IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/iis/dispap/iiisdp99.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Implications of Domestic Support Disciplines for Further Agricultural Trade Liberalization

Author

Listed:
  • Keith Walsh
  • Martina Brockmeier
  • Alan Matthews

Abstract

This paper employs the GTAP computable general equilibrium model and dataset to analyse the implications of domestic support reductions in the context of agricultural trade liberalisation. Three specific issues are addressed: overhang in domestic support, the accurate distinction of the boxes in the GTAP dataset and the treatment of market price support in the amber box. An extensive domestic support database is used to calculate the change in applied domestic support rates from a specified cut in bound rates, and to identify the impact on the different domestic support boxes and the required reductions in each support category. The GTAP model is extended to incorporate an explicit representation of the market price support element of the AMS. The results from these extensions of the standard database and model support the view that the impact of an agreement to reduce domestic support will be limited and lower than conventionally estimated. Results of simulations combining domestic support cuts with market access and export competition disciplines show that the effect of import tariff reductions dominate the gains from domestic support cuts once full account is taken of the issues addressed in this paper.

Suggested Citation

  • 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.
  • Handle: RePEc:iis:dispap:iiisdp99
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.tcd.ie/triss/assets/PDFs/iiis/iiisdp99.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. W. Jill Harrison & J. Mark Horridge & K.R. Pearson, 2000. "Decomposing Simulation Results with Respect to Exogenous Shocks," Computational Economics, Springer;Society for Computational Economics, vol. 15(3), pages 227-249, June.
    2. Keeny, Roman & Hertel, Thomas, 2005. "GTAP-AGR: A Framework for Assessing the Implications of Multilateral Changes in Agricultural Policies," Technical Papers 283422, Purdue University, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Global Trade Analysis Project.
    3. Will Martin & Kym Anderson, 2006. "Agricultural Trade Reform and the Doha Development Agenda," World Bank Publications, The World Bank, number 6889.
    4. Antoine Bouët & Jean‐Christophe Bureau & Yvan Decreux & Sébastien Jean, 2005. "Multilateral Agricultural Trade Liberalisation: The Contrasting Fortunes of Developing Countries in the Doha Round," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 28(9), pages 1329-1354, September.
    5. 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.
    6. 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.
    7. W. Jill Harrison & Mark Horridge & K.R. Pearson & Glyn Wittwer, 2004. "A Practical Method for Explicitly Modeling Quotas and Other Complementarities," Computational Economics, Springer;Society for Computational Economics, vol. 23(4), pages 325-341, June.
    8. Harrison, W Jill & Pearson, K R, 1996. "Computing Solutions for Large General Equilibrium Models Using GEMPACK," Computational Economics, Springer;Society for Computational Economics, vol. 9(2), pages 83-127, May.
    9. Bernard Hoekman & Francis Ng & Marcelo Olarreaga, 2004. "Agricultural Tariffs or Subsidies: Which Are More Important for Developing Economies?," World Bank Economic Review, World Bank Group, vol. 18(2), pages 175-204.
    10. 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 Economic Reports 34015, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.
    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. Brink, Lars, 2007. "Classifying, Measuring and Analyzing WTO Domestic Support in Agriculture: Some Conceptual Distinctions," Working Papers 14581, International Agricultural Trade Research Consortium.
    2. Ole Boysen & Kirsten Boysen-Urban & Alan Matthews, 2021. "Alternative EU CAP Tools for Stabilising Farm Incomes in the Era of Climate Change," Working Papers 202103, Geary Institute, University College Dublin.
    3. Boysen-Urban, Kirsten & Boysen, Ole & Matthews, Alan & Brockmeier, Martina, 2018. "EU Common Agricultural Policy Post-2020: Exploring the Effects of Safety-Net Policy Instruments," 166th Seminar, August 30-31, 2018, Galway, West of Ireland 276200, European Association of Agricultural Economists.

    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. Will Martin & Kym Anderson, 2006. "Agricultural Trade Reform and the Doha Development Agenda," World Bank Publications, The World Bank, number 6889, November.
    2. Alan Matthews & Keith Walsh, 2006. "The Doha Development Agenda: Mixed Prospects for Developing Countries," The Institute for International Integration Studies Discussion Paper Series iiisdp157, IIIS.
    3. 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.
    4. Kym Anderson & Will Martin & Dominique van der Mensbrugghe, 2006. "Doha Merchandise Trade Reform: What Is at Stake for Developing Countries?," World Bank Economic Review, World Bank Group, vol. 20(2), pages 169-195.
    5. Urban, Kirsten & Jensen, Hans G. & Brockmeier, Martina, 2016. "How decoupled is the Single Farm Payment and does it matter for international trade?," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 59(C), pages 126-138.
    6. Keeney, Roman & Beckman, Jayson F., 2007. "WTO Impacts on US Rice Producing Households," 2007 Annual Meeting, February 4-7, 2007, Mobile, Alabama 34812, Southern Agricultural Economics Association.
    7. Anderson, Kym & Martin, Will & Valenzuela, Ernesto, 2006. "The relative importance of global agricultural subsidies and market access," World Trade Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 5(3), pages 357-376, November.
    8. Abate, Gashaw T. & Badiane, Ousmane, 2018. "Determinants of African agricultural exports," IFPRI book chapters, in: Africa agriculture trade monitor 2018, chapter 5, pages 85-109, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    9. Martina Brockmeier & Janine Pelikan, 2006. "Agricultural Market Access: A Moving Target in the WTO Negotiations?," The Institute for International Integration Studies Discussion Paper Series iiisdp125, IIIS.
    10. James Scott & Rorden Wilkinson, 2012. "Changing of the guard: expert knowledge and ‘common sense’ in the Doha Development Agenda," Global Development Institute Working Paper Series 16612, GDI, The University of Manchester.
    11. Surabhi Mittal, 2007. "Oecd Agricultural Trade Reforms Impact On India’s Prices And Producers Welfare," Trade Working Papers 22225, East Asian Bureau of Economic Research.
    12. Mohamed Hedi Bchir & Sébastien Jean & David Laborde, 2006. "Binding Overhang and Tariff-Cutting Formulas," Review of World Economics (Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv), Springer;Institut für Weltwirtschaft (Kiel Institute for the World Economy), vol. 142(2), pages 207-232, July.
    13. Golub, Alla & Hertel, Thomas & Lee, Huey-Lin & Rose, Steven & Sohngen, Brent, 2009. "The opportunity cost of land use and the global potential for greenhouse gas mitigation in agriculture and forestry," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 31(4), pages 299-319, November.
    14. Guido Porto, 2010. "International Market Access and Poverty in Argentina," Review of International Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 18(2), pages 396-407, May.
    15. Anderson, Kym & Jackson, Lee Ann, 2004. "GM food technology abroad and its implications for Australia and New Zealand," 2004 Conference (48th), February 11-13, 2004, Melbourne, Australia 58365, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society.
    16. Boussard, Jean-Marc, 2006. "Consequences of price volatility in evaluating the benefits of liberalisation," MPRA Paper 4467, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    17. Ernesto Valenzuela & Kym Anderson & Thomas Hertel, 2008. "Impacts of trade reform: sensitivity of model results to key assumptions," International Economics and Economic Policy, Springer, vol. 4(4), pages 395-420, February.
    18. Hewitt, Joanna, 2008. "Impact evaluation of research by the International Food Policy Research Institute on agricultural trade liberalization, developing countries, and WTO's Doha negotiations:," Impact assessments 28, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    19. Thomas W. Hertel & Roman Keeney & Maros Ivanic & L. Alan Winters, 2015. "Why Isn't the Doha Development Agenda more Poverty Friendly?," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Non-Tariff Barriers, Regionalism and Poverty Essays in Applied International Trade Analysis, chapter 18, pages 375-391, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    20. Bureau, Jean-Christophe & Jean, Sebastien & Matthews, Alan, 2006. "The Consequences of Agricultural Trade Liberalization for Developing Countries," 2006 Annual Meeting, August 12-18, 2006, Queensland, Australia 25471, International Association of Agricultural Economists.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    WTO agricultural negotiations; domestic support; agricultural protection; Aggregate Measure of Support;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • C68 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Mathematical Methods; Programming Models; Mathematical and Simulation Modeling - - - Computable General Equilibrium Models
    • F13 - International Economics - - Trade - - - Trade Policy; International Trade Organizations
    • Q17 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Agriculture - - - Agriculture in International Trade
    • Q18 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Agriculture - - - Agricultural Policy; Food Policy

    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:iis:dispap:iiisdp99. 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: https://edirc.repec.org/data/cetcdie.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 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: Maeve (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/cetcdie.html .

    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.