IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/gta/workpp/235.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Agriculture and Non-Agricultural Liberalization in the Millennium Round

Author

Listed:
  • Hertel, Thomas W.
  • Kym Anderson
  • Joseph Francois
  • Will Martin

Abstract

Published in "Agriculture and the New Trade Agenda From a Development Perspective", edited by M. D. Ingco and L. A. Winters, Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press Much remains to be done before agricultural trade is as liberal as world trade in manufactures. But agriculture is distorted by more than agricultural policies. In developing countries especially, farming is discouraged not only by farm protection policies in high-income countries but also by those countries' own manufacturing policies and distortions to services markets. This paper explores the extent to which multilateral liberalization of not only farm but also non-farm policies would affect welfare and the markets for farm products. It projects the global economy to 2005, when the Uruguay Round (UR) implementation will be complete, and assesses the potential impact of further cuts from that post-UR base. This is done using a modified version of the GTAP Model of global trade, assuming 40% cuts in protection in agriculture, mining and manufacturing, and services. Results suggest agricultural and industrial liberalizations could yield similar-sized benefits for the global economy in 2005. However, the distributions of gains from those cuts are quite different as between rich and poor countries. We also examine the interaction between non-agricultural reforms and agricultural trade balances. For some regions, most notably for China, non-agricultural reforms dominate and reverse the sign of the change in the food trade balance following liberalization of both farm and non-farm trade. This suggests policy makers concerned with food and agriculture need to give attention also to non-agricultural policy reforms. Keywords: WTO, multilateral trade negotiations, manufacturing trade reform, agricultural distortions JEL Codes: F13, F14, F17, Q17

Suggested Citation

  • Hertel, Thomas W. & Kym Anderson & Joseph Francois & Will Martin, 2002. "Agriculture and Non-Agricultural Liberalization in the Millennium Round," GTAP Working Papers 235, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Department of Agricultural Economics, Purdue University.
  • Handle: RePEc:gta:workpp:235
    Note: GTAP Working Paper No. 08
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.gtap.agecon.purdue.edu/resources/res_display.asp?RecordID=235
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Bouët, Antoine, 2006. "What can the poor expect from trade liberalization?: opening the "black box" of trade modeling," MTID discussion papers 93, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    2. Mai, Yinhua, 2008. "Removing border protection on wheat and rice: effects on rural income and food self-sufficiency in China," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 52(2), pages 1-19.
    3. Lucian Cernat & Sam Laird & Alessandro Turrini, 2003. "How Important are Market Access Issues for Developing Countries in the Doha Agenda?," International Trade 0302004, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    4. Bchir, Mohamed Hedi & Decreux, Yvan & Guérin, Jean-Louis & Jean, Sébastien, 2002. "Key Assumptions in AGE Trade Models: An Assessment using the Mirage Model," Conference papers 331050, Purdue University, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Global Trade Analysis Project.
    5. Diaz-Bonilla, Eugenio & Robinson, Sherman & Thomas, Marcelle, 2002. "On boxes, contents, and users: Food security and the WTO negotiations," TMD discussion papers 82, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    6. Raihan, Selim & Razzaque, Mohammad A, 2007. "WTO and regional trade negotiation outcomes: quantitative assessments of potential implications on Bangladesh," MPRA Paper 38475, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    7. Hess, Sebastian, 2005. "An Econometric Model of CGE Simulations," 2005 International Congress, August 23-27, 2005, Copenhagen, Denmark 24713, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    8. Howard White, 2001. "Pro-poor growth in a globalized economy," Journal of International Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 13(5), pages 549-569.
    9. Kym Anderson & David Norman & Glyn Wittwer, 2019. "Globalisation of the World’s Wine Markets," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Kym Anderson (ed.), The International Economics of Wine, chapter 2, pages 27-50, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    10. van Tongeren, Frank W. & Huang, Jikun, 2004. "China'S Food Economy In The Early 21st Century; Development Of China'S Food Economy And Its Impact On Global Trade And On The Eu," Report Series 29093, Wageningen University and Research Center, Agricultural Economics Research Institute.
    11. Prabhu Pingali & Randy Stringer, 2003. "Food Security and Agriculture in the Low Income, Food- Deficit countries: 10 years after the Uruguay Round," Working Papers 03-18, Agricultural and Development Economics Division of the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO - ESA).
    12. Joseph E. Stiglitz & Andrew Charlton, 2005. "Un cycle de négociations commerciales pour le développement ?," Revue d’économie du développement, De Boeck Université, vol. 13(4), pages 17-54.
    13. Huang, Jikun & Hu, Ruifa & van Meijl, Hans & van Tongeren, Frank W., 2003. "Economic Impacts Of Genetically Modified Crops In China," 2003 Annual Meeting, August 16-22, 2003, Durban, South Africa 25883, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    14. Kym Anderson, 2003. "Trade Liberalization, Agriculture, and Poverty in Low-income Countries," WIDER Working Paper Series DP2003-25, World Institute for Development Economic Research (UNU-WIDER).
    15. Tabeau, Andrzej A. & van Berkum, Siemen, 2011. "Competing claims on land use for food and biodiversity," 2011 International Congress, August 30-September 2, 2011, Zurich, Switzerland 116072, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    16. Kim , Sangkyom & Park , Innwon & Park , Soonchan, 2013. "A Free Trade Area of Asia Pacific (FTAAP): Is It Desirable?," East Asian Economic Review, Korea Institute for International Economic Policy, vol. 17(1), pages 3-25, March.
    17. Raihan, Selim & Khondker, Bazlul Haque, 2010. "Doha Round Impacts on India: A Study in a Sequential Dynamic CGE Framework," MPRA Paper 37897, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    18. Dixon, Peter & van Meijl, Hans & Rimmer, Maureen & Shutes, Lindsay & Tabeau, Andrzej, 2013. "RED vs. REDD: Biofuel Policy vs. Forest Conservation," Working papers 152082, Factor Markets, Centre for European Policy Studies.
    19. Diaz-Bonilla, Eugenio & Tin, Jonathan, 2002. "That was then but this is now: Multifunctionality in industry and agriculture," TMD discussion papers 94, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    20. Diao, Xinshen & Diaz-Bonilla, Eugenio & Robinson, Sherman & Orden, David, 2005. "Tell me where it hurts, an' I'll tell you who to call," MTID discussion papers 84, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    21. Maskus, Keith E. & Wilson, John S. & Tsunehiro Otsuki, 2000. "Quantifying the impact of technical barriers to trade : a framework for analysis," Policy Research Working Paper Series 2512, The World Bank.
    22. Tabeau, Andrzej A. & van Meijl, Hans & Banse, Martin & Woltjer, Geert B., 2008. "Agricultural Incomes Development in EU till 2030: Scenario Analysis of Main Driving Factors," 108th Seminar, February 8-9, 2008, Warsaw, Poland 48115, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    23. 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.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    wto; multilateral trade negotiations; manufacturing trade reform; agricultural distortions jel codes: f13; f14; f17; q17;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • F13 - International Economics - - Trade - - - Trade Policy; International Trade Organizations
    • F14 - International Economics - - Trade - - - Empirical Studies of Trade
    • F17 - International Economics - - Trade - - - Trade Forecasting and Simulation
    • Q17 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Agriculture - - - Agriculture in International Trade

    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:gta:workpp:235. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Jeremy Douglas (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/gtpurus.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.