minimis provisions, and the criteria for blue box payments are reflected in the proposal. At the same time, developed countries' views on the continued placement of direct payments in either blue or green box have been included in the proposal. However, agreement on the extent of reductions and the specific modalities is expected in the next 16 months. The final agreement, scheduled for presentation to members at the Hong Kong WTO Ministerial Conference in December 2005, likely depends on whether or not the new proposals and their modalities would result in meaningful limits on domestic support.

Suggested Citation

  • Gopinath, Munisamy & Mullen, Kathleen & Gulati, Ashok, 2004. "Domestic support to agriculture in the European Union and the United States: policy developments since 1996," MTID discussion papers 75, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
  • Handle: RePEc:fpr:mtiddp:75
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://hdl.handle.net/10568/157142
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Eidman, Vernon R., 2002. "The 2002 Farm Bill: A Step Forward Or A Step Backward?," Working Papers 14442, University of Minnesota, Center for International Food and Agricultural Policy.
    2. Alexandre Gohin & Hervé Guyomard & . International Association of Agricultural Economists, 2000. "The Agenda 2000 CAP reform in the WTO context : distortion effects of area compensatory payments and set-aside requirements," Post-Print hal-01931579, HAL.
    3. Binfield, Julian C.R. & Westhoff, Patrick C. & Young, Robert E., II, 2003. "Reforming The Cap: A Partial Equilibrium Analysis Of The Mtr Proposals," 2003 Annual Meeting, August 16-22, 2003, Durban, South Africa 25856, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    4. Josling, Tim & Kelch, David R. & Liapis, Peter S. & Tangerman, Stefan, 1998. "Agriculture and European Union Enlargement," Technical Bulletins 184380, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.
    5. Hild Rygnestad & Rob Fraser, 1996. "Land Heterogeneity And The Effectiveness Of Cap Set‐Aside," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 47(1‐4), pages 255-260, January.
    6. Robert Innes, 2003. "Stop and Go Agricultural Policies with a Land Market," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 85(1), pages 198-215.
    7. Conforti, Piero & de Filippis, Fabrizio & Salvatici, Luca, 2002. "The Mid-Term Review Of The Common Agricultural Policy: Assessing The Effects Of The Commission Proposals," Osservatorio Sulle Politiche Agricole dell'UE 14802, National Institute of Agricultural Economics, Italy - INEA.
    8. Gulati, Ashok & Narayanan, Sudha, 2003. "The Subsidy Syndrome in Indian Agriculture," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780195662061.
    9. Nancy H. Chau & Harry de Gorter, 2005. "Disentangling the Consequences of Direct Payment Schemes in Agriculture on Fixed Costs, Exit Decisions, and Output," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 87(5), pages 1174-1181.
    10. Guyomard, Herve & Baudry, Marc & Carpentier, Alain, 1996. "Estimating Crop Supply Response in the Presence of Farm Programmes: Application to the CAP," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 23(4), pages 401-420.
    11. Stefan Tangermann, 1998. "An Ex-post Review of the 1992 MacSharry Reform," Palgrave Macmillan Books, in: K. A. Ingersent & A. J. Rayner & R. C. Hine (ed.), The Reform of the Common Agricultural Policy, chapter 2, pages 12-35, Palgrave Macmillan.
    12. Orden, David & Paarlberg, Robert & Roe, Terry, 1999. "Policy Reform in American Agriculture," University of Chicago Press Economics Books, University of Chicago Press, edition 1, number 9780226632643, August.
    13. Unknown, 2003. "Decoupled Payments: Household Income Transfers In Contemporary U.S. Agriculture," Agricultural Economic Reports 34057, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.
    14. David A. Hennessy, 1998. "The Production Effects of Agricultural Income Support Policies under Uncertainty," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 80(1), pages 46-57.
    15. Dimaranan, Betina V. & Hertel, Thomas W. & Keeney, Roman, 2003. "OECD Domestic Support and the Developing Countries," 2003 Annual meeting, July 27-30, Montreal, Canada 22000, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    16. Roe, Terry L. & Somwaru, Agapi & Diao, Xinshen, 2002. "Do Direct Payments Have Intertemporal Effects On U.S. Agriculture?," TMD Discussion Papers 16308, CGIAR, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    17. Aude Ridier & Florence Jacquet, 2002. "Decoupling Direct Payments and the Dynamics of Decisions under Price Risk in Cattle Farms," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 53(3), pages 549-565, November.
    18. Anton, Jesus & Le Mouel, Chantal, 2003. "Do Counter-Cyclical Payments In The Fsri Act Create Incentives To Produce?," 2003 Annual Meeting, August 16-22, 2003, Durban, South Africa 25811, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    19. D. Roberts & J. Froud & R. W. Fraser, 1996. "Participation In Set Aside: What Determines The Opting In Price?," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 47(1‐4), pages 89-98, January.
    20. Gohin, Alexandre & Guyomard, Hervé, 2000. "The Agenda 2000 CAP Reform in the WTO Context: Distortion Effects of Compensatory Payments and Area Set-aside Requirements," 2000 Conference, August 13-18, 2000, Berlin, Germany 197222, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    21. Mullen, Kathleen & Sun, Dongsheng & Orden, David & Gulati, Ashok, 2004. "PRODUCER SUPPORT ESTIMATES (PSEs) FOR AGRICULTURE IN DEVELOPING COUNTRIES: MEASUREMENT ISSUES AND ILLUSTRATIONS FROM INDIA AND CHINA," MTID Discussion Papers 60451, CGIAR, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    22. John C. Beghin & David Roland-Holst & Dominique van der Mensbrugghe, 2002. "Global Agricultural Trade and the Doha Round: What are the Implications for North and South?," Center for Agricultural and Rural Development (CARD) Publications 02-wp308, Center for Agricultural and Rural Development (CARD) at Iowa State University.
    23. Sckokai, Paolo & Moro, Daniele, 2002. "Modelling The Cap Arable Crop Regime Under Uncertainty," 2002 Annual meeting, July 28-31, Long Beach, CA 19860, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    24. Sean A. Cahill, 1997. "Calculating The Rate Of Decoupling For Crops Under Cap/Oilseeds Reform," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 48(1‐3), pages 349-378, January.
    25. Dimaranan, Betina & Hertel, Thomas W. & Keeney, Roman, 2003. "OECD Domestic Support and the Developing Countries," GTAP Working Papers 1161, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Department of Agricultural Economics, Purdue University.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Gracia, Azucena & de Magistris, Tiziana & Casado, Jose Maria, 2008. "The Effect Of The New Single Farm Payment In Irrigated Agriculture: The Case Of Spain," 107th Seminar, January 30-February 1, 2008, Sevilla, Spain 6590, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    2. Pavel Ciaian & d’Artis Kancs & Johan Swinnen, 2010. "EU Land Markets and the Common Agricultural Policy," Journal of Economics and Econometrics, Economics and Econometrics Society, vol. 53(3), pages 1-31.
    3. Zein Kallas & Teresa Serra & Jos頠 M. Gil, 2012. "Effects of policy instruments on farm investments and production decisions in the Spanish COP sector," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 44(30), pages 3877-3886, October.
    4. Baptiste Lelyon & Vincent Chatellier & Karine Daniel, 2011. "Decoupling and prices: determinant of dairy farmers’ choices?," Review of Agricultural and Environmental Studies - Revue d'Etudes en Agriculture et Environnement, INRA Department of Economics, vol. 92(1), pages 47-68.
    5. repec:lic:licosd:20708 is not listed on IDEAS
    6. Moro, Daniele & Sckokai, Paolo, 1999. "Modelling the CAP Arable Crop Regime in Italy : Degree of Decoupling and Impact of Agenda 2000," Cahiers d'Economie et de Sociologie Rurales (CESR), Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique (INRA), vol. 53.
    7. Pavel Ciaian & d'Artis Kancs & Jo Swinnen, 2008. "Static and Dynamic Distributional Effects of Decoupled Payments," Journal of Economics and Econometrics, Economics and Econometrics Society, vol. 51(2), pages 20-47.
    8. Bhaskar, Arathi & Beghin, John C., 2009. "How Coupled Are Decoupled Farm Payments? A Review of the Evidence," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 34(01), pages 1-24, April.
    9. Katranidis, Stelios D. & Kotakou, Christina A., 2008. "Are CAP Decoupling Policies Really Production Neutral?," 2008 International Congress, August 26-29, 2008, Ghent, Belgium 44184, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    10. Serra, Teresa & Zilberman, David & Goodwin, Barry K. & Featherstone, Allen M., 2005. "Effects of Decoupling on the Average and the Variability of Output," 2005 International Congress, August 23-27, 2005, Copenhagen, Denmark 24601, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    11. Go, Delfin S. & Kearney, Marna & Robinson, Sherman & Thierfelder, Karen, 2004. "An Analysis of South Africa's Value Added Tax," Conference papers 331274, Purdue University, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Global Trade Analysis Project.
    12. Andrius Kazukauskas & Carol Newman & Johannes Sauer, 2014. "The impact of decoupled subsidies on productivity in agriculture: a cross-country analysis using microdata," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 45(3), pages 327-336, May.
    13. Devadoss, Stephen & Gibson, Mark J. & Luckstead, Jeff, 2016. "The Impact of Agricultural Subsidies on the Corn Market with Farm Heterogeneity and Endogenous Entry and Exit," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 41(3), pages 1-20, September.
    14. Bhaskar, Arathi & Beghin, John C., 2007. "How Coupled are Decoupled Farm Payments? A Review of Coupling Mechanisms and the Evidence," Working Papers 7347, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
    15. BOUËT Antoine & BUREAU Jean-Christophe & DECREUX Yvan & JEAN Sébastien, 2010. "Is Northern Agricultural Liberalization Beneficial to Developing Countries?," EcoMod2003 330700021, EcoMod.
    16. Thia Hennessy & Tahir Rehman, 2006. "Modelling the Impact of Decoupling on Structural Change in the Farming Sector: integrating econometric and optimisation models," Working Papers 0601, Rural Economy and Development Programme,Teagasc.
    17. Jean-Christophe J.-C. Bureau & Alexandre Gohin & Sébastien Jean, 2007. "The CAP and WTO negotiation [La PAC et la négociation OMC]," Post-Print hal-02821142, HAL.
    18. Samiul Haque & Kenneth A. Foster & Roman Keeney & Kathryn A. Boys & Badri G. Narayanan, 2019. "Output and input bias effects of U.S. direct payments," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 50(2), pages 229-236, March.
    19. Ahearn, Mary Clare & Collender, Robert N. & Diao, Xinshen & Harrington, David H. & Hoppe, Robert A. & Korb, Penelope J. & Makki, Shiva S. & Morehart, Mitchell J. & Roberts, Michael J. & Roe, Terry L. , 2004. "Decoupled Payments In A Changing Policy Setting," Agricultural Economic Reports 33981, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.
    20. Baffes, John & De Gorter, Harry, 2005. "Disciplining agricultural support through decoupling," Policy Research Working Paper Series 3533, The World Bank.
    21. Urban, Kirsten & Jensen, Hans Grinsted & Brockmeier, Martina, 2012. "How Decoupled is the SFP in GTAP: Using a Sensitivity Analysis to Uncover the Degree of Coupling," Conference papers 332173, Purdue University, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Global Trade Analysis Project.

    More about this item

    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:mtiddp:75. 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.