IDEAS home Printed from
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Distortions in World Food Markets in the Wake of GATT: Evidence and Policy Implications


  • Alberto Valdés
  • Joachim Zietz


Ahead of the Uruguay Round accord of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) in December of 1993, numerous developing countries, especially in Latin America, embarked on a process of unilateral trade liberalization. During the late 1980s and early 1990s, bound tariffs were instituted, export taxes removed, and quantitative restrictions replaced with tariffs. Although the principle of tariffication is now widely accepted, many policymakers in these countries are exploring temporary import restrictions in agriculture with the argument that this sector is a special case because of the major distortions in world food prices. Protection is considered in the form of additional tariff protection on importables, such as cereals in the case of Colombia and Chile. In some cases, pressure exists to revert to levels of protection in effect prior to trade policy reforms. The demand for protection has arisen as a result of a decline in internal real farm prices over the last few years. This decline can be traced mainly to two circumstances: an appreciation of the real exchange rate following a surge in net capital inflows and a global decline in world prices (Valdés 1993). Only the exchange rate appreciation can be related to a country's ongoing policy reforms. The decline in world food prices, by contrast, is part of a persistent secular trend toward lower real prices. Advocates of agricultural protection in Latin American countries, however, argue that the current decline in world food prices is mainly the result of protectionist policies of industrialized countries. Local farmers cannot be left alone to compete against the treasuries of rich industrial nations; they must be protected from artificially low world prices. This argument for protection receives its economic logic from the widespread belief among policymakers that world prices will turn sharply upware once the Uruguay Round accord (December 1993) of the GATT is fully implemented. The GATT accord will compel industrial countries to lower their rates of protection to farmers and to eliminate export subsidies over time. Protection is therefore only temporarily needed until food prices rise. Are the advocates of protection right? Are prices in world food markets only temporarily depressed? To find out, this paper assembles and evaluates the available evidence on trends in world food prices and on policy-induced price distortions. In addition, recent work on the likely effects of the Uruguay Round is surveyed. From this evidence, it appears that world food prices cannot reasonably be expected to change significantly in the future. To the extent that prices do change, they are likely to continue downward in real terms. Positive price changes will be limited to a few highly protected commodities, such as beef, dairy products, and to some extent sugar. If world food prices do not trend upward in the near future, however, then there is little economic logic behind schemes for protecting domestic farmers from low price imports. In effect, such protection would only postpone adjustment and unambiguously lower economic welfare of urban consumers, an outcome to be seriously debated before policies of protection are put in place. To avoid the pressure for protection, policymakers may instead want to emphasize measures to enhance productitivity and reduce costs. It may also be useful to develop risk-diffusing instruments to manage price risks and to improve the administrative capacity to apply safeguards and countervailing duties.

Suggested Citation

  • Alberto Valdés & Joachim Zietz, 1994. "Distortions in World Food Markets in the Wake of GATT: Evidence and Policy Implications," Reports _020, World Bank Latin America and the Caribean Region Department.
  • Handle: RePEc:wop:bawlad:_020

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: no

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    1. Tyers,Rod & Anderson,Kym, 2011. "Disarray in World Food Markets," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521172318, October.
    2. Joachim Zietz & Alberto Valdés, 1989. "International Interactions in Food and Agricultural Policies: The Effect of Alternative Policies," OECD Development Centre Working Papers 2, OECD Publishing.
    3. Valdés, Alberto & Zietz, Joachim A., 1980. "Agricultural protection in OECD countries: its cost to less-developed countries," Research reports 21, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    4. Koester, Ulrich, 1993. "International trade and agricultural development in developing countries: Significance of the Uruguay round of GATT negotiations," Agricultural Economics, Blackwell, vol. 8(4), pages 275-294, June.
    5. Frohberg, K. & Fischer, G. & Parikh, K.S., 1990. "Would Developing Countries Benefit From Agricultural Trade Liberalization In Oecd Countries?," Papers 23, Indira Gandhi Institute of Development Research-.
    6. Koester, Ulrich, 1993. "International trade and agricultural development in developing countries: Significance of the Uruguay Round of GATT negotiations," Agricultural Economics of Agricultural Economists, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 8(4), June.
    7. Babcock, Bruce A. & Beghin, John C. & Mohanty, Samarendu & Fuller, Frank H. & Chaudhary, Sudhir & Fabiosa, Jacinto F. & Kovarik, Karen & Hart, Chad E. & Fang, Cheng & Kaus, Phillip J. & Naik, Manta & , 1999. "FAPRI 1999 World Agricultural Outlook," FAPRI Staff Reports 32050, Food and Agricultural Policy Research Institute (FAPRI).
    8. Joachim Zietz & Alberto Valdés, 1993. "The Growth of Agricultural Protection," NBER Chapters,in: Trade and Protectionism, NBER-EASE Volume 2, pages 115-146 National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    9. Richard E. Just, 1974. "An Investigation of the Importance of Risk in Farmers' Decisions," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 56(1), pages 14-25.
    10. Borrell, Brent & Duncan, Ronald C, 1992. "A Survey of the Costs of World Sugar Policies," World Bank Research Observer, World Bank Group, vol. 7(2), pages 171-194, July.
    11. Valdes, Alberto, 1987. "Agriculture in the Uruguay Round: Interests of Developing Countries," World Bank Economic Review, World Bank Group, vol. 1(4), pages 571-593, September.
    12. Maurice Schiff, 1986. "The Competitive Firm Under Uncertainty: An Application to Canadian Wheat Production," Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue canadienne d'agroeconomie, Canadian Agricultural Economics Society/Societe canadienne d'agroeconomie, vol. 34(2), pages 235-242, July.
    13. Lucas, Robert Jr, 1976. "Econometric policy evaluation: A critique," Carnegie-Rochester Conference Series on Public Policy, Elsevier, vol. 1(1), pages 19-46, January.
    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. Pursell, Garry*Gupta, Anju, 1998. "Trade policies and incentives in Indian agriculture : methodology, background statistics, and protection and incentive indicators, 1965-95," Policy Research Working Paper Series 1953, The World Bank.
    2. Valdes, Alberto & McCalla, Alex F., 1996. "The Uruguay round and agricultural policies in developing countries and economies in transition," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 21(4-5), pages 419-431.
    3. Servaas Storm & J. Mohan Rao, 2002. "Agricultural Globalization in Developing Countries: Rules, Rationales and Results," Working Papers wp71, Political Economy Research Institute, University of Massachusetts at Amherst.
    4. Hans Binswanger & Ernst Lutz, 2003. "Agricultural trade barriers, trade negotiations and the interests of developing countries," Chapters,in: Trade and Development, chapter 8 Edward Elgar Publishing.
    5. Safadi, Raed & Laird, Sam, 1996. "The Uruguay Round agreements: Impact on developing countries," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 24(7), pages 1223-1242, July.
    6. Storm, Servaas, 1997. "Agriculture under trade policy reform: A quantitative assessment for India," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 25(3), pages 425-436, March.

    More about this item


    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:wop:bawlad:_020. 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: (Thomas Krichel). 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.

    If CitEc recognized a 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.

    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.