IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ags/ecjilt/23828.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Coping with the Fallout for Preference-receiving Countries from EU Sugar Reform

Author

Listed:
  • Chaplin, Hannah
  • Matthews, Alan

Abstract

Developing countries can produce sugar at much lower cost than it can be produced in the EU, yet reform of the EU sugar policy will result in both winners and losers among them. Reform will benefit competitive sugar exporters currently excluded from the EU market. It will adversely affect those developing countries that currently benefit from preferential import access to the EU's high-priced sugar market, while diminishing the benefits received by those least-developed countries to which duty-free and quota-free access has been promised after July 2009. This article identifies the countries likely to lose and the extent of their potential losses. It examines alternative proposals that have been put forward to assist these countries to adjust to the adverse effects of EU sugar policy reform and contributes to the debate by putting forward a further proposal.

Suggested Citation

  • Chaplin, Hannah & Matthews, Alan, 2006. "Coping with the Fallout for Preference-receiving Countries from EU Sugar Reform," Estey Centre Journal of International Law and Trade Policy, Estey Centre for Law and Economics in International Trade, vol. 7(1), pages 1-17.
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:ecjilt:23828
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.23828
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/23828/files/07010015.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.23828?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
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Larson, Donald F. & Borrell, Brent, 2001. "Sugar policy and reform," Policy Research Working Paper Series 2602, The World Bank.
    2. Kerkelä, Leena & Huan-Niemi, Ellen, 2005. "Trade Preferences in the EU Sugar Sector: Winners and Losers," Discussion Papers 358, VATT Institute for Economic Research.
    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. Elbehri, Aziz & Umstaetter, Johannes & Kelch, David R., 2008. "The EU Sugar Policy Regime and Implications of Reform," Economic Research Report 56457, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.
    2. Massimiliano Calì & Stephan Nolte & Nicola Cantore, 2013. "Sweet and Sour Changes in Trade Regimes," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 36(6), pages 786-806, June.
    3. Zhai, Fan, 2006. "Preferential Trade Agreements in Asia: Alternative Scenarios of "Hub and Spoke"," ADB Economics Working Paper Series 83, Asian Development Bank.
    4. Osman, Rehab Osman Mohamed, 2012. "The EU Economic Partnership Agreements with Southern Africa: a computable general equilibrium analysis," Economics PhD Theses 0412, Department of Economics, University of Sussex Business School.
    5. Thomas Kopp & Sören Prehn & Bernhard Brümmer, 2016. "Preference Erosion – The Case of Everything But Arms and Sugar," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 39(9), pages 1339-1359, September.
    6. Bureau, Jean-Christophe & Gohin, Alexandre & Guindé, Loïc & Millet, Guy & Brandão, Antônio Salazar P. & Haley, Stephen & Wagner, Owen & Orden, David & Sandrey, Ron & Vink, Nick, 2008. "The future of global sugar markets: Policies, reforms, and impact," IFPRI discussion papers 829, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    7. Elobeid, Amani, 2009. "How Would A Trade Deal on Sugar Affect Exporting and Importing Countries?," WTO Doha Round 320140, International Centre for Trade and Sustainable Development (ICTSD).
    8. Marlen Haß, 2022. "Liberalising the EU sugar market: what are the effects on third countries?," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 66(3), pages 638-667, July.
    9. Alan Matthews & Jean-Christophe Bureau, 2005. "EU Agricultural Policy: What Developing Countries Need to Know," The Institute for International Integration Studies Discussion Paper Series iiisdp91, IIIS.
    10. Christopher Stevens, 2006. "Why unwinding preferences is not the same as liberalisation: the case of sugar," The Institute for International Integration Studies Discussion Paper Series iiisdp137, IIIS.
    11. Alan Matthews, 2008. "EPAs and the Demise of the Commodity Protocols," The Institute for International Integration Studies Discussion Paper Series iiisdp258, IIIS.
    12. Alan Matthews & Hannah Chaplin & Thomas Giblin & Marian Mraz, 2007. "Strengthening Policy Coherence for Development in Agricultural Policy: Policy Recommendations to Irish Aid," The Institute for International Integration Studies Discussion Paper Series iiisdp188, IIIS.
    13. Fontagne, Lionel & Laborde, David & Mitaritonna, Cristina, 2008. "An Impact Study of the Economic Partnership Agreements (EPAs) in the Six ACP Regions," 2008 International Congress, August 26-29, 2008, Ghent, Belgium 44194, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    14. Gotor, Elisabetta, 2009. "The Reform of the EU Sugar Trade Preferences toward Developing Countries in Light of the Economic Partnership Agreements," Estey Centre Journal of International Law and Trade Policy, Estey Centre for Law and Economics in International Trade, vol. 10(2), pages 1-15.

    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. Laaksonen, Kalle & Maki-Franti, Petri & Virolainen, Meri, 2007. "Mauritius and Jamaica as Case Studies of the Lome Sugar Protocol," Working Papers 18855, TRADEAG - Agricultural Trade Agreements.
    2. John C. Beghin & Amani Elobeid, 2015. "The Impact of the U.S. Sugar Program Redux," Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 37(1), pages 1-33.
    3. Kym Anderson, 2023. "Loss of preferential access to the protected EU sugar market: Fiji's response," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 67(3), pages 480-499, July.
    4. Akiyama, Takamasa & Baffes, John & Larson, Donald F. & Varangis, Panos, 2003. "Commodity market reform in Africa: some recent experience," Economic Systems, Elsevier, vol. 27(1), pages 83-115, March.
    5. Angelo Zago, 2005. "Tecnhnology estimation for quality pricing in supply-chain relationships," Working Papers 27/2005, University of Verona, Department of Economics.
    6. John C. Beghin & Amani Elobeid, 2015. "The Impact of the U.S. Sugar Program Redux," Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 37(1), pages 1-33.
    7. Burnquist, H. L. & Costa, C. C. & Guilhoto, J. J. M., 2006. "Impacto De Alterações Nas Exportações Regionais De Açúcar E Álcool Sobre A Economia Do Brasil [Impacts Of Changes In Regional Sugar And Ethanol Exports Upon Brazilian Overall Economy]," MPRA Paper 38005, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    8. Verdonk, M. & Dieperink, C. & Faaij, A.P.C., 2007. "Governance of the emerging bio-energy markets," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(7), pages 3909-3924, July.
    9. Nolte, Stephan, 2006. "The application of spatial models in the analysis of bilateral trade flows: An alternative to the Armington approach for the world sugar market," Working Paper Series 10288, Humboldt University Berlin, Department of Agricultural Economics.
    10. Chmielewski, Łukasz, 2021. "Supply and Demand Situation and Prices on the Global and Polish Sugar Market," Problems of Agricultural Economics / Zagadnienia Ekonomiki Rolnej 319810, Institute of Agricultural and Food Economics - National Research Institute (IAFE-NRI).
    11. Elobeid, Amani, 2009. "How Would A Trade Deal on Sugar Affect Exporting and Importing Countries?," WTO Doha Round 320140, International Centre for Trade and Sustainable Development (ICTSD).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    International Relations/Trade;

    JEL classification:

    • F10 - International Economics - - Trade - - - General
    • Q18 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Agriculture - - - Agricultural Policy; Food Policy; Animal Welfare Policy

    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:23828. 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.