Institutional change in the international governance of agriculture: a revised account
The place of agriculture in the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) prior to 1986 is usually described in terms of either exclusion or exemption from general trading rules. This paper reevaluates the ‘exemption’ argument and its corollary that the Uruguay Round Agreement on Agriculture (AoA) represented a punctuated equilibrium in the governance of agriculture. Instead it traces the dynamics of institutional change through the history of the GATT/WTO, distinguishing between multilateral trading rounds and the framework of trade rules as separate but linked contexts for addressing agricultural trade matters; and further disaggregating the latter into broad principles and specific rules. It is argued that the broad principles lacked detail but, paradoxically, initially this facilitated an approach to dispute settlement based on conciliation. Subsequent trade tensions exposed an inability to make definitive legal decisions on the compatibility of specific national rules with broad GATT principles. The AoA is rooted in these institutional antecedents, but claims of the legalization of the trade regime are belied by a continued reliance on political flexibility and bargaining.
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Hooghe, Liesbet & Marks, Gary, 1997. "The Making of a Polity: The Struggle Over European Integration," European Integration online Papers (EIoP), European Community Studies Association Austria (ECSA-A), vol. 1, 04.
- Swinbank, Alan, 2004. "Dirty Tariffication Revisited: The EU and Sugar," Estey Centre Journal of International Law and Trade Policy, Estey Centre for Law and Economics in International Trade, vol. 5(1).
- Welch, Catherine & Wilkinson, Ian, 2005. "Network perspectives on interfirm conflict: reassessing a critical case in international business," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 58(2), pages 205-213, February.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:nbs:wpaper:2008/4. 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: (Simeon Coleman)The email address of this maintainer does not seem to be valid anymore. Please ask Simeon Coleman to update the entry or send us the correct address
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.