IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/inramo/225554.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Identifying, estimating and correcting the biases in WTO rules on public stocks. A proposal for the post-Bali food security agenda

Author

Listed:
  • Galtier, Franck

Abstract

In this paper, we analyse the WTO rules that specify how the subsidy provided to farmers by public stocks should be estimated. We identify three biases in these rules: - Bias B1, resulting from the use of a fixed past unit value of imports or exports as the external reference price, instead of the current price cost of imports or exports. - Bias B2, resulting from the use of the public stock procurement price instead of the price prevailing on the domestic market to estimate the price support received by farmers selling their production on the domestic market. - Bias B3, resulting from the use of total national production instead of the marketed share of national production, thereby ignoring farmers’ self-consumption. The effect of these three biases on the estimated subsidy varies from country to country, but on average, WTO rules result in the subsidy being overestimated by a factor of between 2 and more than 300, depending on public stock intervention modalities and country characteristics. This means that in the most favourable scenarios, the estimated subsidy is (on average) twice the real subsidy. These biases have a huge effect on country compliance: many countries have an estimated subsidy that exceeds their maximum allowed level (even with very limited public stock interventions), simply because the subsidy provided by public stocks is overestimated by WTO rules. This result challenges the widespread idea that almost all countries comply with WTO rules on public stocks. We also test the effect of individually correcting biases B1, B2 and B3. It appears that doing so would not eliminate the bias on country compliance. One implication of this is that expressing the fixed external reference price (FERP) in US dollars, correcting it with the country inflation rate or replacing it by the average unit value of imports or exports over the last five years (as proposed by some experts and WTO Members) would not be enough to remove the bias on country compliance. It is therefore necessary to correct all three biases, which can be achieved in a rather simple manner, as shown at the end of the paper.

Suggested Citation

  • Galtier, Franck, 2015. "Identifying, estimating and correcting the biases in WTO rules on public stocks. A proposal for the post-Bali food security agenda," Working Papers MOISA 225554, Institut National de la recherché Agronomique (INRA), UMR MOISA : Marchés, Organisations, Institutions et Stratégies d'Acteurs : CIHEAM-IAMM, CIRAD, INRA, Montpellier SupAgro, Montpellier, France.
  • Handle: RePEc:ags:inramo:225554
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.225554
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/225554/files/WP%20MOISA_2015-5%20New.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.225554?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. Brink, Lars, 2007. "Classifying, Measuring and Analyzing WTO Domestic Support in Agriculture: Some Conceptual Distinctions," Working Papers 14581, International Agricultural Trade Research Consortium.
    2. Brink, Lars, 2014. "Support to Agriculture in India in 1995-2013 and the Rules of the WTO," Working Papers 166343, International Agricultural Trade Research Consortium.
    3. Franck Galtier & Hélène David-Benz & Julie Subervie & Johny Egg, 2014. "Agricultural market information systems in developing countries: new models, new impacts [Les systèmes d'information sur les marchés agricoles dans les pays en développement : nouveaux modèles, nou," Post-Print hal-02629892, HAL.
    4. repec:cii:cepiei:2012-q2-130-5 is not listed on IDEAS
    5. Hélène David-Benz & Franck Galtier & Johny Egg & Frédéric Lançon & G.W. Meijerink, 2012. "Market information systems," Post-Print hal-03079057, HAL.
    6. Houssein Guimbard & Sébastien Jean & Mondher Mimouni & Xavier Pichot, 2012. "MAcMap-HS6 2007, an Exhaustive and Consistent Measure of Applied Protection in 2007," International Economics, CEPII research center, issue 130, pages 99-122.
    7. Jayne, Thomas S. & Mason, Nicole M. & Myers, Robert J. & Ferris, John N. & Mather, David & Sitko, Nicholas & Beaver, Margaret & Lenski, Natalie & Chapoto, Antony & Boughton, Duncan, 2010. "Patterns and Trends in Food Staples Markets in Eastern and Southern Africa: Toward the Identification of Priority Investments and Strategies for Developing Markets and Promoting Smallholder Productivi," Food Security International Development Working Papers 62148, Michigan State University, Department of Agricultural, Food, and Resource Economics.
    8. Hélène David-Benz & Franck Galtier & Johny Egg & Frédéric Lançon & G.W. Meijerink, 2012. "Market information systems," Working Papers hal-03079057, HAL.
    9. Díaz-Bonilla, Eugenio, 2014. "On food security stocks, peace clauses, and permanent solutions after Bali:," IFPRI discussion papers 1388, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    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. Ictsd, 2016. "Evaluating Nairobi: What Does the Outcome Mean for Trade in Food and Farm Goods?," Post-Nairobi WTO Agenda 320180, International Centre for Trade and Sustainable Development (ICTSD).

    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. Hilel Hamadache & Sophie S. Drogue, 2014. "Staple food market regulation in Algeria, what is the alternative policy? A CGE analysis for wheat," Post-Print hal-02795719, HAL.
    2. Gianluca Orefice, 2017. "Non-Tariff Measures, Specific Trade Concerns and Tariff Reduction," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 40(9), pages 1807-1835, September.
    3. Birthal, Pratap S. & Roy, Devesh & Negi, Digvijay S., 2015. "Assessing the Impact of Crop Diversification on Farm Poverty in India," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 72(C), pages 70-92.
    4. repec:spo:wpmain:info:hdl:2441/3lmdaefcr886ao8sahjmam30ke is not listed on IDEAS
    5. Bellora, Cecilia & Fontagné, Lionel, 2023. "EU in search of a Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 123(C).
    6. Bignebat, Celine & Piot-Lepetit, Isabelle, 2015. "Transaction costs and the market access in Sub-Saharan Africa: The case of maize," 2015 Conference, August 9-14, 2015, Milan, Italy 211341, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    7. Beestermöller, Matthias & Disdier, Anne-Célia & Fontagné, Lionel, 2018. "Impact of European food safety border inspections on agri-food exports: Evidence from Chinese firms," China Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 48(C), pages 66-82.
    8. McCalla, Alex F., 2007. "Implications of WTO Developments for Market Integration," 2007 NAAMIC Workshop IV: Contemporary Drivers of Integration 163900, North American Agrifood Market Integration Consortium (NAAMIC).
    9. 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.
    10. Balie, Jean & Strutt, Anna & Nelgen, Signe & Narayanan, 2018. "Infrastructure investments for improved market access in subSaharan Africa: A CGE analysis," African Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, African Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 13(2), June.
    11. Fukase,Emiko & Martin,William J. & Fukase,Emiko & Martin,William J., 2015. "Economic implications of a potential free trade agreement between India and the United States," Policy Research Working Paper Series 7212, The World Bank.
    12. Fouré, Jean & Guimbard, Houssein & Monjon, Stéphanie, 2016. "Border carbon adjustment and trade retaliation: What would be the cost for the European Union?," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 54(C), pages 349-362.
    13. Ignaciuk, Ada & Malevolti, Giulia & Scognamillo, Antonio & Sitko, Nicholas J., 2022. "Can food aid relax farmers’ constraints to adopting climate-adaptive agricultural practices? Evidence from Ethiopia, Malawi and the United Republic of Tanzania," ESA Working Papers 324073, Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Agricultural Development Economics Division (ESA).
    14. Chen, Junyi & Kibriya, Shahriar & Bessler, David & Price, Edwin, 2018. "The relationship between conflict events and commodity prices in Sudan," Journal of Policy Modeling, Elsevier, vol. 40(4), pages 663-684.
    15. Felbermayr, Gabriel & Teti, Feodora & Yalcin, Erdal, 2019. "Rules of origin and the profitability of trade deflection," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 121(C).
    16. Jean-Christophe Bureau & Sébastien Jean, 2013. "Trade liberalization in the bio-economy: coping with a new landscape," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 44(s1), pages 173-182, November.
    17. Laborde, David & Mamun, Abdullah & Martin, Will & Pineiro, Valeria & Vos, Rob, 2020. "Modeling the Impacts of Agricultural Support Policies on Emissions from Agriculture," Conference papers 333141, Purdue University, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Global Trade Analysis Project.
    18. Jean Fouré & Houssein Guimbard & Stéphanie Monjon, 2013. "Border Carbon Ajustment in Europe and Trade Retaliation: What would be the Cost for European Union?," Working Papers 2013-34, CEPII research center.
    19. Fontagné, Lionel & Martin, Philippe & Orefice, Gianluca, 2018. "The international elasticity puzzle is worse than you think," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 115(C), pages 115-129.
    20. Ciliberto, Federico & Jäkel, Ina C., 2021. "Superstar exporters: An empirical investigation of strategic interactions in Danish export markets," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 129(C).
    21. Buisson, M.-C. & Balasubramanya, Soumya, 2019. "The effect of irrigation service delivery and training in agronomy on crop choice in Tajikistan," Papers published in Journals (Open Access), International Water Management Institute, pages 81:175-184..

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Agricultural and Food Policy; International Relations/Trade;

    JEL classification:

    • Q18 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Agriculture - - - Agricultural Policy; Food Policy; Animal Welfare Policy
    • Q11 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Agriculture - - - Aggregate Supply and Demand Analysis; Prices
    • F1 - International Economics - - 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:inramo:225554. 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/moisafr.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.