Skip to main content
Article thumbnail
Location of Repository

Environmental considerations in a new multilateral agricultural negotiation, and associated Developing Country implications

By John Whalley

Abstract

This paper discusses the potential role for environmental considerations in agricultural negotiations in the next WTO trade round, from developing country perspective. For now, as a non-trade issue in the new negotiations, environmental considerations are not the dominant concern, which is food security; although conflicts have arisen over the issue of multi functionality (agriculture serving multiple purposes including providing support for the rural environment), whether export subsidies have any rationale on environmental grounds, and the environmental case for the elimination of fishing subsidies. If new agricultural disciplines remain focused on the Uruguay Round issues of tightening the existing structure of bound tariffs, and limitations on domestic supports and export subsidies, then environmental concerns could enter in all of these. I suggest that for the developing countries, available studies seemingly point to substantial gains for them from internalization of externalities related to their own rural/agricultural activities and seemingly, further, environmental concerns should dominate trade concerns. However, the agriculture disciplines from the Uruguay Round seemingly provide relatively inefficient instruments to achieve substantive internalization of their externalities. Also, allowing environmental concerns to enter runs the risk of market restricting justifications (multi functionality) adversely affecting their export access to foreign markets. Finally, among the list of items on the trade and environmental agenda (Art 20 exceptions, MEAs, lax standards, eco-labeling) few or none can be addressed adequately as part of an environmental negotiation, and so environment in an agricultural negotiation is no substitute for a wider trade and environment negotiation. The bottom line is to suggest that developing countries focus heavily on environmental issues, perhaps even more so than trade, but that a WTO negotiation on agriculture is not the best forum to seek a remedy

Topics: S1, JZ
Publisher: University of Warwick. Centre for the Study of Globalisation and Regionalisation
Year: 1999
OAI identifier: oai:wrap.warwick.ac.uk:2079

Suggested articles

Citations

  1. (1997). A Developed Country Perspective of the Agenda for the Next WTO
  2. (1992). Agricultural Trade Liberalization and the Environment: A Global Perspective” The World Economy, doi
  3. (1999). Agriculture and the Environment: The Case of Export Subsidies” Submission by Argentina,
  4. (1987). Agriculture and the GATT: Rewriting the Rules”, doi
  5. (1957). and K.J.Lancaster
  6. (1996). Assessing agricultural tariffication under the Uruguay Round “
  7. (1992). Effects on the Environment and Welfare of Liberalization of World Trade: The Case of Coal and Food”
  8. (1997). Emerging Asia-Changes and Challenges,
  9. (1992). Environmental Changes as a Source of Conflict and Economic Losses in China” Paper prepared for a
  10. (1999). Environmental Effects of Trade Liberalization in the Agricultural Sector” Submission by Norway to the Committee on Trade and Environment;
  11. (1997). Environmental Issues in the New World Trading System,
  12. (1999). EU Agriculture, Agenda
  13. (1997). Evaluating Economywide Policies in the Presence of Agricultural Environmental Externalities: The Case of Ghana”
  14. (1995). Expost Evaluation of the Uruguay Round Agricultural Agreement". The World doi
  15. (1999). Impact of Trade Liberalization on the Environment: The Case of Tariff Reduction for Potato
  16. (1999). Launching New Global Trade Talks: An Action Agenda,
  17. (1998). Non Trade Concerns in the Next Agricultural Negotiations” Submission by Argentina to the Committee on Trade and Environment;
  18. (1996). Pay-offs to Progress”, Down to Earth (Centre for Science and Environment,
  19. (1996). Quantifying the Uruguay Round” doi
  20. (1998). Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures, doi
  21. (1989). The Costs of Soil Erosion on Java: A Natural Resource Accounting Approach”, Environment Working Paper 18, World Bank, Environment Department,
  22. (1996). The Economics of Soil Erosion: Theory, Methodology and Examples” Economy and Environmental Programme of South East Asia, Special Paper,
  23. (1918). The Economics of Welfare, MacMillan Resosudarmo, B.
  24. (1999). The Environment and Trade Negotiations: Open Coops in the Developing World” The World doi
  25. (1999). The Environmental Regime in Developing Countries” paper presented at a FEEM /NBER Conference, doi
  26. (1997). The Greening of Economic Policy Reform’ vol.1: Principles; vol.2: Case Studies”, The World Bank Environmental Department and Economic Development Institute. doi
  27. (1988). The On-Site and Downstream Costs of Soil Erosion in the Magat and Pantabangan Watersheds”
  28. (1996). The Uruguay Round: a numerically based qualitative assessment”
  29. (1989). The World Trading System, doi
  30. (1996). Trade and Environment Beyond Singapore” doi

To submit an update or takedown request for this paper, please submit an Update/Correction/Removal Request.