IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/aes007/7965.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Curbing Agricultural Exceptionalism: The EU's Response To External Challenge

Author

Listed:
  • Swinbank, Alan
  • Daugbjerg, Carsten

Abstract

From the launch of GATT in 1948, through to the Uruguay Round of GATT negotiations, the niceties of international trade rules had little impact on the design and implementation of EU farm policies. GATT was built on consensus, but powerful economic actors (such as the EU) were to a large extent able to implement farm policies that best suited their perceived needs. This agricultural exceptionalism (a term used by political scientists) had been promoted by the US in the 1940s and 1950s, but was cultivated by the EU (and others) in the 1960s and 1970s. However, dating from the Punta del Este declaration of 1986 launching the Uruguay Round, agricultural exceptionalism has been under pressure and the Uruguay Round Agreement on Agriculture of 1994 (the URAA) did, to some extent, curb agricultural exceptionalism and continues so doing through the WTO dispute settlement body.

Suggested Citation

  • Swinbank, Alan & Daugbjerg, Carsten, 2007. "Curbing Agricultural Exceptionalism: The EU's Response To External Challenge," 81st Annual Conference, April 2-4, 2007, Reading University, UK 7965, Agricultural Economics Society.
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:aes007:7965
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.7965
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/7965/files/cp07sw01.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.7965?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. Hudec, Robert E., 1998. "Does The Agreement On Agriculture Work? Agricultural Disputes After The Uruguay Round," Working Papers 14612, International Agricultural Trade Research Consortium.
    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. Vik, Jostein, 2020. "The agricultural policy trilemma: On the wicked nature of agricultural policy making," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 99(C).
    2. Moon, Wanki & Sakuyama, Takumi, 2021. "The Political Economy of Agricultural Trade Policy in Northeast Asia: Comparisons with the West and between Japan and Korea," 2021 Conference, August 17-31, 2021, Virtual 315192, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    3. Wanki Moon & Gabriel Pino, 2018. "Do U.S. citizens support government intervention in agriculture? Implications for the political economy of agricultural protection," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 49(1), pages 119-129, January.

    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. Tangermann, Stefan, 2001. "Has The Uruguay Round Agreement On Agriculture Worked Well?," Working Papers 14586, International Agricultural Trade Research Consortium.
    2. Bernard Hoekman & Kym Anderson, 2000. "Developing-Country Agriculture and the New Trade Agenda," Economic Development and Cultural Change, University of Chicago Press, vol. 49(1), pages 171-180.
    3. Burfisher, Mary E. & Norman, Terry & Schwartz, Renee, 2001. "Nafta Trade Dispute Resolution: What Are The Mechanisms?," Proceedings of the 6th Agricultural and Food Policy Systems Information Workshop, 2000: Trade Liberalization Under NAFTA: Report Card on Agriculture 16843, Farm Foundation, Agricultural and Food Policy Systems Information Workshops.
    4. Roland Herrmann & Marc Kramb & Christina Mönnich, 2001. "Tariff rate quotas and the economic impact of agricultural trade liberalization in the world trade organization," International Advances in Economic Research, Springer;International Atlantic Economic Society, vol. 7(1), pages 1-19, February.
    5. Swinbank, Alan, 2006. "The EU’s Export Refunds on Processed Foods: Legitimate in the WTO?," Estey Centre Journal of International Law and Trade Policy, Estey Centre for Law and Economics in International Trade, vol. 7(2), pages 1-16.
    6. Anderson, Kym, 2000. "Agriculture, Developing Countries, And The WTO Millennium Round," CEPR Discussion Papers 2437, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    International Relations/Trade;

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:aes007:7965. 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/aesukea.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.