Measuring the Trade Restrictiveness of Domestic Support using the EU Common Agricultural Policy as an Example

We develop an index that measures the overall trade effects of domestic support payments. Our index is based on the Mercantilist Trade Restrictiveness Index (MTRI) and is capable of analysing the development of the trade restrictiveness of domestic support payments over time and across countries. It facilitates the evaluation of agricultural policy reforms introducing changes in the composition of domestic support payments. We conduct this analysis with a computable general equilibrium model that is extended to depict detailed agricultural policies using the Common Agricultural Policy of the European Union (EU) as an example. For the representation of agricultural policies, we updated the underlying database by incorporating detailed EU domestic support payments taken from the OECD Producer Support Estimate (PSE) tables and reconcile PSE data with the WTO classification scheme. Our index confirms a decrease in trade distortion stemming from the implementation of decoupled support in the EU. In addition, the trade-equivalent protection rate shows that the trade restrictiveness of domestic support payments depends on the assumptions made with regard to the degree of decoupling of those payments.     

Agricultural price distortions: trends and volatility,past, and prospective

Historically, earnings from farming in many developing countries have been depressed by a pro‐urban bias in own‐country policies, as well as by governments of richer countries favoring their farmers with import barriers and subsidies. Both sets of policies reduced global economic welfare and agricultural trade, and added to global inequality and poverty. Over the past three decades, much progress has been made in reducing agricultural protection in high‐income countries and agricultural disincentives in developing countries. However, plenty of price distortions remain. As well, the propensity of governments to insulate their domestic food market from fluctuations in international prices has not waned. Such insulation contributes to the amplification of international food price fluctuations, yet it does little to advance national food security when food‐importing and food‐exporting countries equally engage in insulating behavior. Thus there is still much scope to improve global economic welfare via multilateral agreement not only to remove remaining trade distortions but also to desist from varying trade barriers when international food prices gyrate. This article summarizes indicators of trends and fluctuations in farm trade barriers before examining unilateral or multilateral trade arrangements, together with complementary domestic measures, that could lead to better global food security outcomes.     

Trade,policy, and food security

Food insecurity is extensive throughout the world and hunger and malnutrition are expected to remain serious humanitarian and political concerns, both in the short term and for the foreseeable future, particularly in low income developing countries where many rural and urban households are both income and asset poor. In those countries, domestic agricultural production is expected to be especially vulnerable to the impacts of climate change over the next 30 years. Thus international markets for staple agricultural commodities, which have become increasingly important as sources of nutrition for both developing and developed countries over the past 60 years, are likely to become even more important in the future. Free trade policies allow countries to exploit their comparative advantages in economic activity, increasing average per capita incomes, longer term growth rates and a country's capacity to fund social safety nets for the poor. However, many countries abandoned those policies in favor of domestic protections in their efforts to mitigate the effects of short run food crises. The policy challenge is therefore to resolve the tension between optimal long run policies and short run initiatives to address food security concerns.     

新冠肺炎疫情对全球食物安全的影响及对策

当前,新冠肺炎疫情已在全球扩散,许多本就因为冲突、自然灾害或气候变化而深陷食物不安全的国家和地区的防疫形势也日益严峻。虽然目前全球食物供给总体充足,食物价格稳定,但疫情的快速蔓延将给全球食物安全带来威胁。由于隔离和边境关闭,市场、供应链和贸易受到波及,全球食物的供给受到影响。食物流通渠道可能因运输中断和更加严格的检疫措施而受阻,运输成本和贸易成本增加、效率降低。一些国家为保障国内食物供应而采取限制出口的行为,将影响依赖于粮食进口的国家进口粮食,也不利于依赖于出口初级农产品的低收入发展中国家出口农产品。封锁措施带来的经济影响使居民收入和购买力下降,居民获得充足的营养食物变得更加困难。食物安全不再是一个区域性问题,而是一个需要共同应对的全球性问题,各国应当共同努力,加强合作和全球治理,对最弱势群体采取迅速的保护和援助措施。既要确保国内食物供应链的正常运行,同时,应该保持贸易开放,并利用和创新电子商务保障食物供应,保障全球粮食安全。     

A POST-KENNEDY ROUND LOOK AT SOME PROBLEMS IN AGRICULTURAL TRADE

The Kennedy Round, concluded in 1967, ws the most far-reaching in the series of trade negotiations. The United States insisted on the inclusion of agricultural products, with the support of other foodexporting countries. The results for agriculture should not be underestimated. The agreement on cereals gave practical recognition of joint responsibility in food aid. There were also many agricultural tariff concessions. However, it is domestic agricultural policies, not tariffs, which really hamper agricultural trade. The cost of these policies and the extent to which they achieve their objectives are questionable. Competition becomes fiercer for the remaining accessible markets, and export subsidies multiply. The Kennedy Round left the basis problems untouched. It did, however, strengthen the “global” or comprehensive, multilateral approach.     

International trade and agricultural development in developing countries: Significance of the Uruguay Round of GATT negotiations

Liberalization of world trade in agricultural products ranks high on the agenda of the Uruguay Round. After a period of more than six years, however, the negotiations have not been concluded. Nevertheless, an outcome seems to be in sight. The agreement will most likely not result in a move to freer trade. It seems that domestic policies will become even more regulative than in the past in an attempt to cut exportable surpluses and to ease trade tensions among the main exporting nations. This paper explores possible impacts of the GATT Round on agricultural development in developing countries. Agricultural development is more than only growth in agricultural production or productivity. However, it is argued in the paper that other variables which also indicate agricultural development are often closely correlated with growth in production and productivity. Trade in agricultural products is not always an engine for agricultural development. If internal divergences are not accounted for by appropriate domestic policies, trade may be even harmful to agricultural development. Hence, empirical research based on cross-country analysis does not provide a clear answer about the role of trade for development. Past policies in industrialized countries have most likely had a negative effect on developing countries as a group; however, the effects differ widely across countries. Liberalization policies in industrialized countries would not just reverse these negative effects for developing countries. Price reduction in industrialized countries may not result in the often-cited production decline in the short term. Present X-inefficiency in agriculture will be reduced by liberalization, leading to an outward shift of the supply curve. Hence, liberalization may not lead to higher world market prices for temperate-zone products in the short and medium term. Apart from this, empirical models differ widely in the price effects they predict. The expected outcome of the Uruguay Round – increased regulation of domestic policies – is likely both more negative for developing countries than past protectionist policies and worse than an overall liberalization. World market prices will increase, uncertainty and instability can be expected to grow, and food aid may become less available. There will be a need to react to these challenges with measures on the international and national level. Initiatives to deal with food crises in developing countries and to stimulate liberalization in developing countries should be considered. Finally, developing countries should be made aware that their own domestic policies have a much greater economic impact than policies in other countries, even if the latter are as protectionist as current agricultural policies in the industrialized world.     

Conditioning trends shaping the agricultural and rural landscape in Africa

African countries continue to face deepening food crises that have been accentuated by the global food, energy, and financial crises. This situation is part of a long‐term structural problem: decades of under‐investments in agricultural sector and poor policies of support for smallholder farmers who form the bulk of the farming population. The inability of these farmers to achieve a supply response when commodity prices were high and market access was less of a problem suggests that there are multiple sets of binding constraints that continue to limit the potential of agricultural growth to reduce food security and poverty on the continent. This article reviews some of the historical trends that have hampered the performance of the agriculture sector. In addition, it reviews the impacts of more positive trends that could stimulate agricultural growth in Africa that could change the African agricultural landscape. The article however warns that there are more recent global developments and some continental challenges that could prevent or slow agricultural growth. These include the global financial crisis, public sector investments, inequities in global agricultural development policies, rush for agricultural lands by foreign investors, domestic commercial financing markets, climate change, and emerging carbon markets. The article argues that while opportunities for accelerated growth exists for African agriculture, new sets of policy instruments will be needed to support smallholder farmers to access new agricultural technologies, finance, reduce impacts of climate change, and adopt sustainable land use practices that can allow them to benefit from emerging global carbon markets.     

Economic growth,convergence, and agricultural economics

After nearly two centuries of lagging behind the industrial countries, growth in many developing countries has surged since the early 1990s. This outperformance has major implications for almost all areas of agricultural economics and, if continued, will likely do so into the future. This article aims to identify the key ways in which the changes in rich and poor country growth rates matter for agricultural economists, as a basis for formulating better research agendas. A key impact arises through sharp increases in demand for agricultural resources as demand for livestock products increases. This changing structure of food demand has important implications for nutrition studies and policies, with the emergence of a double burden of malnutrition. On the supply side, growth in developing countries tends to increase domestic food supply, which is also boosted by increases in research and development spending. Growth in developing countries both stimulates and benefits from increases in infrastructure investment, evaluation of which requires new analytical tools. Negative impacts include the contribution of increased demand for livestock products to global greenhouse gas emissions. In terms of trade policy, growth in developing country is tending to lead to convergence of agricultural policies with the pattern of assistance seen in today's developed countries, raising concerns about the future need to deal with collective action problems, particularly those that increase the volatility of world prices.     

新冠肺炎疫情冲击粮食安全:趋势、影响与应对

新冠肺炎疫情在全球加速扩散蔓延,引发全球粮食市场异常波动以及对中国粮食安全的担忧。疫情对后期全球粮食生产与贸易的影响将进一步加大,全球粮食市场波动有可能进一步升级。随着全球金融市场充分释放流动性,国际投机资本若炒作农产品市场,爆发类似2008年粮食危机的风险将越来越高。分析表明,中国粮食安全保障体系总体上可从容应对全球粮食市场波动升级的挑战,但大豆等农产品进口需防控国际市场波动风险。本文认为,要高度重视全球粮食市场波动的可能风险和挑战,必须加强监测、及早谋划,系统应对、综合施策。包括:有效管控输入性不稳定预期对国内粮食市场的干扰和冲击;进一步强化粮食生产能力建设;构建国家粮食安全保障风险治理体系;完善重要农产品储备体系;强化农产品全球供应链管理;加强国际粮食安全、贸易和投资政策协调。     

Trade Creation and Diversion Effects of Preferential Trade Associations on Agricultural and Food Trade

Agricultural market distortions remain a major focus of contention in world trade negotiations. Estimates of the effects of liberalising current agricultural trade restrictions indicate an approximately $385 billion increase in global welfare, with the disproportionate share of the benefit being enjoyed by developing countries. In response to difficulties in adopting agricultural trade reforms, individual groups of countries have formed multiple bilateral and regional preferential trade agreements (PTA) to enhance trade among members. Few sectoral analyses exist of the effects on agricultural and food product trade of PTAs. This research uses a gravity model to isolate the effects of various PTAs on both intra‐ and extra‐bloc agricultural and food product trade for three time periods: 1995, 2000 and 2004. Findings strongly support PTA benefits in terms of increased intra‐bloc trade in both sectors. The findings also generally support trade creation in agricultural products. PTA membership was also associated with food trade creation in most cases, although diversion was observed for several associations composed primarily of developing countries.     

Higher fuel and food prices: impacts and responses for Mozambique

Rising world prices for fuel and food represent a negative terms‐of‐trade shock for Mozambique. The impacts of these price rises are analyzed using various approaches. Detailed price data show that the world price increases are being transmitted to domestic prices. Short‐run net benefit ratio analysis indicates that urban households and households in the southern region are more vulnerable to food price increases. Rural households, particularly in the North and Center, often benefit from being in a net seller position. Longer‐term analysis using a computable general equilibrium (CGE) model of Mozambique indicates that the fuel price shock dominates rising food prices from both macroeconomic and poverty perspectives. Again, negative impacts are larger in urban areas. The importance of agricultural production response in general and export response in particular is highlighted. Policy analysis reveals difficult trade‐offs between short‐run mitigation and long‐run growth. Improved agricultural productivity has powerful positive impacts, but remains difficult to achieve and may not address the immediate impacts of higher prices.     

日本与欧美农业环境支持政策对中国的启示

农业政策中与环境相关的支付政策越来越多。发达国家将WTO绿箱政策、农业直接支付政策与农业环境支持政策结合起来,这样既可以从根本上解决农业生产所带来的安全问题,也可以加深消费者对相关政策的理解与支持,同时从产业链的上游解决食品安全及农业的可持续发展问题。欧盟的Greening政策和日本实施的农业直接支付政策均以农户遵守农药化肥及农业废弃物处理的相关规范为前提,通过合理使用肥料及各种防治措施从不同程度上达到农业可持续发展、农业的多功能性及降低温室气体排放的目的,并由此获取政府的支持。文章通过对发达国家,特别是与中国农业形态类似的日本农业环境政策取向的分析及与欧美相关政策比较分析,认为中国首先应该完善循环农业的相关法律法规和标准,加强对农民的培训以及明确其应遵守的基本义务,对采取环境友好型农业生产方式的农民给予支持。     

新一轮国际粮食价格上涨：原因及对中国市场的影响

目的 随着中国粮食进口不断增加,国内外市场联系越来越紧密。2020年下半年以来,国际市场粮食价格快速上涨,对国内粮食市场产生一定影响,分析国际市场价格上涨的原因和影响对确保国内粮食供应稳定、保障国家粮食安全具有重要意义。方法 文章分析了2019年以来小麦、大米、玉米、大豆4种粮食产品的国内外价格走势,从供需状况、贸易政策、气候变化等因素分析国际市场价格波动的原因,并探讨了国际价格对国内价格的影响。结果 当前全球主要粮食品种供应充足,库存仍处于较高水平,此轮国际粮食价格上涨主要是受到美国等发达国家宽松的货币政策以及疫情后全球消费逐步回暖的影响;但国际市场价格上涨对中国市场的影响总体有限,国内小麦、大米、玉米价格上涨的主因是国内消费回暖和生猪产能恢复带动的饲用需求快速增长,油用大豆受国际市场的影响较大。结论 为稳定国内粮食市场,避免国际市场的冲击,中国要进一步提升粮食综合生产能力,强化科技支撑,加强粮食储备管理,健全政策支持体系,并引导居民建立科学的消费观念。     

Trade Reform and the Corn Market: Prospects for the World Trade Organization Negotiations on Agriculture

Government support and trade restrictions on agricultural commodities are among the most globally distorting protectionist policies. This is especially true with regards to corn. Vast production subsidies and import barriers, primarily within the European Union and China, have artificially inflated the global supply of this commodity, while restricting the available consumer markets. This impact is augmented by the preferential treatment granted in these countries to the production and importation of the best available substitute to corn, soybeans. Using an econometric model with commodity data over the past 20 years, this article predicts the likely impact of potential World Trade Organization (WTO) trade pacts on these corn trade distortions. Despite the WTO setback in Seattle, the vast global benefits resulting from agricultural trade liberalization in corn alone validate a continued push towards freer trade.     

Comparative Advantage in Demand: Experimental Evidence of Preferences for Genetically Modified Food in the United States and European Union

The United States (US) exports more than US$6 billion in agricultural commodities to the European Union(EU) each year, but one issue carries the potential to diminish this trade: use of biotechnology in food production. The EU has adopted more stringent policies towards biotechnology than the US. Understanding differences in European and American policies towards genetically modified (GM) foods requires a greater understanding of consumers’ attitudes and preferences. This paper reports results from the first large‐scale, cross‐Atlantic study to analyse consumer demand for genetically modified food in a non‐hypothetical market environment. We strongly reject the frequent if convenient assumption in trade theory that consumer preferences are identical across countries: the median level of compensation demanded by English and French consumers to consume a GM food is found to be more than twice that in any of the US locations. Results have important implications for trade theory, which typically focuses on differences in specialization, comparative advantage and factor endowments across countries, and for on‐going trade disputes at the World Trade Organization.     

How would global trade liberalization affect rural and regional incomes in Australia?

Agricultural protection in rich countries, which had depressed Australian farm incomes via its impact on Australia’s terms of trade, has diminished over the past two decades. So too has agricultural export taxation in poor countries, which has had the opposite impact on those terms of trade. Meanwhile, however, import protection for developing country farmers has been steadily growing. To what extent are Australian farmers and rural regions still adversely affected by farm and non‐farm price‐ and trade‐distortive policies abroad? This paper draws on new estimates of the current extent of those domestic and foreign distortions: first, to model their net impact on Australia’s terms of trade (using the World Bank’s Linkage model of the global economy); and second, to model the effects of that terms of trade impact on output and real incomes in rural versus urban and other regions and households within Australia as of 2004 (using Monash’s multi‐regional TERM model of the Australian economy).     

Trade liberalisation and greenhouse gas emissions: the case of dairying in the European Union and New Zealand*

The link between trade and the environment has aroused considerable interest both in terms of the impact of trade liberalisation on the environment, and also the impact of environmental policy on production and trade. Of key environmental concern at present is global warming and its association with greenhouse gas emissions. Agriculture is a sector of the economy that both contributes to, and will be affected by, climate change. This paper models the impact of agricultural trade liberalisation on greenhouse gas emissions from agriculture around the world, focusing particularly on the effects on New Zealand, a small economy highly dependent on agricultural trade. A partial equilibrium agricultural multicountry, multicommodity trade model is used for the analysis, extended to include physical production systems and their greenhouse gas emissions. Two simulations are performed: removal of agricultural policies in the EU and in all OECD countries. The results indicate that although producer returns in New Zealand increase, greenhouse gas emissions also increase significantly. EU producers face lower returns but also lower greenhouse gas emissions.     

The impact of OECD biofuels policies on developing countries

OECD countries’ biofuels policies, derived from energy and environmental legislation and activated by high oil prices, were the primary cause of not only the sudden spike in grain and oilseed prices in 2007–2008 but also of the ensuing price volatility. Even though developing countries have a comparative advantage in biofuels production, they were shut out of rich countries’ biofuel markets by trade discriminating biofuels policies. Developing countries would not have been able to take full advantage of the price spike in the short run anyway given the low supply elasticities and the long time required for biofuel production to come online, unlike for corn‐ethanol. The controversy over the right price of food is misplaced and policy makers should instead focus on improving biofuels policies, which like their counterpart agricultural policies in previous decades, have damaged the welfare of developing countries.     

European trade in forest products and fuels

The purpose has been to determine to what extent differences in net trade and revealed comparative advantage between EU member states could be explained by differences in forest endowments, domestic demand, energy policies and other country specific characteristics. An adopted model of the Heckscher–Ohlin theory, suggesting a direct relationship between a country's trade, forest endowments and income (HOV model), has been empirically estimated for three forest products (roundwood, chips & particles and wood fuel), 19 European countries and for the period 1994–2006. Both net export and an index of revealed comparative advantages was constructed and used as dependent variables. Moreover, different model specification was estimated using different measures of forest endowments. The results suggest that forest endowments are an important determinant for explaining differences in net trade of the included forest commodities. However, domestic demand, measured by income level, is not. Thus, the results provide mixed support for the HOV model.