IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/wpa/wuwpit/0401010.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Domestic And International Environmental Impacts Of Agricultural Trade Liberalisation

Author

Listed:
  • Peter Walkenhorst

    (OECD)

Abstract

A reduction of trade barriers will influence the overall scale of agricultural activities, the structure of agricultural production in different countries, the mix of inputs and outputs, the production technology, and the regulatory framework. These adjustments, in turn, will impact on the international and domestic environment by increasing or reducing environmental harm and creating or destroying environmental amenities. International environmental effects include transboundary spill-overs, such as greenhouse gas emissions, changes in international transport flows, and the potential introduction of non-native species, pests and diseases alongside agricultural products. Domestic environmental effects include ground- and surfacewater pollution from fertiliser and pesticide run-offs, and changes in land-use that affect landscape appearance, flood protection, soil quality, and biodiversity. This study illustrates the direction and magnitude of some of the environmental impacts by combining preliminary results on the commodity market impacts of agricultural trade liberalisation with agri- environmental indicators. The international environmental impacts indicate that projected medium-term increases in ruminant livestock numbers could lead to substantial increases in methane emissions in some OECD countries, which could warrant the attention of policy makers in the context of existing Kyoto Protocol commitments on greenhouse gas emissions. With respect to domestic environmental impacts, the quantitative analysis suggests that agricultural prices and production intensity would decrease in countries that have had historically high levels of fertiliser and pesticide application, so that environmental stress in these countries would be relieved. Countries where increases in production intensity occur might be able to accommodate increased application rates of agro-chemicals relatively easily, as their historical levels of fertiliser and pesticide use tend to be low. Projections on the effects of further agricultural trade liberalisation on land use do not suggest substantial changes in agricultural land. Yet, the analysis does not allow to derive firm conclusions on prospective changes in landscape appearance, soil and flood protection, and biodiversity, since the projections did not explicitly consider some environmentally sensitive areas, such as pastures and marginal agricultural land.

Suggested Citation

  • Peter Walkenhorst, 2004. "Domestic And International Environmental Impacts Of Agricultural Trade Liberalisation," International Trade 0401010, University Library of Munich, Germany.
  • Handle: RePEc:wpa:wuwpit:0401010
    Note: Type of Document - pdf
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://econwpa.ub.uni-muenchen.de/econ-wp/it/papers/0401/0401010.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Grossman, Gene, 1993. "Pollution and Growth: What Do We Know?," CEPR Discussion Papers 848, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    2. Chichilnisky, Graciela, 1996. "Property rights and the dynamics of North-South trade, chapter 8," MPRA Paper 8514, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    3. Abler, David G & Shortle, James S, 1992. "Environmental and Farm Commodity Policy Linkages in the U.S. and the EC," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 19(2), pages 197-217.
    4. John Beghin & Sebastien Dessus & David Roland‐Hoist & Dominique van der Mensbrugghe, 1997. "The trade and environment nexus in Mexican agriculture. A general equilibrium analysis," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 17(2-3), pages 115-131, December.
    5. Kym Anderson, 1992. "Agricultural Trade Liberalisation and the Environment: A Global Perspective," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 15(1), pages 153-172, January.
    6. James Boyce, 1996. "Ecological Distribution, Agricultural Trade Liberalization, and In Situ Genetic Diversity," Published Studies ps14, Political Economy Research Institute, University of Massachusetts at Amherst.
    7. Ernst Lutz, 1992. "Agricultural trade liberalization, price changes, and environmental effects," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 2(1), pages 79-89, January.
    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. Florent Venayre, 2012. "Protection du marché agricole et qualité sanitaire en Polynésie française," Post-Print halshs-00785749, HAL.

    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. Johansson, Robert C. & Cooper, Joseph & Vasavada, Utpal, 2005. "Greener Acres or Greener Waters? Potential U.S. Impacts of Agricultural Trade Liberalization," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 34(1), pages 42-53, April.
    2. Jussi LANKOSKI, 1997. "Environmental Effects Of Agricultural Trade Liberalization And Domestic Agricultural Policy Reforms," UNCTAD Discussion Papers 126, United Nations Conference on Trade and Development.
    3. Liapis, Peter S., 1994. "Environmental And Economic Implications Of Alternative Ec Policies," Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Southern Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 26(1), pages 1-11, July.
    4. Courtney Harold & C. Ford Runge, 1993. "GATT and the Environment: Policy Research Needs," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 75(3), pages 789-793.
    5. Maya, Peter H. & Bonilla, Olman Segura, 1997. "The environmental effects of agricultural trade liberalization in Latin America: an interpretation," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 22(1), pages 5-18, July.
    6. Nicole Ballenger & Barry Krissoff & Rachel Beattie, 1995. "Trade agreements and incentives for environmental quality: A Western Hemisphere example," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 11(2), pages 131-138.
    7. Jose Mendez & Lewis Gale, "undated". "A Note on the Empirical Relationship Between Trade, Growth and the Environment," Working Papers 2132836, Department of Economics, W. P. Carey School of Business, Arizona State University.
    8. Kym Anderson, 2005. "On the Virtues of Multilateral Trade Negotiations," The Economic Record, The Economic Society of Australia, vol. 81(255), pages 414-438, December.
    9. Juan Antonio Duro & Jordi Teixidó-Figueras & Emilio Padilla, 2017. "The Causal Factors of International Inequality in $$\hbox {CO}_{2}$$ CO 2 Emissions Per Capita: A Regression-Based Inequality Decomposition Analysis," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 67(4), pages 683-700, August.
    10. Peterson, Jeffrey M. & Boisvert, Richard N. & de Gorter, Harry, 1999. "Multifunctionality and Optimal Environmental Policies for Agriculture in an Open Economy," Working Papers 127701, Cornell University, Department of Applied Economics and Management.
    11. Kishor, Nalin M., 1992. "Pesticide externalities, comparative advantage, and commodity trade : cotton in Andhra Pradesh, India," Policy Research Working Paper Series 928, The World Bank.
    12. Ghazala Aziz & Rida Waheed & Majid Ibrahim Alsaggaf, 2023. "Investigating the Impact of Green Natural Resources and Green Activities on Ecological Footprint: A Perspective of Saudi Vision 2030," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(11), pages 1-19, May.
    13. Betina Dimaranan & Thomas W. Hertel & Roman Keeney, 2003. "OECD Domestic Support and Developing Countries," WIDER Working Paper Series DP2003-32, World Institute for Development Economic Research (UNU-WIDER).
    14. Anna Strutt & Kym Anderson, 2000. "Will Trade Liberalization Harm the Environment? The Case of Indonesia to 2020," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 17(3), pages 203-232, November.
    15. Muradian, Roldan & Martinez-Alier, Joan, 2001. "Trade and the environment: from a 'Southern' perspective," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 36(2), pages 281-297, February.
    16. Balsalobre-Lorente, Daniel & Shahbaz, Muhammad & Roubaud, David & Farhani, Sahbi, 2018. "How economic growth, renewable electricity and natural resources contribute to CO2 emissions?," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 113(C), pages 356-367.
    17. Unknown, 1998. "Economic Harmonization in the Canadian/ U.S./ Mexican Grain-Livestock Subsector," Proceedings of the 4th Agricultural and Food Policy Systems Information Workshop 1998: Economic Harmonization in the Canadian\U.S.\Mexican Grain-Livestock Subsector; 252441, Farm Foundation, Agricultural and Food Policy Systems Information Workshops.
    18. Theodore Panayotou, 2000. "Globalization and Environment," CID Working Papers 53A, Center for International Development at Harvard University.
    19. Tim Wise & Eliza Waters, "undated". "Community Control in a Global Economy: Lessons from Mexico's Economic Integration Process," GDAE Working Papers 01-03, GDAE, Tufts University.
    20. Ervin, David E. & Fox, Glenn, 1998. "Environmental Policy Considerations In The Grain-Livestock Subsectors In Canada, Mexico And The United States," Proceedings of the 4th Agricultural and Food Policy Systems Information Workshop 1998: Economic Harmonization in the Canadian\U.S.\Mexican Grain-Livestock Subsector; 16754, Farm Foundation, Agricultural and Food Policy Systems Information Workshops.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Trade and environment; scale effects; structural change; transboundary impacts; invasive species; greenhouse gas;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • F1 - International Economics - - Trade
    • F2 - International Economics - - International Factor Movements and International Business

    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:wpa:wuwpit:0401010. 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: EconWPA (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://econwpa.ub.uni-muenchen.de .

    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.