IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ags/ecjilt/23822.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

WTO Constraints on U.S. and EU Domestic Support in Agriculture: The October 2005 Proposals

Author

Listed:
  • Brink, Lars

Abstract

The USA, the EU and the G-20 submitted proposals on domestic support in the WTO agriculture negotiations in October 2005. This research projects future support, allowances and constraints for the USA and the EU under these proposals. Accounting properly for the de minimis rules generates a "maximum usable components" constraint, which, even when added to the cap on blue, can be more constraining than the new overall commitment. The overall commitment under the U.S. proposal constrains neither the USA nor the EU in the future. However, the overall commitment under the EU and G 20 proposals constrains both the USA and the EU to provide less future overall support than the sum of the cap on blue and maximum usable components. In general the three proposals are weak in constraining future distorting support in the USA and the EU.

Suggested Citation

  • Brink, Lars, 2006. "WTO Constraints on U.S. and EU Domestic Support in Agriculture: The October 2005 Proposals," Estey Centre Journal of International Law and Trade Policy, Estey Centre for Law and Economics in International Trade, vol. 7(1), pages 1-20.
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:ecjilt:23822
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.23822
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/23822/files/07010096.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.23822?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Sumner, Daniel A., 2003. "Implications of the US Farm Bill of 2002 for agricultural trade and trade negotiations," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 47(1), pages 1-24.
    2. Bruce A. Babcock & Chad E. Hart, 2005. "How Much "Safety" Is Available under the U.S. Proposal to the WTO?," Center for Agricultural and Rural Development (CARD) Publications 05-bp48, Center for Agricultural and Rural Development (CARD) at Iowa State University.
    3. Westhoff, Patrick C. & Brown, Scott & Hart, Chad E., 2006. "When Point Estimates Miss the Point: Stochastic Modeling of WTO Restrictions," Staff General Research Papers Archive 31341, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Cardwell, Ryan T., 2008. "Food Aid and the WTO: Can New Rules Be Effective?," Estey Centre Journal of International Law and Trade Policy, Estey Centre for Law and Economics in International Trade, vol. 9(1), pages 1-20.
    2. Will Martin & Kym Anderson, 2008. "Agricultural trade reform under the Doha Agenda: some key issues ," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 52(1), pages 1-16, March.
    3. Kerr, William A., 2007. "Too Smart for Their Own Good! Complexity, Capacity and Credence in Trade Negotiations," Estey Centre Journal of International Law and Trade Policy, Estey Centre for Law and Economics in International Trade, vol. 8(2), pages 1-14.
    4. Kerr, William A., 2009. "Recession, International Trade and the Fallacies of Composition," Estey Centre Journal of International Law and Trade Policy, Estey Centre for Law and Economics in International Trade, vol. 10(1), pages 1-11.
    5. Brockmeier, Martina & Pelikan, Janine, 2008. "Agricultural market access: A moving target in the WTO negotiations?," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(3), pages 250-259, June.
    6. Kerr, William A., 2015. "Food Security, Strategic Stockholding and Trade-Distorting Subsidies: Is There a Permanent Solution?," Estey Centre Journal of International Law and Trade Policy, Estey Centre for Law and Economics in International Trade, vol. 16(1), pages 1-13.
    7. Lars Brink, 2009. "WTO Constraints on Domestic Support in Agriculture: Past and Future," Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue canadienne d'agroeconomie, Canadian Agricultural Economics Society/Societe canadienne d'agroeconomie, vol. 57(1), pages 1-21, March.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Bhaskar, Arathi & Beghin, John C., 2007. "Decoupled Farm Payments and the Role of Base Updating Under Uncertainty," Working Papers 7350, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
    2. Brink, Lars, 2005. "WTO Constraints on U.S. and EU Domestic Support in Agriculture: Assessing the October 2005 Proposals," Working Papers 14601, International Agricultural Trade Research Consortium.
    3. Cuffey, Joel & Li, Wenying & Sawadgo, Wendiam & Rabinowitz, Adam, 2022. "Cross-Hedging in the Classroom: Engaging Students in Developing Scholarly Extension Output," Applied Economics Teaching Resources (AETR), Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 4(2), July.
    4. Chad E. Hart & John C. Beghin, 2004. "Rethinking Agricultural Domestic Support under the World Trade Organization," Center for Agricultural and Rural Development (CARD) Publications 04-bp43, Center for Agricultural and Rural Development (CARD) at Iowa State University.
    5. Anania, Giovanni, 2007. "Multilateral Negotiations, Preferential Trade Agreements and the CAP. What's Ahead?," Working Papers 7283, TRADEAG - Agricultural Trade Agreements.
    6. Paulson, Nicholas D. & Babcock, Bruce A., 2008. "Get a Grip: Should Area Revenue Coverage Be Offered Through the Farm Bill or as a Crop Insurance Program?," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 33(2), pages 1-17.
    7. Voica, Daniel C., 2014. "Are Subsidies Decoupled from Production in the Presence of Incomplete Financial Markets?," 2014 Annual Meeting, July 27-29, 2014, Minneapolis, Minnesota 169788, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    8. Key, Nigel D. & Lubowski, Ruben N. & Roberts, Michael J., 2004. "The 1996 Federal Agriculture Improvement and Reform Act: Correcting a Distortion?," 2004 Annual meeting, August 1-4, Denver, CO 20128, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    9. Shaik, Saleem & Atwood, Joseph A. & Helmers, Glenn A., 2012. "Did 1933 new deal legislation contribute to farm real estate values: A regional analysis," Journal of Policy Modeling, Elsevier, vol. 34(6), pages 801-816.
    10. Bhaskar, Arathi & Beghin, John C., 2009. "How Coupled Are Decoupled Farm Payments? A Review of the Evidence," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 34(1), pages 1-24, April.
    11. Coble, Keith H. & Barnett, Barry J., 2008. "Implications of Integrated Commodity Programs and Crop Insurance," Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Southern Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 40(2), pages 1-12, August.
    12. Bhaskar, Arathi & Beghin, John C., 2007. "How Coupled are Decoupled Farm Payments? A Review of Coupling Mechanisms and the Evidence," Working Papers 7347, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
    13. Patrick Westhoff & Julian Binfield, 2008. "US Farm Bill 2008: Back to the Future? La loi agricole de 2008 aux États‐Unis : Retour vers le futur? Das US‐Landwirtschaftsgesetz von 2008: Zurück in die Zukunft?," EuroChoices, The Agricultural Economics Society, vol. 7(3), pages 17-23, December.
    14. Bureau, Jean-Christophe & Jean, Sebastien & Matthews, Alan, 2006. "The Consequences of Agricultural Trade Liberalization for Developing Countries," 2006 Annual Meeting, August 12-18, 2006, Queensland, Australia 25471, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    15. Britz, Wolfgang & Heckelei, Thomas, 2008. "Recent Developments In Eu Policies – Challenges For Partial Equilibrium Models," 107th Seminar, January 30-February 1, 2008, Sevilla, Spain 6315, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    16. BOUËT Antoine & BUREAU Jean-Christophe & DECREUX Yvan & JEAN Sébastien, 2010. "Is Northern Agricultural Liberalization Beneficial to Developing Countries?," EcoMod2003 330700021, EcoMod.
    17. Keith H. Coble & J. Corey Miller, 2006. "The Devil’s in the Details:Why a Revenue-based Farm Program is No Panacea," Working Papers 9602, Mississippi State University, Department of Agricultural Economics, revised Jul 2006.
    18. Fadiga, Mohamadou L. & Mohanty, Samarendu & Pan, Suwen & Welch, Mark, 2006. "U.S. Proposal for WTO Hong Kong Ministerial Conference: What's at Stake for Cotton Producers?," 2006 Annual meeting, July 23-26, Long Beach, CA 21273, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    19. Arathi Bhaskar & John C. Beghin, 2010. "Decoupled Farm Payments and the Role of Base Acreage and Yield Updating Under Uncertainty," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 92(3), pages 849-858.
    20. Elobeid, Amani & Tokgoz, Simla, 2008. "AJAE Appendix for “Removing Distortions in the U.S. Ethanol Market: What Does It Imply for the United States and Brazil?”," American Journal of Agricultural Economics APPENDICES, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 90(4), pages 1-30, February.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    International Relations/Trade;

    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:ags:ecjilt:23822. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic 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.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: AgEcon Search (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/esteyca.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.