Are We Moving Towards Functioning Agricultural Markets and Trade Relations?

We introduce a special feature on the functioning of international agricultural markets. This feature is motivated by the increased interest in the functioning of commodity markets raised by unprecedented price turbulences since 2008, major structural changes through changed roles of emerging economies and related concerns regarding food security. We argue that the delineation of non‐functioning markets from markets that adequately adjusted to adverse framework conditions lacks theoretical foundation. We discuss the relevance of some results on institutions for agricultural markets in emerging and transition countries. A synthesis of the articles included in the special feature is provided by highlighting the selection of topics that span a topical range covering price formation on world and domestic markets, market power and trade policy modelling.     

What is the Appropriate Counterfactual When Estimating Effects of Multilateral Trade Policy Reform?

Multilateral trade reforms, such as may eventually emerge from the WTO's Doha Development Agenda (DDA), tend to be phased in over a decade or so after agreement is reached. Given the DDA's slow progress, that implementation may not be completed before the end of the next decade. Ex‐ante analysis of the DDA's possible effects thus requires first modelling the world economy to 2030 and, in that process, projecting what trade‐related policies might be by then without a DDA. Typically, modellers assume the counterfactual policy regime to be a ‘business‐as‐usual’ projection assuming the status quo. Yet we know developing country governments tend to switch from taxing to assisting farmers in the course of economic development. This paper shows the difference made by including political economy‐determined agricultural protection growth endogenously in the baseline projection. We reveal that difference by projecting the world economy to 2030 using the Global Trade Analysis Project (GTAP) model with those two alternative policy regimes and then simulating a move to global free trade (the maximum benefit from a multilateral trade reform) in each of those two cases. The welfare effects of removing the counterfactual price distortions in 2030 are shown to be much larger in the case where agricultural protection grows endogenously than in the case assuming no policy changes over the projection period. This suggests the traditional way of estimating effects of a multilateral agricultural trade agreement may considerably understate the potential welfare gains.     

North American Trade Policy for Agriculture and Forestry: Can Economics Trump Politics?

Despite overwhelming evidence of benefits overall from lower barriers to trade in goods and services, the number of trade restrictions continues to grow. In some nations, nationalistic politicians who threaten to build walls between nations and reject both new and established trade treaties have gained considerable public support by fanning the resentment and anger of those left behind in a globalizing world. Trade and immigration have incorrectly been blamed. Instead, it should be recognized that economic growth has been fueled by technological and institutional changes that have been accelerated by trade and investment. While these changes improve standards of living overall and create new job opportunities, they also displace workers in high cost regions and industries. Perceptions of the fairness of distribution of gains from trade are likely to be improved where public policy effectively assists labor adjustment and mandates socially acceptable employment standards and safety nets. Possible ways to encourage improvements in communication of the benefits of growth that arise from trade and globalization are suggested. Malgré des preuves accablantes démontrant les avantages généraux provenant de la réduction des barrières au commerce de biens et services, le nombre de ces restrictions continue d'augmenter. Certaines nations oú des politiciens nationalistes menacent la construction de murs frontaliers et rejettent les accords de commerce, autant nouveaux que déjà en vigueur, reçoivent un soutien public considérable en encourageant l'animosité et la colère de ceux qui se sentent exclus de la mondialisation. Le commerce et l'immigration portent sans raison le blâme. Il faut plutôt reconnaître la croissance économique nourrie par les changements technologiques et institutionnels, ces derniers accélérés par le commerce et l'investissement. Alors que ces changements améliorent, en général, les niveaux de vie et créent de nouvelles possibilités d'emplois, ils délogent aussi les travailleurs au sein d'industries à coût élevé. La perception de justice dans la répartition des gains de commerce pourrait s'améliorer là où les politiques publiques appuient efficacement les ajustements à la main‐d'œuvre et mandatent des normes de travail et des dispositions de soutien acceptables pour la société. L'article propose des moyens pour encourager des améliorations à la communication des avantages de la croissance provoquée par le commerce et la mondialisation.     

The New Tomato Suspension Agreement: What Are the Implications for Trade Flows?

This paper examines the implications of the new tomato suspension agreement (signed on March 4, 2013, by the U.S. government and Mexican tomato producers) for trade in fresh tomatoes and processed tomato products. The empirical analysis is performed through a gravity model that accounts for vertical linkages between primary and processed goods. The estimated gravity parameters are used to implement suspension agreement scenarios. The results show that the new suspension agreement leads to considerable decreases in Mexico's exports of fresh tomatoes to the United States. These decreases are accompanied with various trade diversion and deflection effects. There are increases in Mexico's exports of processed tomato products to the United States and other countries, and in Mexico's exports of fresh tomatoes to non‐U.S. destinations. These increases do not amount, however, to considerable compensations of the decreases in Mexico's fresh tomato exports to the United States. The results also suggest that the initial 1996‐based suspension agreement has significantly smaller impacts on trade flows over the period that preceded the implementation of the new suspension agreement.     

Agricultural Trade Liberalisation in the 21st Century: Has It Done the Business?

Based on a novel, detailed, time‐consistent tariff database taking account of import protection developments in the agricultural sector since 2001, we propose a statistical decomposition of the changes in the various types of tariffs. The results show that the multilateral system has played a limited role in trade liberalisation over the period. Many countries have continued to apply much lower tariffs on agricultural products than their WTO ceilings. Moreover, there has been substantial unilateral dismantling of tariffs over the period, so that much of the liberalisation took place outside WTO and regional agreements. The number of regional trade agreements has surged, but their impact on applied agricultural tariffs has been limited. Finally, we investigate the tariffs, trade and production implications for food and agricultural products of two extreme scenarios in the future development of trade negotiations: an ambitious surge of regional agreements and a trade war within the WTO context.     

Estimating Price Elasticities of Food Trade Functions: How Relevant is the CES‐based Gravity Approach?

The main objective of this article is to examine econometric estimates of price elasticities of food trade functions. We investigate the relevance of the prominent gravity approach. This approach is based on the assumptions of symmetric, monotone, homothetic, Constant Elasticity of Substitution (CES) preferences. We test all these assumptions using intra‐European trade in cheese. In general, the assumptions made on preferences by the gravity approach are not supported by our dataset. The bias induced in the estimated price elasticities is ambiguous.     

‘Deal’ or ‘No Deal’? Impacts of Alternative Post‐Brexit Trade Agreements on UK Agriculture

Brexit will have important implications for UK agricultural commodity markets due to potentially significant changes to trade flows. We quantify the sectoral impacts on UK agriculture of three illustrative scenarios, which capture a broad range of potential trade arrangements: Bespoke Free Trade Deal , WTO Default and Unilateral Trade Liberalisation . It is estimated that the projected market impacts are relatively small if the UK negotiates a Bespoke Free Trade Agreement with the EU. The projected impacts are much greater under the two other scenarios, which capture potential trade arrangements if ‘no deal’ is reached. The high tariffs imposed under the WTO default scenario lead to significant adjustments in trade between the UK and EU‐27, with the impact on the domestic UK market depending on whether the UK is a net importer or a net exporter of the relevant commodity. All sectors experience price and production declines under the trade liberalisation scenario in which the UK unilaterally sets tariffs on imports from both the EU‐27 and the rest of the world to zero; the impacts are particularly severe in the beef and sheep sectors where international competition is very strong.