Transcript Slide 1
Trade Negotiations and Agreements Dr. George Norton Agricultural and Applied Economics Virginia Tech Copyright 2006 Objectives Discuss multi-lateral agreements as potential solutions to trade problems • Discuss the GATT and WTO • Regional agreements – for example NAFTA Developing country trade reform interests With trade reform, many developing countries would gain from lower barriers for their exports; some would lose from the projected 10-20% higher prices for grain imports. Most countries would gain. Europe and Japan have the highest trade barriers, but U.S. and developing countries also restrict trade significantly OECD Producer Support Estimates, 2004, in Percent Switzerland 68 Japan 56 European Union 33 Canada 21 United States 18 Mexico 17 Australia 4 New Zealand 3 30 Countries Overall Source: OECD Agriculture Directorate 30 Average Producer Support in OECD Countries, 2004, in Percent Rice 75 Sugar 58 Milk 36 Beef & Veal 34 Wheat 33 Corn 31 Oilseeds 27 Pork 21 Overall 30 Source: OECD Agriculture Directorate Domestic Effects of Subsidies to Agriculture Increase total investment in agriculture relative to other sectors Distort what gets produced where Affect price of land and other fixed assets Holds people in agriculture that would normally move to other sectors as development proceeds External Effects of Ag Protection and Subsidies Fewer imports by importer (examples: US sugar; Japan rice) can lower world price For net exporter, larger production and exports can depress world price (example: US cotton) Barriers to imports may reduce domestic price variability but increase variability on the world market Why Is It Difficult to Reduce Ag Subsidies & Liberalize Trade? Benefits are capitalized into land values, so value of land would fall Labor adjustment difficult • Specialized skills become less valuable Retraining may be costly (or impractical for older people). • Adjustment may require physical relocation May be both monetarily and emotionally costly Those with benefits want to keep them • Subsidy recipients don’t give up without a fight. • Politicians likely to lose campaign contributions and/or bribes. Gainers and Losers Gainers exceed losers, but there are losers The challenge is to define policies to compensate losers: • to facilitate their adjustment • to neutralize political opposition Multilateral Trade Agreements General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) World Trade Organization (WTO) GATT Temporary trade agreement set up after WWII when agreement to form an International Trade Organization was not ratified 4 basic principles of the GATT Tariffs are the only “legitimate” form of trade restraint No discrimination in application of tariffs (most favored nation principle) Consultation and negotiation to avoid and settle disputes Agreement to periodic multilateral negotiations to lower trade barriers (with reciprocity) Non-tariff barriers legitimate if: Balance of payments problem Severe shortage in domestic economy (i.e. can put on export restriction) Import quotas can be put on goods under production controls at home Health, safety, copyright reasons, etc. Periodic Negotiations 1949 1950 1956 1960 1964 1973 1981 1986 2001 – 51 – – – – – – 62 Dillon round 67 Kennedy round 79 Tokyo round 83 Geneva round 93 Uruguay round ? Doha round (under WTO) Uruguay Round Agreement on Agriculture Increased market access • Change non-tariff trade measures to tariffs • Establish tariff-rate quotas • Bind all tariffs Reduced export subsidies • Defined limits on export subsidies • No new export subsidies Required scientific basis for SPS barriers Acknowledged that some domestic agricultural subsidies distort trade and categorized them by degree of trade distortion into boxes: Green, Amber, Blue The WTO Colored Boxes “Green box” = non trade distorting investments in public goods and decoupled income transfers (no cap) “Amber box” = trade-distorting (bound and reduced) (capped) “Blue box” = trade-distorting, but offset by production controls or setasides Estimated benefits of Uruguay Round A few $billion to U.S. and world economies per year (after fully implemented) U.S. agricultural exports up a little U.S. net farm income up a little Some savings in domestic farm support programs initially World Trade Organization (WTO) What is the WTO? How does it affect U.S. agriculture? Is the WTO harmful or helpful to developing countries? Background on WTO 148 member countries which negotiate to revise trade rules Secretariat, in Geneva, organizes negotiations & follows a process to resolve differences over whether rules are being broken Dispute settlement panels & an appellate body interpret agreements WTO can not force a country to change policies, but it can authorize victims to collect compensation via import duties on the violator Key Players in Doha Round Agricultural Negotiations United States European Union G-20 (Brazil, India, China, S. Africa, +) Cairns Group (Australia, New Zealand, +) G-10 (Japan, Korea, Norway, Switzerland,+) Other developing Countries (the majority of members, but heterogeneous interests) Focus on Development in the Doha Round Developing countries are potential growth markets -- but only if they enjoy broadbased economic growth -- which will be facilitated if they can export what they produce relatively most efficiently. Developing countries now are the majority of WTO members. There will be no new trade agreement until they feel it will help them (unlike past trade agreements) Developing countries in need of development to improve living standards Many U.S. Farmers: Losing confidence in their international competitiveness Don’t recognize potential for growth in developing country markets Think Uruguay Round Agreement on Agriculture was unfair to U.S. farmers And therefore are unenthusiastic about the Doha round Doha Round of Negotiations Was scheduled for completion in 2007 U.S. has proposed reducing ag subsidies substantially, but only if other countries provide greater access to their markets. Developing countries won’t open their markets as long as world market prices are depressed by ag subsidies in developed countries Progress at a standstill Increase in Regional Agreements and Country Groupings Examples • North America – NAFTA • Europe – EU • Asia – APEC, ASEAN, and others • Africa – SADC, ECOWAS, COMESA, and others • Latin America – Andean Group, Mercosur, ALADI, and others Motivations for Regional Integration Economic • Economies of scale • Specialization • Increased competition • Market power • Stabilization Social Cultural Political Military Regional Economic Groupings Free Trade Area Customs Union Common Market Economic Union Loose ties Close ties North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) Conclusions A more open trading environment can stimulate faster economic growth, helping developed and developing countries Trade agreements and negotiations are difficult but can facilitate trade liberalization