Why it won't be like this all the time: the shift from duopoly to oligopoly in agricultural trade
Grant, Wyn (2006) Why it won't be like this all the time: the shift from duopoly to oligopoly in agricultural trade. Working Paper. University of Warwick. Centre for the Study of Globalisation and Regionalisation, Coventry.
WRAP_Grant_wp19106.pdf - Requires a PDF viewer such as GSview, Xpdf or Adobe Acrobat Reader
Official URL: http://www2.warwick.ac.uk/fac/soc/csgr/research/wo...
Agricultural trade remains highly politicised and securing agreement on further change is one of the most critical and difficult tasks in the Doha Round. There has been a shift from a EU-US power duopoly in the Uruguay Round to an oligopolistic form of decision-making that incorporates the G-20 representing emerging countries. Market access has been the most difficult issue to resolve and internal opposition to a settlement is growing in the US and EU. Nevertheless, a settlement is still achievable, but not at Hong Kong.
|Item Type:||Working or Discussion Paper (Working Paper)|
|Subjects:||S Agriculture > S Agriculture (General)
H Social Sciences > HF Commerce
H Social Sciences > HD Industries. Land use. Labor
|Divisions:||Faculty of Social Sciences > Politics and International Studies
Faculty of Social Sciences > Centre for the Study of Globalisation and Regionalisation
|Library of Congress Subject Headings (LCSH):||World Trade Organization, Group of Twenty, Doha Development Agenda (2001- ), Agriculture -- Economic aspects, International trade|
|Series Name:||Working papers (University of Warwick. Centre for the Study of Globalisation and Regionalisation)|
|Publisher:||University of Warwick. Centre for the Study of Globalisation and Regionalisation|
|Place of Publication:||Coventry|
|Number of Pages:||40|
|Status:||Not Peer Reviewed|
|Access rights to Published version:||Open Access|
|References:||Coleman, W., Grant, W. and Josling T. (2004) Agriculture in the New Global Economy (Cheltenham: Edward Elgar). Grant, W. (2004) ‘Is a more multilateral trade policy possible?’, Review of International Studies, 30, 537-44. Henning, S. (2005) ‘Geographical Indications (GIs): Squaring the Doha Round circle’, Agra Europe, No. 2180, 28 October 2005, A1-A2. Josling, T. (2005) ‘Geographical Indications: Protection for Producers or Consumer Information?’ paper presented to the Annual Conference of the Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, Coffs Harbour, 7-11 February 2005. Narlikar, A. (2003) International Trade and Developing Countries: Bargaining coalitions in the GATT and WTO (London: Routldege). Oxfam (2005) ‘A round for free: How rich countries are getting a free ride on agricultural subsidies at the WTO’, http://www.oxfam.org/eng/pdfs/bn050615_dumping_roundforfree Phillips, N. (2005) ‘Globalization Studies in International Political Economy’ in N. Phillips (ed.) Globalizing International Political Economy (Basingstoke: Palgrave) Rogan, J. (2005) Van Morrison: No Surrender (London: Secker and Warburg). Rude, J. (2001) ‘Under the green box. The WTO and farm subsidies’, Journal of World Trade, 35 (5), 1015-1033. Swinbank, A. and Tranter, R. (eds) (2004) A Bond Scheme for Common Agricultural Policy Reform (Wallingford: CABI Publishing). Swinbank, A. and Tranter, R. (2005) ‘Decoupling EU Farm Support: Does the New Single Payment Scheme Fit within the Green Box?’, Estey Centre Journal of International Trade and Policy, 6 (1), 47-61. Williamson, J. (1977) The Failure of World Monetary Reform, 1971-74 (Sunbury-on-Thames: Thomas Nelson). Wilson, G. (2005) ‘Farmers, Interests and the American State’ in D. Halpin (ed.) Surviving Global Change: Agricultural Interest Groups in Comparative Perspective (Aldershot: Ashgate), 167-87.|
Actions (login required)