agriculture – specific issues
DESCRIPTION
Agriculture – Specific issues. Data Day at the WTO. Tariffs. Overview. Agricultural trade is still dampen by tariff and non tariff barriers Agricultural tariffs 7 times higher than Non Ag. Combinations of border and non border measures Lack of transparency of many measures - PowerPoint PPT PresentationTRANSCRIPT
INTERNATIONAL FOOD POLICY RESEARCH INSTITUTE
Agriculture – Specific issues
Data Day at the WTO
INTERNATIONAL FOOD POLICY RESEARCH INSTITUTE
TARIFFS
Agricultural trade is still dampen by tariff and non tariff barriers• Agricultural tariffs 7 times higher than
Non Ag.
• Combinations of border and non border measures
Lack of transparency of many measures• Complex instruments• Weak notifications
Data sources: AMAD, IDB, MAcMap, MAcMapHS6, WTO notifications, National sources…
Overview
Numerous changes across time• Between years• Inside a given year
Seasonal protection• Challenge for the analysis: Calendar year
versus Crop year Endogeneity of tariff to price level
• Target domestic price
Tariff variation
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
15/0
6/20
04
22/0
6/20
04
29/0
6/20
04
06/0
7/20
04
13/0
7/20
04
20/0
7/20
04
27/0
7/20
04
03/0
8/20
04
10/0
8/20
04
17/0
8/20
04
24/0
8/20
04
31/0
8/20
04
07/0
9/20
04
14/0
9/20
04
21/0
9/20
04
28/0
9/20
04
05/1
0/20
04
12/1
0/20
04
euro
s p
ar t
on
ne
Illustration 2: Tariff volatility, the case of Wheat (EU)
Specific tariffs: 45% of agricultural protection • OECD countries• But… Reference price and ad valorem in
developing countries From price to unit value
• Product heterogeneity Different concepts of unit value
• Official = Negotiation Accessibility to information
• Effective distortions = Economic impacts Tariffs and Unit values: endogeneity problems Lack of robustness of bilateral unit values
• Unit value and preferences: who gets the rents? Exchange rate, unit values and mechanical on
AVE
Specific tariffs, Unit values and AVE
0
200000
400000
600000
800000
1000000
1200000
1400000
0
0,5
1
1,5
2
2,5
3
3,5
4
trade uv_max uv_min uv_med
BRAZIL
Max > 100Max > 100 Max > 40
Illustration 1: unit value heterogeneity the case of Sugar (HS170111)
Entry prices, additional duties… Tariff rate quotas: tariffs, quantity, fill rates…
• WTO and preferential• Bound and applied level• Multilateral and allocated• Allocation method
What’s happen really on the field? Need of a transparent database on licenses
• Discretionary behaviorNew quota
• Assessing the real level of protection, rents etc.New research initiatives
More complex tools
Countries Inside rate applied
MacMapHS6 solution
Outside rate applied
South Africa 12.6 15.1 18.0
Canada 5.7 15.9 17.3
China 10.6 11.1 25.9
South Korea 23.8 36.8 55
United States 3.8 8.9 9.9
Japan 20.0 28.2 31.6
Panama 13.1 15.8 17,7
Switzerland 30.1 53.2 83.6
European Union 16.1 21.3 24.2
All countries with TRQ
14.7 18.8 22.0
Illustration 3: The role of TRQ in measuring protection
Laborde (2008)
INTERNATIONAL FOOD POLICY RESEARCH INSTITUTE
DOMESTIC SUPPORT
Subsidies
Domestic support• Notifications, box and coupling instruments• When notifications are not available:
researchers come with their own: Improving WTO Transparency, Shadow Domestic Support Notifications Measurement Issues, IFPRI
• Measurement of support: PSE of OECD Export subsidies
• Ad valorem / specific: level of subsidies and level of world prices
• Export Credit, Food Aid• Public monopoly
12
Illustration 4: AMS – product specific cap
0
400
800
1200
1600
Base AMS New ceiling
Two different provisions
13
Supporting Table DS:4
Current total AMS for product x: 1,049
WORLD TRADE
ORGANIZATION G/AG/N/country/number 17 March ....
(…)
Committee on Agriculture Original: English
NOTIFICATION
http://docsonline.wto.org/
Illustration 4: AMS – product specific cap
INTERNATIONAL FOOD POLICY RESEARCH INSTITUTE
OTHER INDICATORS
15
1 Whether product is staple or part of the basic food basket 6 % women producers
1 % contribution to Caloric intake 6 % of production in disadvantaged regions
2 Domestic production as % of domestic consumption
7 % of value of production from the product
3 Domestic consumption as % of total world exports
7 % of agriculture income of households from the product
3 % exported by the largest exporting country
8 % of product processed
4 % domestic production on small land holdings
8 % of value addition to the product
4 % of small land holdings producing the product
9 % of customs tariff revenue
5 % of population/labour force employed in the production
10 % of food expenditure on the product
6 % low income farmers 10 % of income spent on the product
6 % of resource poor farmers 11 AMS or blue box subsidies and exported
6 % of subsistence farmers 12 Productivity per worker of the product
6 % vulnerable communities 12 Productivity per hectare of the product
Illustration 5: Special products
16
• FAO provides data on the caloric intake in kcal by product
• Data is available for 124 products at the level of the FAO classification
• Example: Apples, Maize, Potatoes, Wheat, Sugar cane• There is no easy one-to-one match with the HS
classification used in WTO: but a (complex) concordance table exists
• Calculate share of contribution to total caloric intake for each product
• If this share is higher than [10 %] the product contributes significantly to caloric intake AND is thus a candidate for SP
Illustration 5: Special products – Contributions to calories intake
17Share of products that each contributes at least 10 per cent (5 per cent) to the total caloric intake; Based on products for which data are available; Data source: FAOstat
Country 10 % threshold 5 % threshold Country 10 % threshold 5 % thresholdA 2.0% 5.0% Q 3.0% 4.0%B 3.0% 4.0% R 3.9% 5.9%C 2.6% 3.4% S 0.9% 4.6%D 3.3% 9.9% T 1.8% 4.4%E 2.9% 4.9% U 1.7% 4.3%F 1.8% 3.6% V 2.7% 4.4%G 0.9% 3.6% W 3.7% 4.9%H 2.7% 4.5% X 2.9% 5.8%I 1.0% 5.2% Y 2.6% 4.3%J 2.0% 4.9% Z 2.7% 4.4%K 1.8% 6.3% AA 0.9% 4.5%L 2.0% 4.0% AB 1.9% 3.9%M 2.5% 3.4% AC 3.3% 4.4%N 3.8% 5.8% AD 1.9% 3.8%O 2.9% 4.8% AE 3.6% 7.1%P 1.9% 5.8% AF 1.8% 3.5%
Illustration 5: Special products – Contributions to calories intake
INTERNATIONAL FOOD POLICY RESEARCH INSTITUTE
MEASURING IMPACTS
19
Illustration 6: Possible Change in World Prices from Doha Round
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
%
Liv
esto
ckB
ovin
e m
eat
Shee
p m
eat
Pig
mea
tP
oultr
yM
ilk, c
onc.
But
ter
Che
ese
Hid
es &
ski
nsW
heat
Ric
eB
arle
yM
aize
Sorg
hum
Suga
r, r
awSu
gar,
ref
ined
Cof
fee,
gre
enC
offe
e, p
roc.
Coc
oa b
eans
Coc
oa, p
roc.
Tob
acco
leav
esO
ilsee
ds, t
emp.
Oils
eeds
, tro
p.V
eget
able
oils
Pul
ses
Tom
atoe
sR
oots
& tu
bers
App
les
Citr
us fr
uits
Ban
anas
Oth
er tr
opic
al fr
uits
Tea
Cot
ton
Ave
rage
Source: ATPSM simulation, UNCTAD
Beyond agriculture
Agriculture, Poverty and Hunger
Agriculture, Redistribution and Stabilization
Agriculture and Climate Change
Agriculture and Energy:• Biofuels
INTERNATIONAL FOOD POLICY RESEARCH INSTITUTE
DATA SOURCES
22
Data for agricultural trade
Data SourceTrade flows UN Comtrade, USDA, Models such as GTAP,
ATPSM, WTO IDB
Production FAO, USDA, national statisticsConsumption National statistics,
USDA (International Food Consumption Patterns)
Market accessApplied tariffs Wits, UNCTAD Trains, ITC MAcMap, WTO IDBBound tariffs Wits, WTO CTSTariff rate quota AMAD, Wits
Domestic SupportAmber box, blue box, green box WTO notifications, USDA ERS
Export Subsidies WTO notifications, USDA ERSDistortions to agric. incentives World BankFood security, nutrition FAOElasticities GTAP, Wits SMART, FAO, USDASocial indicators World Bank WDI, ILOCommodity specific information e.g. ICO, IGC, UNCTAD InfocommCompetition in export markets ICT Market Access MapHousehold and community surveysIFPRI, World Bank
23
Data Sources
http://comtrade.un.org/http://docsonline.wto.org/http://econ.worldbank.org/http://faostat.fao.org/http://wits.worldbank.org/witsweb/http://www.amad.org/http://www.ers.usda.gov/Data/http://www.gtap.org/http://www.ifpri.org/data/data_menu.asphttp://www.macmap.org/http://www.unctad.org/infocomm/anglais/indexen.htmhttp://www.worldbank.org/datahttp://www.wto.org/english/res_e/statis_e/Statis_e.htm