Suchergebnisse

Are the agricultural policy reforms embodied in the Uruguay Round consistent with meeting domestic policy objectives such as providing adequate food security, environmental protection and viability of rural areas? This article examines the claim that agriculture deserves more price support and import protection than other sectors because of the non-marketed externalities and public goods it produces jointly with marketable food and fibre (agriculture's so-called 'multifunctionality'). Do these unrewarded positive externalities exceed the negative externalities from farming by more than the net positive externalities produced by other sectors? To what extent are those farmer-produced spillovers under-supplied, and what are the most efficient ways to boost their production to the socially optimal levels? The article concludes that there is little trade-off required to meet domestic policy objectives on the one hand and agricultural protection reform objectives as embodied in WTO rules on the other. ; Thanks are due to the OECD for financial support.

This study reviews policy developments in recent years and, in the light of that, explores ways in which further consensus might be reached among WTO members to reduce farm trade distortions — and thereby also progress the multilateral trade reform agenda. Particular attention is given to ways that would boost well-being in developing countries, especially for those food-insecure households still suffering from poverty and hunger.

For most of the past 10,000 years, long-distance agricultural trade has focused on crop seeds or cuttings, breeding animals, and farm production technologies, before the dramatic falls in trade costs over the past two centuries allowed the gradual addition of farm outputs in raw or processed form to long-distance trade. That process was helped or hindered in various periods and places by governments' trade-related policies. This paper traces the impact of those developments on terms of trade during the first globalisation wave to 1913 and then looks briefly at the inter-war period, before concentrating on the period since the 1950s.

Agricultural biotechnologies, and especially transgenic crops, have the potential to boost food security in developing countries by offering higher incomes for farmers and lower priced and better quality food for consumers. That potential is being heavily compromised, however, because the European Union and some other countries have implemented strict regulatory systems to govern their production and consumption of genetically modified (GM) food and feed crops, and to prevent imports of foods and feedstuffs that do not meet these strict standards. This paper analyses empirically the potential economic effects of adopting transgenic crops in Asia and Sub-Saharan Africa. It does so using a multi-country, multi-product model of the global economy. The results suggest the economic welfare gains from crop biotechnology adoption are potentially very large, and that those benefits are diminished only very slightly by the presence of the European Union's restriction on imports of GM foods. That is, if developing countries retain bans on GM crop production in an attempt to maintain access to EU markets for non-GM products, the loss to their food consumers as well as to farmers in those developing countries is huge relative to the slight loss that could be incurred from not retaining EU market access.

Agricultural biotechnologies, and especially transgenic crops, have the potential to boost food security in developing countries by offering higher incomes for farmers and lower priced and better quality food for consumers. That potential is being heavily compromised, however, because the European Union and some other countries have implemented strict regulatory systems to govern their production and consumption of genetically modified (GM) food and feed crops, and to prevent imports of foods and feedstuffs that do not meet these strict standards. This paper analyses empirically the potential economic effects of adopting transgenic crops in Asia and Sub-Saharan Africa. It does so using a multi-country, multi-product model of the global economy. The results suggest the economic welfare gains from crop biotechnology adoption are potentially very large, and that those benefits are diminished only very slightly by the presence of the European Union's restriction on imports of GM foods. That is, if developing countries retain bans on GM crop production in an attempt to maintain access to EU markets for non-GM products, the loss to their food consumers as well as to farmers in those developing countries is huge relative to the slight loss that could be incurred from not retaining EU market access.

For most of the past 10,000 years, long-distance agricultural trade has focused on crop seeds or cuttings, breeding animals, and farm production technologies, before the dramatic falls in trade costs over the past two centuries allowed the gradual addition of farm outputs in raw or processed form to long-distance trade. That process was helped or hindered in various periods and places by governments' trade-related policies. This paper traces the impact of those developments on terms of trade during the first globalisation wave to 1913 and then looks briefly at the inter-war period, before concentrating on the period since the 1950s.

For most of the past 10,000 years, long‐distance agricultural trade has focused on crop seeds or cuttings, breeding animals, and farm production technologies, before the dramatic falls in trade costs over the past two centuries allowed the gradual addition of farm outputs in raw or processed form to long‐distance trade. That process was helped or hindered in various periods and places by governments' trade‐related policies. This paper traces the impact of those developments on terms of trade during the first globalisation wave to 1913 and then looks briefly at the inter‐war period, before concentrating on the period since the 1950s.

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 favouring 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 behaviour. 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 paper 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. ; Thanks are due to the Australian Research Council, the Rural Industries Research and Development Corporation, and the World Bank for financial assistance.

The volatility of food prices has always concerned national governments, especially those of open developing economies, as it undermines their perceived national food security. A common policy approach has been to partially insulate their domestic market from international food price fluctuations by varying restrictions on their imports or exports. Unfortunately, such domestic stabilization measures amplify international price fluctuations. This article explains conceptually, and illustrates empirically, how insulation measures do little to advance national food security and collectively imperil global food security. Many countries also intervene to alter the trend level of domestic farm product prices, again most commonly with the use of trade restrictions. The latter policies have the unintended consequence of thinning international food markets, adding to their volatility. The article concludes by pointing to alternative ways for governments to boost food security for vulnerable households; such alternatives have become far more feasible in recent times, thanks to the information and communication technology revolution.

In both rich and poor countries, food markets have been subjected to some of the most heavy-handed governmental interventions. Policy developments in this sector since the 1950s have been mostly gradual but persistent, involving in many cases a change from taxing to subsidizing farmers—and from subsidizing to taxing food consumers—as national per capita incomes grow. In a few important countries there also have been transformational policy reforms, and in all countries there tends to be only partial short-run transmission of international price fluctuations to domestic markets—a tendency that has not declined over time. This paper summarizes indicators of these trends and fluctuations in price-distorting impacts of policies for a sample of 82 countries, using a global set of annual data from 1955 to 2011. It then draws implications for what policy interventions might evolve over coming years, especially as emerging economies attain and move beyond middle-income status. ; Financial support from the Australian Research Council and Rural Industries Research and Development Corporation is also gratefully acknowledged.

This book brings together core papers by the author and some of his colleagues during the past two decades on the role of trade openness, especially in farm products, in promotion national and global economic development. The chapters cover four areas: how national comparative advantage evolves in the course of economic growth; how agricultural markets and national and global economic welfare are affected by distortionary price and trade policies; how inefficiently non-trade concerns of societies are addressed using trade-distorting policies; and how the income distributional effects of trade policies drive the political economy of those policies.

Global food price spikes in 2008 and again in 2011 coincided with a surge of political unrest in low- and middle-income countries. Angry consumers took to the streets in scores of nations. In some places, food riots turned violent, pressuring governments and in a few cases contributed to their overthrow. Foreign investors sparked a new global land rush, adding a different set of pressures. With scientists cautioning that the world has entered a new era of steadily rising food prices, perhaps aggravated by climate change, the specter of widespread food insecurity and sociopolitical instability weighs on policymakers worldwide. In the past few years, governments and philanthropic foundations began redoubling efforts to resuscitate agricultural research and technology transfer, as well as to accelerate the modernization of food value chains to deliver high quality food inexpensively, faster, and in greater volumes to urban consumers. But will these efforts suffice? This volume explores the complex relationship between food security and sociopolitical stability up to roughly 2025. Organized around a series of original essays by leading global technical experts, a key message of this volume is that actions taken in an effort to address food security stressors may have consequences for food security, stability, or both that ultimately matter far more than the direct impacts of biophysical drivers such as climate or land or water scarcity. The means by which governments, firms, and private philanthropies tackle the food security challenge of the coming decade will fundamentally shape the relationship between food security and sociopolitical stability.