Sistema de comércio agrícola

Comércio agrícola.
Perspectivas agrícolas da OCDE-FAO.
O Perspectiva Agrícola da OCDE-FAO 2017-2026 contém projeções de dez anos para commodities agrícolas, além de um capítulo especial sobre o Sudeste Asiático.
Base de dados de políticas AMIS.
A base de dados da política da AMIS reúne informações sobre medidas comerciais e medidas domésticas relacionadas às quatro culturas AMIS (trigo, milho, arroz e soja), além de biocombustíveis. Este banco de dados permite comparações entre países, commodities e políticas por períodos de tempo selecionados.
Políticas alternativas para estoques tampão para segurança alimentar.
Este documento identifica políticas alternativas para o armazenamento de estoque. O primeiro posiciona os estoques de reserva dentro do leque de políticas voltadas para a estabilização de preços e a segurança alimentar, e examina a alternativa mais direta às reservas públicas de alimentos para a estabilização de preços, a saber, o estoque privado. Ele explora a experiência com estoque privado para avaliar a sua eficácia na consecução dos objetivos de estabilização de preços e nas condições necessárias para a implementação.
Este relatório anual abrange os países da OCDE, grandes economias, como Índia, República Popular da China, Federação Russa, Brasil e Argentina, e regiões em desenvolvimento na África e na Ásia. É complementado por um banco de dados on-line que inclui dados históricos de volta a 1970, onde está disponível, e projeções para a próxima década. & Zwnj; & zwnj; A edição deste ano apresenta um capítulo especial sobre o Sudeste Asiático.
O impacto das restrições de exportação difere em países tradicionalmente mais dependentes das importações do país restante do que em países que importam uma parcela menor?
Este artigo explora como estimar o comércio que ocorre nas GVC agroalimentares.
Este estudo explora os fatores que influenciam a participação em GVC agroalimentares.
Este relatório centra-se na evolução significativa nos mercados agrícolas mundiais e nas políticas das principais regiões produtoras agrícolas, desde que a última rodada de negociações da OMC começou em 2001.
Este artigo explora o impacto na segurança alimentar da evolução do comércio agrícola e dos mercados até 2024.
Este livro tem como objetivo informar e auxiliar os decisores políticos e os negociadores, na medida em que buscam superar os problemas que tornaram desafiador o pilar agrícola das negociações comerciais da Agenda de Doha.
& raquo; Documentos de política comercial.
Principais Áreas no Comércio Agrícola.
A bioenergia aborda áreas tão diversas como desenvolvimentos científicos, efeitos ambientais, balanços de energia e economia de mercado agrícola. A OCDE lançou um programa de pesquisa interdisciplinar incorporando conhecimentos de várias outras direções da Organização, Agência Internacional de Energia (AIE) e outras instituições e pesquisadores.
O futuro do sistema agrícola e alimentar está sujeito a preocupações consideráveis. O aumento da demanda agrícola, impulsionado pela crescente e crescente população urbanizada, o aumento dos rendimentos e as demandas substanciais de commodities de matéria-prima para a energia e outros usos não alimentares. O trabalho da OCDE centra-se no diálogo entre os governos e com outras partes interessadas, especialistas e modeladores. e reúne aspectos de uma variedade de questões econômicas, biofísicas, sociais e políticas, permitindo assim uma abordagem multidisciplinar necessária para um debate informado.
A OCDE está a contribuir activamente para o Sistema de Informação do Mercado Agrícola (AMIS) convocado pelos Ministros da Agricultura do G20 com o objectivo de abordar a volatilidade dos preços dos alimentos através de informações mais oportunas, precisas e transparentes nos mercados mundiais de alimentos. A AMIS emite relatórios mensais sobre mercados globais que são acessíveis gratuitamente aos analistas e ao público.

Sistema de comércio agrícola
A expansão do comércio agrícola ajudou a fornecer maior quantidade, maior variedade e alimentos de melhor qualidade para um número crescente de pessoas a preços mais baixos. O comércio agrícola também é um gerador de renda e bem-estar para milhões de pessoas que estão diretamente ou indiretamente envolvidas nela. A nível nacional, para muitos países, é uma das principais fontes de divisas necessárias para financiar as importações e o desenvolvimento; enquanto que para muitos outros, a segurança alimentar doméstica está intimamente relacionada com a capacidade do país para financiar as importações de alimentos.
Tal como acontece com qualquer atividade que envolve compradores e vendedores, no entanto, o comércio agrícola - talvez mais do que qualquer outro comércio, tende a ser fonte de conflitos de interesse e confronto internacional. Uma das razões para isso é que as políticas agrícolas são freqüentemente influenciadas pelos interesses de grupos políticos particulares dentro de um país e não por interesses nacionais, internacionais ou globais. As razões relacionadas são: o surgimento eo crescimento de distorções generalizadas nos mercados agrícolas mundiais; O papel da segurança alimentar do comércio agrícola, que lhe confere uma dimensão política, socioeconômica e estratégica especial; e, mais recentemente, diferentes percepções sobre o papel do comércio agrícola em questões ambientais de natureza transnacional ou global.
A política de comércio agrícola refletiu durante muito tempo a crença generalizada de que, devido à sua importância e vulnerabilidade, o setor agrícola não poderia ser exposto a todos os rigores da concorrência internacional sem incorrer em conseqüências políticas, sociais e econômicas inaceitáveis. Este ponto de vista levou a uma proteção ampla e generalizada do setor, que tem sido uma causa de mercados de commodities agrícolas deprimidos e instáveis, por sua vez, levando a novas pressões de proteção. Nos últimos anos, no entanto, muitos países em desenvolvimento tomaram medidas unilateralmente para a liberalização dos mercados globais e agrícolas. A maioria dessas etapas envolveu o desenvolvimento de programas de ajuste estrutural e esquemas de cooperação regional. Nas antigas economias de planejamento central, as reformas sistêmicas em andamento também levaram a uma maior abertura externa e este processo, em particular o papel cada vez mais importante no comércio internacional que a China provavelmente terá, tem implicações de longo alcance em todo o mundo. Por outro lado, para vários países desenvolvidos, incluindo comerciantes importantes como os Estados Unidos e a CE, a reforma da política agrícola induzida por pressões domésticas ou internacionais levou a uma redução das distorções do comércio, mas não a uma significativa liberalização do comércio até o momento.
Foi neste contexto um protecionismo generalizado e problemas estruturais profundos no sistema comercial mundial de comércio agrícola que as negociações do Uruguay Round de GATT ocorreram. A sua conclusão e a criação de uma nova Organização Mundial do Comércio (OMC) têm sido marcos na história recente das relações comerciais internacionais (embora os resultados da Rodada tenham ficado aquém das expectativas). Apesar das suas deficiências, a Rodada foi um evento importante para o comércio agrícola; primeiro porque, pela sua própria conclusão, o pior foi evitado; segundo, porque a agricultura era, pela primeira vez, um elemento importante nas negociações; em terceiro lugar, porque proporciona esperança de pelo menos alguns progressos para uma maior liberalização do mercado e redução do apoio doméstico na agricultura; e em quarto lugar, porque a Rodada e a OMC recém-criada fornecem o quadro para mais disciplina, estabilidade e transparência no comércio global e agrícola. No entanto, o impacto da Rodada nos mercados agrícolas mundiais pode ser pequeno no curto prazo e o protecionismo em formas antigas e novas provavelmente permanecerá alto no médio prazo e por mais tempo, a menos que novas reduções sejam negociadas com sucesso.
Ao mesmo tempo que a comunidade internacional estava enquadrando novas regras multilaterais para o comércio, muitos grupos de países avançavam ativamente para os acordos comerciais regionais. No passado recente, tais acordos aumentaram em número, cobertura e dinamismo do país; e eles incluem a agricultura em uma extensão crescente. O desenvolvimento desses acordos levantou questões relacionadas à sua posição no sistema comercial multilateral, seu grau de abertura em relação aos países terceiros e os riscos de regionalização dos fluxos comerciais.
Outra questão que atraiu uma atenção crescente e pode afetar significativamente as futuras relações comerciais é o papel do comércio internacional na proteção ambiental e a sustentabilidade da produção. Este é um problema complexo e controverso. O comércio pode ser favorável ao meio ambiente, na medida em que ele provoca eficiência no uso de recursos. No entanto, o comércio e os atos relacionados de produção e comercialização também pressionam os recursos ambientais. As políticas ambientais e comerciais apropriadas podem ajudar a garantir a compatibilidade entre o comércio e os objetivos ambientais. No entanto, as limitações de recursos geralmente impõem escolhas políticas difíceis entre necessidades imediatas de desenvolvimento e segurança alimentar e preocupações ambientais a longo prazo.
Os problemas e problemas que enfrentam o comércio agrícola e as forças subjacentes às políticas comerciais agrícolas só podem ser apreciados à luz das principais mudanças que ocorreram nos mercados mundiais nas últimas décadas. A primeira seção deste capítulo apresenta alguns dados básicos que ilustram as principais mudanças que ocorreram desde o início da década de 1960 em relação ao peso da agricultura no comércio geral; as quotas de mercado das diferentes regiões e países; o valor real eo poder de compra das exportações agrícolas; e a direção e composição dos fluxos de comércio agrícola. A segunda seção examina o comércio agrícola no contexto das principais transformações políticas e econômicas que ocorreram nas últimas décadas, especialmente desde o início da década de 1980. A Seção III discute as novas regras de comércio agrícola que surgiram em 1994 após a conclusão das negociações do Uruguay Round de GATT e seu provável impacto no comércio agrícola mundial. A Seção IV discute o movimento para uma integração econômica regional mais próxima através do desenvolvimento de blocos comerciais regionais e do local da agricultura neste processo. Finalmente, a Seção V examina as interfaces entre o comércio agrícola, o meio ambiente e o desenvolvimento sustentável e as condições em que o comércio e o meio ambiente poderiam ser apoiados mutuamente.
Em meio às mudanças profundas na importância econômica, estrutura, direção e composição do comércio agrícola mundial nas últimas três décadas, surgiu uma série de características paradoxais. Apesar de perder a importância em relação ao comércio total, o comércio agrícola manteve-se um elemento-chave nas economias de muitos países. No entanto, tende a ser aquelas economias que dependem menos do comércio agrícola que obtiveram maiores ganhos na participação do mercado agrícola; enquanto as economias que estão mais firmemente baseadas na agricultura não só perderam participação de mercado, mas também, em muitos casos, também viram os seus saldos comerciais agrícolas se deteriorarem diante de uma dependência econômica persistentemente alta ou mesmo crescente em relação às exportações agrícolas e à dependência da segurança alimentar nas importações.
Outras tendências gerais têm sido um declínio prolongado nos preços internacionais reais dos produtos agrícolas, o que afetou negativamente seu poder de compra; maior diversificação geográfica dos fluxos comerciais agrícolas, juntamente com intensificação das trocas intra-regionais; e a crescente importância do valor agregado em relação aos produtos primários no comércio agrícola total.
A relação entre comércio e produção em geral está subjacente à crescente interdependência e integração das economias mundiais. Este é o caso também para a agricultura. A nível mundial, a taxa de crescimento a longo prazo do comércio agrícola tende a ser significativamente maior do que a produção.
Esse padrão foi revertido durante grande parte da década de 1980, refletindo exportações e importações deprimidas nos países em desenvolvimento, particularmente na América Latina e no Caribe e na África. Em contrapartida, o crescimento do comércio agrícola continuou a ser geralmente superior ao da produção nos países desenvolvidos (Figura 11).
Apesar do seu relativo dinamismo, no entanto, o comércio de produtos agrícolas tende a ficar para trás do comércio em outros setores, particularmente nos manufaturados, à medida que a industrialização prossegue. Em termos globais, as exportações agrícolas representam agora menos de 10% das exportações de mercadorias, em comparação com cerca de 25% no início da década de 960.
A tendência para o comércio agrícola perder importância relativa no comércio externo tem sido comum a todas as regiões, mas nas regiões do país em desenvolvimento o processo foi particularmente pronunciado durante a década de 1960 e início da década de 1970 (Figuras 12 e 13).
Posteriormente, a participação da agricultura nas exportações totais se estabilizou em torno de 2 a 7% na região do Oriente Próximo e Norte da África; e cerca de 10% na Ásia e no Pacífico. As flutuações mais acentuadas da parcela foram registradas na África subsaariana e na América Latina e no Caribe, onde o declínio geral da parcela do comércio agrícola foi pontuado por aumentos temporários (especialmente no final da década de 1970 nos anos "boom" e em 1986, um ano de altos preços do café causados ​​por culturas reduzidas pela seca no Brasil e sua suspensão de cotas de exportação) (Figuras 14A e 14B).
Um padrão semelhante é observado ao lado das importações. O declínio do peso da agricultura nas importações totais, que é um bom indicador da taxa de desenvolvimento de um país, foi notavelmente forte na região da Ásia e do Pacífico; menos marcado nas regiões do Próximo Oriente e da América Latina e do Caribe (o último apresentando um índice relativamente baixo de agricultura para total de importações, no entanto); e dificilmente visível na África subsaariana.
As exportações agrícolas também tendem a perder importância como fonte de financiamento de importação. Este processo de longo prazo foi interrompido apenas em períodos excepcionais, como quando prevalecem condições particularmente favoráveis ​​para as exportações agrícolas (como no final da década de 1970); ou, mais notavelmente, nos anos que se seguiram à crise da dívida na década de 1980, quando muitos países em desenvolvimento contraíram fortemente suas importações totais.
No entanto, na América Latina e no Caribe e na África subsaariana, as exportações agrícolas ainda financiam cerca de um quinto da conta de importação total. Além disso, a dependência econômica das exportações agrícolas permaneceu muito alta em muitos países (Figuras 15). Em 1993, 17 dos 46 países da África dependiam da agricultura para metade ou mais dos seus ganhos de exportação totais. Na América Latina e no Caribe, 16 dos 40 países estavam na mesma situação (nove deles no Caribe).
Casos extremos, em que 80 por cento ou mais dos ganhos de exportação foram baseados em agricultura, incluindo Cuba e Paraguai na América Latina; e Burundi, Comores, Guiné-Bissau, Malawi, Uganda e Sudão.
A distribuição regional do comércio mundial total e agrícola mudou significativamente desde o início da década de 1960. Enquanto os países em desenvolvimento ganharam participação de mercado para as exportações totais de mercadorias (de cerca de 20 para mais de 25% do total mundial), sua participação nas exportações agrícolas totais diminuiu de mais de 40 para cerca de 27% (Figura 16).
A contrapartida das perdas de participação no mercado dos países em desenvolvimento foi o aumento do peso dos países desenvolvidos, principalmente a CE, nos mercados agrícolas mundiais. De fato, enquanto no início da década de 1960 a EC-12 representava um pouco mais de 20% das exportações agrícolas mundiais, essa participação é agora de cerca de 45%. A maior parte desse aumento reflete a intensificação do comércio entre os países membros da CE. Excluindo o comércio intracomunitário, no entanto, as exportações da CE ainda representam aproximadamente 13% do total mundial, acima de 8% no início da década de 1960. A CE também permaneceu, de longe, a maior área de importação do mundo, embora a sua participação nas importações mundiais de fora da Comunidade tenha tendido a diminuir.
Os Estados Unidos, depois de ter perdido alguma participação de mercado no final da década de 1960, conseguiram retomá-lo depois de 1973, quando o setor de exportação se beneficiou de políticas fiscais e monetárias liberais e um dólar fraco. No entanto, a partir de 1982, o aperto das políticas macroeconômicas, o fortalecimento do dólar após o segundo choque do petróleo e a recessão mundial resultante resultaram em uma marcada desaceleração no crescimento das exportações dos Estados Unidos.
Todas as regiões dos países em desenvolvimento, com exceção da Ásia e do Pacífico, perderam progressivamente a quota de mercado mundial para suas exportações. Que a Ásia e o Pacífico realmente ganhou participação nas exportações agrícolas mundiais desde meados da década de 1970 é ainda mais notável, pois esta também é a região que tem sido mais bem sucedida na diversificação da sua base de exportação para a agricultura. Em contrapartida, apesar da persistente componente agrícola forte de seu comércio externo, a presença da África Subsahariana nos mercados agrícolas mundiais tende a perder significado desde o início da década de 1970 e agora é de uma magnitude comparável à do Oriente Próximo e Norte da África. A América Latina e o Caribe sofreram perdas de mercado pronunciadas desde a segunda metade da década de 1980, um período de crescimento lento no volume de exportações agrícolas e de forte declínio nos preços de exportação (Figuras 17 e 18).
Até o final da década de 1970, as exportações agrícolas dos países em desenvolvimento como um todo excediam as importações agrícolas por uma margem significativa e relativamente estável. A crise econômica do início da década de 1980 causou um declínio acentuado na demanda por exportações dos países em desenvolvimento e levou a uma reversão temporária de sua posição comercial comercial comercial. Conforme a crise progrediu, no entanto, as restrições financeiras impuseram uma redução drástica das importações, inclusive dos alimentos, e os países em desenvolvimento como um todo emergiram novamente como exportadores agrícolas líquidos, posição que mantiveram até 1991. Os desempenhos de exportação geralmente decepcionantes nos dois anos seguintes levaram, mais uma vez, a uma inversão da balança comercial.
As situações regionais, no entanto, diferiram amplamente neste padrão geral. Em geral, a América Latina e o Caribe mantiveram uma forte posição de superávit agrícola, embora as importações tenham tendido a subir muito mais rapidamente do que as exportações nos últimos anos. A África subsaariana registrou amplas flutuações no seu índice de exportação e importação agrícola, mas as tendências recentes sugerem dificuldades crescentes para a região na manutenção do seu tradicional status de exportador líquido. A Ásia e o Pacífico mudaram-se para uma posição de importador agrícola líquido desde meados da década de 1970, com uma expansão constante de importações e exportações apenas interrompidas durante a primeira metade da década de 1980. Finalmente, o Oriente Médio e o Norte da África, um exportador agrícola líquido durante a década de 1960, tem aumentado a dependência de alimentos durante a década de 1970 e início da década de 1980 e permanecem extremamente elevados desde então. O hiato do comércio agrícola aumentou dramaticamente nos países exportadores de petróleo nesta região, mas os déficits alimentares de natureza estrutural também surgiram em vários países não exportadores de petróleo (Figura 19).
Duas tendências gerais caracterizaram a direção dos fluxos comerciais agrícolas nas últimas décadas. A primeira é uma crescente diversificação geográfica das exportações e importações e a segunda é a intensidade crescente das trocas dentro das regiões individuais.
Essas tendências gerais foram longe de ser uniformes, no entanto, e não resultaram em grandes mudanças nos padrões globais de comércio agrícola. O comércio agrícola dos países desenvolvidos manteve-se, em grande parte, cada vez mais auto-centrado, e os países em desenvolvimento representam uma parcela decrescente das importações totais. Os países em desenvolvimento, por outro lado, ainda dependem em grande parte dos mercados dos países desenvolvidos como fornecedores de importações e como pontos de venda para exportações.
A dependência dos mercados tradicionais dos países desenvolvidos, em particular os da CE, permaneceu elevada em África. Na verdade, os países desenvolvidos atualmente representam as três quartos das exportações agrícolas totais da região e quase 70% de suas importações agrícolas. Os exportadores agrícolas africanos aumentaram a participação do comércio intra-regional nas exportações totais de 5 para 11 por cento entre 1970 e 1990. No entanto, isso contribuiu pouco para reduzir a dependência pesada de África das importações de alimentos nos mercados dos países desenvolvidos.
Todas as outras regiões dos países em desenvolvimento mostraram diversos graus de diversificação do mercado e integração regional. O Extremo Oriente já era a região mais autocentrada para o comércio agrícola, intensificou os intercâmbios intra-regionais, ao mesmo tempo em que reduziu a parcela de suas exportações agrícolas totais para os países desenvolvidos, particularmente a CE. A América Latina e o Caribe mantiveram um padrão de exportação bastante equilibrado entre os mercados da CE, da América do Norte, dos países em desenvolvimento e das antigas economias com planejamento central. No entanto, a região também aumentou significativamente o país em desenvolvimento e a parcela intrarregional do comércio agrícola, o último intensificando os esforços para a integração econômica regional. O Oriente Próximo tendeu a confiar na CE por uma parcela crescente de suas importações de alimentos, as respectivas ações da América do Norte e do Extremo Oriente permanecendo amplamente equivalente.
Os mercados agrícolas estreitamente integrados da Europa Oriental e Central e da antiga URSS tenderam a abrir significativamente as importações, em particular da América do Norte e da CE, mesmo antes das reformas da década de 1990 e a quebra dos tradicionais sistemas de comércio intra-regional. Em 1990, a CE também emergiu como a principal saída para as exportações agrícolas desses países (mais de 31% do total, em comparação com 23% para as exportações intra-regionais). Uma parcela crescente dos embarques da região também havia sido em direção dos países em desenvolvimento. Nos últimos anos, a dissolução do Conselho de Assistência Econômica Mútua (CMEA) e os esforços dos países da Europa Oriental e Central para fortalecer os vínculos econômicos e políticos com a Europa Ocidental levaram a um enfraquecimento ainda maior do comércio dentro das economias em transição. A introdução em 1993 de uma Área de Comércio Livre da Europa Central envolvendo a República Checa, a Hungria, a Polónia e a Eslováquia pode reativar o comércio intra-regional de produtos agrícolas até certo ponto (Quadros 16 e 17).
Ao longo dos anos 1960 e 1970, os valores das unidades de exportação agrícola nos países desenvolvidos e em desenvolvimento seguiram tendências ascendentes praticamente idênticas. Ambos os grupos de países também compartilharam o declínio nos preços que se seguiram à crise econômica do início da década de 1980. No entanto, enquanto os preços dos produtos exportados pelos países em desenvolvimento continuaram deprimidos até recentemente, os países desenvolvidos retomaram sua tendência ascendente em meados da década de 1980.
Tabela 16 Destino das exportações agrícolas por região (por cento)
Fonte: FAO com base nos dados da UNCTAD.
Nota: os números nas áreas sombreadas, que representam subtotais para economias de mercado desenvolvidas, países em desenvolvimento e Europa Oriental e Central / antiga URSS, devem ser adicionados a 100 horizontalmente. Na maioria dos casos, não, devido a arredondamento e / ou discrepâncias estatísticas.
Tabela 17 Origem das importações agrícolas por região (por cento)
Fonte: FAO com base nos dados da UNCTAD.
Nota: os números nas áreas sombreadas, que representam subtotais para economias de mercado desenvolvidas, países em desenvolvimento e Europa Oriental e Central / antiga URSS, devem ser adicionados a 100 horizontalmente. Na maioria dos casos, não, devido a arredondamento e / ou discrepâncias estatísticas.
Em contraste com esses movimentos de preços, os volumes de exportações mostraram uma tendência ascendente constante no geral. No entanto, no início dos anos 80 marcou uma mudança nos padrões relativos de crescimento das exportações dos dois grupos de países. O crescimento do volume de exportação desacelerou acentuadamente nos países desenvolvidos (principalmente devido ao menor volume de exportação dos Estados Unidos causado pela mudança da política econômica após o choque do petróleo de 1979) e acelerou um pouco nos países em desenvolvimento (refletindo, em larga medida, os crescentes desembolsos de exportação da Ásia e do Pacífico e a pressão para gerar divisas para aliviar a dívida na América Latina e no Caribe). No entanto, devido ao diferencial de aumento de preços, o valor atual das exportações agrícolas aumentou bastante mais rápido nos países desenvolvidos - cerca de 50% entre 1979-81 e 1991 93 - do que nos países em desenvolvimento onde, no mesmo período, o aumento comparável foi apenas um pouco acima de 20% (Figura 20).
O aumento dos valores das unidades de exportação agrícola dos países em desenvolvimento também ficou para trás do de outros grandes produtos comercializados, resultando em uma deterioração pronunciada e quase ininterrupta de seus preços agrícolas reais (ou termos de troca de rede) nos mercados internacionais após a alimentação mundial anos de crise do início da década de 1970. Considerando 1979-81 como base, os termos de troca de permuta líquida dos países em desenvolvimento se deterioraram em quase 40% em 1993. Todas as regiões dos países em desenvolvimento compartilharam a deterioração, mas em graus variados (Figura 21).
O declínio geral nos preços das commodities agrícolas pode ser explicado por muitos fatores, incluindo: apoio e proteção governamental, particularmente nos países industrializados, que proporcionaram incentivos à produção, muitas vezes bem acima dos oferecidos pelos mercados internacionais; os esforços de muitos países para combater o declínio dos preços através da expansão dos volumes de embarques; as plantações e os investimentos feitos durante os anos mais favoráveis ​​que precederam a década de 1980; e políticas de estabilização e ajuste estrutural que afetam as taxas de câmbio, a tributação e os sistemas de comercialização, o que, em alguns casos, aumentou os preços pagos aos produtores em relação aos preços do mercado internacional.
Os ganhos de produtividade e / ou a expansão da área sob culturas de exportação permitiram aos países em desenvolvimento compensar a queda dos preços até certo ponto. De fato, como observado anteriormente, o crescimento de seus volumes de exportação realmente se acelerou um pouco durante a década de 1980 deprimida em relação às décadas anteriores.
No geral, no entanto, os preços caíram em níveis tão deprimidos que compensaram a expansão da produção e o volume de exportação, reduzindo assim os ganhos globais. Como resultado, a capacidade de compra das exportações agrícolas (termos de troca de renda) deteriorou-se para uma grande maioria dos países em desenvolvimento. Em 1991-1993, o índice de termos de troca de renda dos países em desenvolvimento como um todo era 8% abaixo dos níveis de 1979-81.
Dentro desse contexto geral, as experiências regionais divergiram. A Ásia e o Pacífico beneficiaram, por um lado, de uma queda menos traumática dos preços de exportação reais do que as demais regiões e, por outro lado, de uma forte aceleração dos volumes de embarque (quase dobrou entre 197981 e 1992-93). Por outro lado, a África subsaariana sofreu um colapso nos preços de exportação, juntamente com volumes de exportações amplamente flutuantes, mas em geral estagnados. A América Latina e o Caribe também experimentaram preços de exportação em declínio, mas mantiveram um crescimento positivo dos volumes de exportação.
Em grande medida, os diferentes desempenhos regionais de exportação refletiram o comportamento do mercado das principais commodities exportadas pelas respectivas regiões. Geralmente, os preços internacionais dos produtos exportados pelos países asiáticos foram menos deprimidos e sofreram flutuações menos pronunciadas do que os produtos tropicais exportados pela África e América Latina e Caribe. Por exemplo, os preços nominais em dólar do arroz caíram 13 por cento entre 197981 e 198991, os de borracha caíram cerca de 20 por cento e os de óleo de palma 46 por cento. Por outro lado, os preços do chá e, mais acentuadamente, a juta e o algodão, tenderam a se fortalecer. Nos casos de café e cacau, as principais culturas de exportação para muitos países africanos e latino-americanos, os preços diminuíram respectivamente 56 e 58 por cento durante o mesmo período.
Uma questão de grande importância é a medida em que os países em desenvolvimento conseguiram mudar das exportações de produtos primários não processados ​​para produtos de valor agregado. As diferentes regiões dos países em desenvolvimento registraram vários graus de sucesso nessa conta. Tanto na Ásia como no Pacífico e na América Latina e no Caribe, a participação dos produtos processados ​​nas exportações agrícolas totais aumentou de cerca de 10% no início da década de 1960 para cerca de um terço do total nos últimos anos. Esta parcela aumentou para níveis consideravelmente mais altos nos países mais industrializados nessas regiões. Assim, na Argentina e no Brasil, o valor comparável é de cerca de 50%, enquanto na Malásia é mais de 70%.
Na África subsaariana, por outro lado, a participação dos produtos transformados nas exportações agrícolas permaneceu em torno de 15% ao longo das últimas três décadas. Por trás desse padrão de estagnação, alguns países apresentaram variações temporais pronunciadas. No caso do Quênia, a proporção de produtos processados ​​para as exportações agrícolas totais foi relativamente alta (em torno de 17%) durante a década de 1960 e início da década de 1970, mas diminuiu para menos de 10% nas décadas seguintes. Na Costa do Marfim, a proporção aumentou acentuadamente entre o início dos anos 1960 e meados da década de 1970 (de cerca de 3 a 22 por cento), mas caiu para cerca de 15% nos anos 80. Para a maioria dos países da região, no entanto, o quadro geral é uma dependência alta e não limitada de uma gama limitada de exportações de produtos primários. No Oriente Próximo e Norte da África, a alta parcela dos produtos de valor agregado no total geralmente reflete o forte peso de alguns produtos processados ​​em uma base de exportação agrícola relativamente pequena. Os moluscos processados ​​e outros produtos do mar, bem como frutas e legumes enlatados e conservados representaram grande parte do total. Entre os países individuais, a alta parcela dos produtos transformados é amplamente explicada pelo vinho na Argélia (embora este produto tenha perdido uma importância considerável nos últimos anos); por produtos da pesca processados ​​e pistache no Irã; e por confecções de tabaco, avelã e frutas em Turquia (Figura 22).
O comércio sendo uma parte relativamente pequena da atividade econômica da maioria dos países, as formas em que é regulada e conduzida estão intimamente relacionadas às orientações políticas que regem a economia global. Assim, as principais transformações que ocorreram em muitas economias mundiais durante a última década, e especialmente desde o final da década de 1980, provavelmente terão efeitos profundos e permanentes nas políticas comerciais e, de fato, na forma como o comércio será conduzido.
A década de 1980 marcou um afastamento da intervenção do governo em economias desenvolvidas, em desenvolvimento e com planejamento central. As economias de mercado desenvolvidas começaram a reduzir a intervenção interna do governo de várias formas e eliminaram as restrições sobre fluxos de capital e investimento. Mudanças mais significativas ocorreram nos países em desenvolvimento, que começaram a abandonar suas políticas comerciais e de investimento voltadas para o interior e iniciaram grandes reformas. As economias em desenvolvimento reduziram a intervenção do governo que causou a sobrevalorização da taxa de câmbio, reduziu ou eliminou os controles de capital e privatizou as empresas estatais. In the greatest shift of all, the political and economic system collapsed in the former USSR and in Central and Eastern Europe and these countries began adopting market-oriented principles of economic management. Starting in 1979 the People's Republic of China also began major internal reforms of its economic system. As a result, a large portion of the world economy, which had been under the control of state planning systems, moved towards a market system.
The developed countries had already removed many direct government controls over their economies in the years prior to the 1980s. They had been confident enough in their policy direction to sign the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) in 1947 and to adopt a set of common trade rules. Among other things, the GATT rules barred the use of quantitative import controls except in special circumstances, and this meant that tariffs became the only way of protecting non-agricultural products. GATT also prohibited the use of export subsidies in export competition for all but primary products. The original GATT, however, only covered trade in goods. Recognizing the difference in national policies related to agricultural markets, it set out exemptions for agriculture that were to persist for more than four decades. Export subsidies for agriculture were allowed, as was the use of quantitative import quotas, in recognition of the fact that many countries would keep internal markets for agricultural products isolated from world markets.
The developing countries began their major economic reforms in the 1980s. Although the form and pace of these reforms varied from country to country, they usually included the removal of controls and interventions on capital movements and exchange rates. In many cases, government-owned enterprises were sold to the private sector, thus ending the drain on public resources of supporting inefficient activities. Special measures were introduced to attract foreign investors, who had often been rebuffed in the past, and to encourage the repatriation of capital that had fled the country to avoid economic instability, uncertainty and government controls.
As internal reforms took hold, developing countries were in a position to reform and liberalize their foreign trade policies as well. Foreign exchange was made more freely convertible, import restrictions and tariffs were reduced and state trading entities dismantled. The various internal and trade reforms rendered national policies more compatible with GATT trade rules, and developing countries moved to join GATT and become active participants in the Uruguay Round of trade negotiations.
The shift in perceptions and policies also manifested itself with regard to intervention in international commodity markets (see Box 7).
A recent study concluded that, in contrast with earlier periods, the recent liberalization of trade was unidirectional and continual in most developing countries outside Africa. Liberalization was most rapid in Latin America and is beginning to accelerate in South Asia, East Asian countries varied in the speed of reform, but generally made continued progress towards neutrality and.
The first United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD) took place in 1964 to deal with the trade and development concerns of developing countries. The countries that led in the formation of UNCTAD had a different agenda from that of members of GATT. UNCTAD's activities centred on the development of a trading system for commodities that were of major concern to the developing countries through international commodity agreements. Commodity agreements were negotiated in the 1960s and 1970s for tin, rubber, coffee, cocoa, wheat and sugar. The interest in this type of agreement increased in the wake of the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries' (OPEC) initial success in increasing and stabilizing oil prices through its producer cartel.
In the GATT Tokyo Round there was an attempt to extend the internal market interventions in agriculture, practiced by many governments, into the international trade sphere. The EC proposed a series of international commodity agreements that would attempt to maintain minimum and maximum prices in world markets and allocate supplies to needy developing countries in the case of shortages. Agreements were proposed for grains, oilseeds, dairy products and meat.
It turned out that countries with markedly different internal systems and objectives were unwilling to adhere to an international system of commodity agreements. As a result of this, the Tokyo Round ended with modest agreement in agriculture and without effective international commodity agreements. The existing agreements in coffee and sugar were to collapse under the economic pressures of the 1980s.
In some ways the end of the Tokyo Round marked a turning point in the movement for government involvement in international markets. The world had already been forced off the fixed exchange rates of the Bretton Woods Agreement in 1973. Worldwide inflation, shortly followed by a widespread debt crisis and a collapse of international commodity prices in the 1980s, made many of the old interventions impossible and, in many cases, too expensive to maintain. liberality. Only Africa has shown little progress in trade liberalization, with several countries actually reversing reform when confronted with renewed foreign exchange constraints and/or import competition.
Changes in both developed and developing market economies were well under way before centrally planned economies began to make significant internal reforms. Centrally planned economic systems were generally linked to the political system and thus changes in political power were required before significant economic liberalization could occur. Incipient forms of internal reform had begun in these economies in the late 1970s and early 1980s. China had also begun some reforms in the late 1970s, including reform of the agricultural system and opening up to outside investors. By the late 1980s, the monopoly of the communist party over political power was broken in the former USSR and Central and Eastern Europe and the centrally planned economic system as it had been operated in these countries effectively ended. Economic reforms were initiated and have been pursued to varying degrees and with varying rates of progress. Generally these reforms have involved a reduction in government intervention in internal markets and more market-oriented trade policies.
In both developed and developing countries agricultural interventions were very firmly entrenched politically and this made them among the most difficult interventions to remove. The political influence of agricultural groups in the developed countries far exceeded their numbers in the electorate. These groups fought vigorously to protect government interventions that, in their view, increased their incomes and reduced competition from more efficient or more heavily subsidized producers. In many developing countries government interventions were heavily focused towards reducing the cost of basic foods to urban consumers, especially those consumers important to political stability. Moves towards agricultural reform came, as in the other parts of the economy, because the old system was not working well, was too expensive or because there were changes in political regimes.

Agricultural trade system

It is a great honour for me to be able to address you today on behalf of the WTO Director-General, Roberto Azevêdo, whom we have just heard in the video message.
The WTO attaches great importance to its relationship with the FAO, as by working together the two institutions can make a positive contribution to the global effort to eliminate hunger and enhance the food security of countries. As noted by DG Azevêdo in his address, the WTO and FAO collaborate in a number of areas and let me list some of them.
The FAO is an active participant in WTO bodies, including the SPS Committee, the Committee on Agriculture and the Standards and Trade Development Facility (STDF). The WTO values FAO's technical advice and input, particularly in its work on food safety and food security, as well as its monitoring and implementation services in a range of STDF-funded projects. The WTO has also been an active participant in FAO's work, through its participation in a range of meetings, including ministerial meetings, the Committee on Commodity Problems, the Committee on World Food Security and in the food safety area, those of Codex and the IPPC.
The two institutions also collaborate to service the Agricultural Market Information System (AMIS) in support of G20 countries' efforts to achieve greater global coherence in national policy responses to commodity price volatility and have produced joint publications, including the one on trade and food standards, which was jointly launched by DG Azevêdo and DG Graziano in Geneva in July 2017.
This cooperation reflects the confluence of the two organizations' objectives in promoting the realisation of the Sustainable Development Goals. FAO's core mandate includes ameliorating rural poverty, food insecurity and malnutrition, which are reflected in SDG 2 "End hunger, achieve food security and improved nutrition and promote sustainable agriculture". A well-functioning multilateral trading system is imperative for the realization of SDG 2. The contribution that could be made by the WTO is recognised in SDG 17, which underscores the need for the promotion of "a universal, rules-based, open, non-discriminatory and equitable multilateral trading system under the World Trade Organization".
It is widely acknowledged that trade openness can make a positive contribution to each of the four dimensions of food security as espoused by the FAO, namely availability, access, utilization and stability. Trade openness increases the availability of food by enabling products to flow from surplus to deficit areas, connecting the "land of the plenty to the land of the few". It enhances access as it contributes to faster economic growth, higher incomes and higher purchasing power. Indeed, in response to the transmission of unbiased price signals, it encourages an effective allocation of resources based on comparative advantages, thus limiting inefficiencies.
Trade openness also facilitates utilisation and improved nutrition by increasing the diversity of national diets and accelerating the diffusion of sound SPS regulations around the world. Lastly, it enhances food availability and reduces price volatility, as risks associated with domestic food production are greater than pooled production of countries worldwide.
It follows that an open trading system is an essential element in achieving food security. This is not to suggest that open trade alone can resolve the food insecurity in the world. Trade is an indispensable tool that must be part of a comprehensive policy package encompassing, among others, coherent macroeconomic policies, nutrition policies, research and development, agricultural extension services to achieve food security.
It is also recognized that trade openness could in the short to medium term hamper access to food by the poor and other vulnerable sections of society necessitating the adoption of targeted policies to address such situations.
The WTO disciplines strike a careful balance between the competing demands. The long term objective, as stated in the preamble of the Agreement on Agriculture, is to establish a fair and market-oriented agricultural trading system, while at the same time allowing members to pursue other legitimate objectives and policies to enhance food security. Let me give some specific examples of how the WTO contributes to the food security of countries and the realisation of the SDGs.
Export subsidies : The Nairobi December 2018 Decision on Export Competition was truly historic. After 60 years of special treatment, agricultural export subsidies will be eliminated, in parallel with new disciplines on export finance, exporting state trading enterprises and on international food aid. This constituted the most significant reform of global rules on agriculture trade in the last 20 years. It will help level the playing field in agriculture markets, to the benefit of farmers and exporters in developing and least developed countries and thus contribute to enhanced food security. The Decision delivered on a key target of the second SDG, and was one of the first targets to be met under the UN’s new Sustainable Development Agenda.
SPS Agreement : The SPS Agreement aims to achieve a balance between countries' right to ensure appropriate sanitary and phytosanitary protection, which obviously constitutes a necessary component of a food secure global system, and the avoidance of unnecessary barriers to trade. The Agreement does this by requiring that regulations be based on science, and applied only to the extent necessary to protect human, animal or plant life or health. In addition, members are strongly encouraged to use international standards, guidelines and recommendations as the basis for their SPS measures, where they exist. The SPS disciplines, therefore, facilitate trade and create a more predictable regulatory environment for trade in food and agricultural products, based to the extent possible on a shared assessment of the risks. In that sense, the SPS disciplines contribute to a well-functioning international agricultural trading system which can make a positive contribution to global food security.
Export restrictions : The possible negative effects of export prohibitions and restrictions on foodstuffs on international price volatility and global food security, by reducing supplies on the global market and aggravating increases in world prices, have been well documented following the 2008 food crisis. Such measures may, however, be justified to prevent or relieve critical shortages of foodstuffs in a country. WTO provisions address this delicate balance. WTO members are currently negotiating in Geneva possible new provisions aimed at improving the transparency of such export restrictions measures, with a view to enhancing the predictability and stability of markets and thereby contributing to global food security and the realisation of SDG 2.
Public stockholding for food security purposes : This issue is also currently being discussed by WTO members, with a mandate agreed at the December 2018 Bali Ministerial Decision to negotiate on a Permanent Solution for adoption by MC11. The text of the Bali decision as well as the current discussions in the WTO demonstrate here again the attempt by members to find the right balance between the sovereign right of each member to put in place programmes to ensure food security on its territory and the need to ensure that stocks procured under such programmes do not distort trade or adversely affect the food security of other members.
I could have also added in this list, though outside the scope of agriculture negotiations, fisheries subsidies, which are explicitly mentioned in one of the targets under SDG 14 "Conserve and sustainably use the oceans, seas and marine resources for sustainable development", and I quote: "By 2020, prohibit certain forms of fisheries subsidies which contribute to overcapacity and overfishing, eliminate subsidies that contribute to illegal, unreported and unregulated fishing and refrain from introducing new such subsidies, recognizing that appropriate and effective special and differential treatment for developing and least developed countries should be an integral part of the World Trade Organization fisheries subsidies negotiation".
State of play in the WTO agriculture negotiations.
Let me turn to the current state of play in the agriculture negotiations.
Our meeting today is very timely as we have seen a burst of activity in recent weeks. The Special Session of the Committee on Agriculture and the related dedicated sessions on public stockholding for food security and the Special Safeguard Mechanism chaired by Ambassador Karau from Kenya met last week. The week before also saw the gathering of 41 trade ministers in Marrakesh to review progress in the negotiations in the run-up to the Buenos Aires Ministerial Conference. A meeting of the WTO General Council is scheduled to take place at the end of this week.
So what is the situation today and what are the prospects for an agricultural outcome at MC11? The situation is very fluid, as is usually the case in the run up to every Ministerial Conference. The negotiations thus far have focussed on the following issues: domestic support; public stockholding for food security purposes; cotton domestic support; export restrictions; market access; the Special Safeguard Mechanism for developing country members; and other issues, including export competition and SPS issues.
It is clear that with the limited time available, there is need for prioritisation of the issues. In fact, this was the subject of discussions among ministers in Marrakesh. There appears to be agreement among the members that priority should be given to issues in respect of which there is a possibility of an outcome at MC11. Where there are wide divergences in members’ positions on a negotiating subject, the emerging consensus is that it should be taken up in a post-MC11 work programme.
With the exception of public stockholding for food security purposes in respect of which members agreed at the Bali Ministerial Conference to negotiate a permanent solution for adoption by MC11, it is clear that negotiations will have to continue on all the other issues after MC11.
Let me now be more specific and briefly describe the state of play on all these issues using the categorisation adopted by Chairman Karau. Issues in the first category are those that many members consider that a substantive outcome could be achieved at MC11. In this category are domestic support, PSH, cotton and export restrictions.
With respect to domestic support , many members have affirmed that it is a priority for them and that there should be an outcome at MC11. Consequently, there has been enhanced engagement on the substance of the issues in recent weeks. There are now several ideas on the table on what could constitute the core elements of a possible outcome. Several members have expressed their support for an overall limit on trade distorting support, whether based on a percentage of the value of production or on a monetary ceiling. By contrast, many members have expressed support for the idea that the AMS entitlements of developed members should be eliminated as a first step in order to level the playing field before discussing further disciplines. The divergences in members’ positions are wide and further engagement is needed to bridge the gaps.
Regarding public stockholding for food security purposes , there is convergence of views among members that it is a priority issue and that a permanent solution should be found at or before MC11 in accordance with the Bali and Nairobi Ministerial Declarations. It is also seen by some members as a gateway issue for the whole MC11 package. There are currently two proposals on the table. The first is a proposal by the G-33, a group of developing countries which have been advocating relaxation of the conditions in the Bali interim solution. The other is a joint proposal by the European Union, Brazil, Colombia, Peru and Uruguay. They both advocate exempting the support provided under PSH programmes from AMS calculation, although the attached conditions differ.
Some members have expressed a preference for the approach followed in the Bali interim solution, under which the AMS calculation methodology would remain unchanged, but a developing country member’s compliance with the Agreement on Agriculture shall not be challenged through the WTO dispute settlement mechanism if it complies with the conditions in the Decision. Members’ positions on the core issues (country and product coverage; transparency requirements; safeguards and anti-circumvention provisions; and legal certainty) have not evolved significantly. The negotiations have also been complicated by the linkage being made between the PSH issue and domestic support generally by some members.
With respect to cotton , an outcome is also seen as a priority for a large number of members, who believe that it would send a positive signal about the commitment of the WTO to facilitate the fuller participation of LDCs in the multilateral trading system. Some delegations have, however, cast doubts about the possibility of achieving an outcome by MC11, in light of the overall negotiating environment, especially taking into account the de facto link between the overall negotiation on domestic support and the negotiation on cotton domestic support.
Regarding export restrictions , many members support a limited outcome focused on enhancing transparency in export prohibitions and restrictions. A textual proposal by Singapore has attracted broad support among the membership. As special and differential treatment for developing countries, the text seeks to exempt from its coverage foodstuffs purchased for non-commercial humanitarian purposes by the World Food Programme. Some members have, however, sought clarification of certain elements in the proposal, while others have cautioned against imposing onerous notification requirements on developing countries. Other members would like the scope to go beyond notification and transparency elements. Last but not least, most members consider that an outcome on export restrictions cannot be envisaged absent a more comprehensive outcome in the agricultural negotiations.
Under the second category are issues (market access, export competition and SPS-related issues) in respect of which most members consider a post-MC11 work programme as the most realistic outcome, taking into account the gaps in negotiating positions.
With respect to market access, there is growing acknowledgement, including among the proponents, that the best possible outcome would be a detailed post-MC11 work programme. The proponents had suggested focusing first on issues like tariff simplification, tariff peaks, tariff escalation and bound in-quota tariffs, but this suggestion has not been well received by some members who are against a "pick and choose" abordagem. Other members have also stated that all market access negotiations in agriculture cannot proceed in isolation. All market access negotiations (agriculture, non-agricultural market access and services) should proceed in parallel. The issue of elimination of the current Special Agricultural Safeguard has also been raised specifically by some members.
Regarding export competition, some members have expressed the need to reaffirm the fact that export competition was still an unfinished business and that the disciplines of the Nairobi Ministerial Decision on Export Competition should be revisited and improved.
With regard to SPS issues , the main question is in which WTO forum should they be discussed.
The issue of a Special Safeguard Mechanism falls in the third category by itself. It will be recalled that a Decision was adopted in Nairobi recognizing that members should pursue negotiations on this issue in dedicated sessions. Many members consider that a substantive outcome on SSM cannot be realistically achieved at MC11, absent a broader outcome on market access. However, some G33 members insist on having a substantive outcome at MC11, either on a price-based or on a volume-based SSM. Members would need to enhance their consultations on the way forward on this issue.
Concluding remarks.
From the foregoing, it is clear that we have a difficult road ahead. Members are determined to have a successful Ministerial Conference at Buenos Aires. It is widely recognised that an outcome on agriculture, however limited, would contribute to the realisation of this objective.
As previously mentioned, apart from PSH, where there is a ministerial mandate to find a permanent solution at MC11, almost all the decisions taken would have a work programme component. Thus, Buenos Aires should not be seen as an end in itself; it is a stop on the long and tortuous road. With determination and flexibility on all sides, members will be able to overcome their differences and fulfil their objective to establish a fair and market oriented agricultural trading system that will contribute to ending hunger, achieving food security and improved nutrition and promoting sustainable agriculture. A fair, robust and dynamic agricultural trading system will contribute to the realization of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development Goals.

Agricultural trade system

IPC member Stefan Tangermann reflects on changes in the global food trading system since the Doha Development Agenda was launched at the WTO and highlights recommendations of an experts group to address recent challenges including export restrictions, biofuels, increasing financial support for food security purposes, and improving the functioning of the WTO. This is a presentation given by IPC President Ellen Terpstra based on Tangermann's slide presentation. The full report is to be released by ICTSD and IPC in the near future.
Innovative Agricultural Production Technologies: A Global Approach to Increasing Production, Enhancing Food Security and Improving Food Safety?
We face a critical challenge of increasing global food supplies by 70 percent to meet the anticipated world population of more than 9 billion in 2050 as well as the additional demand for meat and dairy products as millions more enter the middle class. Gains can be made, too, by using technology to reduce waste and to more precisely utilize fertilizers and pesticides. New technologies, including plant breeding techniques, animal biotechnology and nanotechnology, can play an important part in meeting these challenges. They have the potential to increase production, reduce waste, enhance food security, and improve food safety.
But fully utilizing these technologies and being able to trade products made from them may depend on what governments decide in terms of whether these need to be regulated, and if so, how. Questions arise in some cases from there being no trace of the process used to create the product and therefore no way to identify whether it should be regulated. Many governments are currently considering these questions, but if they reach contradictory conclusions, trade may be stifled and the benefits of these advances unrealized.
Food Security: New Market Variables and Rational Public Policy Choices.
The downward trend of grain stocks is related to higher demand from increased incomes, higher protein diets, and biofuels, the combination of which seems to have set the stage for more frequent episodes of high volatility in food markets related to weather and other potential supply disruptions. These developments have led to considerable dialogue regarding possible need for greater government intervention in markets to provide for improved assurance of food at reasonable prices. However, recent research offers considerable evidence that private markets remain the best mechanism for distributing relatively scarce stocks.
IPC hosts three panel discussions in Washington.
This panel examined the newer business model many multilateral corporations have adopted of providing not only economic output but social value, a concept known as creating shared value. NGOs have weighed in on the effectiveness of these efforts and some companies are working in partnership to assess the impact of these policies and to measure their effectiveness.
Food security concerns in response to volatile world commodity prices have resulted in many governments undertaking public policy actions to address domestic concerns but which may exacerbate global price spikes. This panel examined price volatility, the role of grain reserves as a moderating policy, and the effectiveness of WTO disciplines on export restrictions.
This seminar, co-hosted by the U. S. Chamber of Commerce featured insight into various countries' perspectives on the opportunities of regional trade agreements as well as efforts to address longstanding trade barriers through new and existing mechanisms.
Understanding the often conflicting U. S. and EU approaches to agricultural trade policy will be essential for effectively shaping the negotiating structure of the EU-U. S. Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership Agreement. The U. S. and EU have diverging views on issues pertaining to SPS measures, market access, and geographical indications. Innovative, non-traditional approaches to shaping the FTA negotiations will be important for a successful outcome. However, the most significant benefit would be a paradigm shift in the trade-related approaches to protecting human, animal, or plant life or health. IPC, with the support of the Royal Netherlands Embassy, released a discussion paper examines these issues. Mais.
The broader Asia-Pacific region—encompassing countries in Asia, North, Central and South America, and Oceania—accounts for more than half of both global GDP and the world’s food supply, includes key food exporters and importers, and encompasses populations with rising incomes and transforming diets, alongside subsistence agriculture and urban poor. The IDB and IPC convened a seminar to take stock of food policy related developments and initiatives in the region. High-level speakers included policymakers, private sector representatives and academics from the region and feature discussions about a number of food security, trade and regulatory initiatives occurring in the region. Participants engaged in shaping recommendations aimed at promoting food security and a more open, productive and sustainable food and trade system. Mais.
IPC provide input into a report, Food and Agriculture: The future of sustainability , by the U. N. Division for Sustainable Development as a strategic input to the "Sustainable Development in the 21st Century Report" to be launched at the Rio+20 Summit. The report states that on our current trajectory, severe disruptions to national and regional food systems are highly likely to happen; the main question is when. Exposing unforeseen areas of consensus, the report lays out concrete steps for sustainable and resilient food and agriculture systems. By opening the silos of partisan thinking to invite reasoned discussion, it also exposes areas of disagreement and advances a key set of specific "high impact" areas where smart decisions will make the most difference. View Report.
As number of biotech crops has grown, regulatory approvals of new biotech crops across different countries have become less synchronized. Asynchronicity in regulatory approvals between producing and importing countries implies that some agricultural commodity trade flows may contain low level presence (LLP) of biotech events which are authorized in the exporting but not in the importing country. Trade disruptions have already occurred. Such disruptions are likely to increase and can have significant economic implications unless countries adopt a practical approach when faced with LLP situations. Mais.
As the EU prepares to reform its Common Agricultural Policy and the US Congress seeks to pass a new farm bill, tight government budgets will require that policymakers consider carefully policy options to ensure that domestic objectives are properly addressed. EU and US policy choices will have implications for global food and agricultural production and trade, for food security and for commodity prices. IPC’s latest discussion paper examines how various policy approaches for agriculture and biofuels could fulfill the stated and implicit objectives of US and EU farm policy, and how policy instruments are likely to impact international objectives of the US and EU respectively.
Regulations in the food and agriculture sector increasingly lead to the application of Non-Tariff Measures (NTMs) that affect international trade. There is a need to step up efforts to promote greater transparency on NTMs and to improve our ability to measure their impact. The OECD and the International Food & Agricultural Trade Policy Council recently hosted an international seminar on NTMs at the OECD in Paris, France on September 13, 2018. More.
On May 24, 2018, The Chicago Council on Global Affairs convened a symposium, in partnership with IPC, to review progress on the U. S. government’s global food security strategy and provide critical thinking on how best to overcome potential obstacles to success. Speakers and agenda are available here.
The goal of the project, in which IPC is one of 19 international project partners, is to collect and analyze new data on non-tariff measures (NTMs), particularly on governmental standards and regulations that prescribe the conditions for EU agrifood exports and compares these with conditions for importing into the EU. Furthermore, impacts from EU and trade partner NTMs on least developing country (LDC) exports are examined. Mais.
IPC began in 1987 to promote a more open and equitable global food system by pursuing pragmatic trade and development policies in food and agriculture to meet the world’s growing needs.
IPC was dissolved in 2018 but its analyses and seminar records will remain available for some time.
© 2018 International Food & Agricultural Trade Policy Council.

Agricultural trade system

The expansion of agricultural trade has helped provide greater quantity, wider variety and better quality food to increasing numbers of people at lower prices. Agricultural trade is also a generator of income and welfare for the millions of people who are directly or indirectly involved in it. At the national level, for many countries it is a major source of the foreign exchange that is necessary to finance imports and development; while for many others domestic food security is closely related to the country's capacity to finance food imports.
As with any activity that involves buyers and sellers, however, agricultural trade - perhaps more than any other trade tends to be a source of conflicts of interest and international confrontation. One reason for this is that agricultural policies are frequently influenced by the interests of particular political constituencies within a country rather than by national, international or global interests. Related reasons are: the emergence and growth of widespread distortions in world agricultural markets; the food-security role of agricultural trade, which confers upon it a special political, socio-economic and strategic dimension; and, more recently, differing perceptions of the role of agricultural trade in environmental matters of transnational or global i merest.
Agricultural trade policy has long reflected the widely held belief that, because of its importance and vulnerability, the agricultural sector could not be exposed to the full rigours of international competition without incurring unacceptable political, social and economic consequences. This view has led to high and widespread protection of the sector, which has been a cause of depressed and unstable agricultural commodity markets, in their turn, leading to further pressures for protection. In recent years, however, many developing countries have unilaterally taken steps towards the liberalization of overall and agricultural markets. Most of these steps have involved the development of structural adjustment programmes and regional cooperation schemes. In the former centrally planned economies, the systemic reforms underway have also led to greater external openness and this process, in particular the increasingly important role in international trade that China is likely to play, has far-reaching implications worldwide. On the other hand, for a number of developed countries, including such major traders as the United States and the EC, agricultural policy reform induced by domestic or international pressure has led to some reduction in trade distortions but not to significant trade liberalization as yet.
It was against this background of widespread protectionism and deep structural problems in the world agricultural trading system that the Uruguay Round of GATT negotiations took place. Its conclusion, and the creation of a new World Trade Organization (WTO), have been milestones in the recent history of international trade relations (even though the results of the Round fell short of expectations). Despite its shortcomings the Round was a momentous event for agricultural trade; first because, by its very conclusion, the worst was avoided; second, because agriculture was, for the first time, a major element in the negotiations; third, because it provides hope for at least some progress towards greater market liberalization and reduced domestic support in agriculture; and fourth, because the Round, and the newly created WTO, provide the framework for more discipline, stability and transparency in overall and agricultural trade. However, the impact of the Round on world agricultural markets may turn out to be small in the short term and protectionism in old and new forms is likely to remain high in the medium term and for longer unless further reductions are successfully negotiated.
At the same time as the international community was framing new multilateral rules for trade, many groups of countries were actively moving towards regional trading arrangements. In the recent past such arrangements have increased in number, country coverage and dynamism; and they include agriculture to a growing extent. The development of these arrangements has raised issues related to their position in the multilateral trading system, their degree of openness vis-а-vis third countries and the risks of regionalization of trade flows.
Another issue that has attracted increased attention, and may significantly affect future trade relations, is the role of international trade in environmental protection and the sustainability of production. This is a complex and controversial problem. Trade may be environment-friendly to the extent that it brings about efficiency in the use of resources. However, trading and the related acts of producing and marketing also put pressure on environmental resources. Appropriate environmental and trade policies can help ensure compatibility between trade and environmental objectives. However, resource limitations often impose difficult policy choices between immediate developmental and food security needs and long-term environmental concerns.
The problems and issues facing agricultural trade and the forces underlying agricultural trade policies can only be appreciated in the light of the major changes that have taken place in world markets during the past decades. The first Section of this chapter presents some basic data illustrating the main changes that have taken place since the early 1960s with regard to: the weight of agriculture in overall trade; the market shares of the different regions and countries; the real value and purchasing power of agricultural exports; and the direction and composition of agricultural trade flows. The second Section examines agricultural trade in the context of the major political and economic transformations that have taken place during the past decades, especially since the beginning of the 1980s. Section III discusses the new agricultural trading rules that emerged in 1994 after the conclusion of the Uruguay Round of GATT negotiations and their likely impact on world agricultural trade. Section IV discusses the movement towards closer regional economic integration through the development of regional trading blocs and the place of agriculture in this process. Finally, Section V examines the interfaces between agricultural trade, the environment and sustainable development and the conditions under which trade and the environment could be made mutually supportive.
Amid the profound changes in the economic importance, structure, direction and composition of world agricultural trade during the past three decades, a number of paradoxical features have emerged. While losing importance in relation to total trade, agricultural trade has remained a key element in the economies of many countries. Nevertheless, it has tended to be those economies that depend less on agricultural trade which have made the largest gains in agricultural market share; while economies that are more firmly based on agriculture have not only lost market share, but in many cases have also seen their agricultural trade balances deteriorate in the face of persistently high or even increasing economic dependence on agricultural exports and food security dependence on imports.
Other general tendencies have been a protracted decline in the real international prices of agricultural products, which has negatively affected their purchasing power; greater geographic diversification of agricultural trade flows, along with intensified intraregional exchanges; and the increasing importance of value-added compared with primary products in total agricultural trade.
The relationship between trade and output in general underlies the growing interdependence and integration of the world economies. This is the case also for agriculture. On a global basis, the long-term growth rate of agricultural trade has tended to be significantly greater than that of production.
This pattern was reversed during much of the 1980s, reflecting depressed exports and imports in the developing countries, particularly in Latin America and the Caribbean and in Africa. By contrast, the growth in agricultural trade continued to generally exceed that of production in the developed countries (Figure 11).
Despite its relative dynamism, however, trade in agricultural products has tended to lag behind trade in other sectors, particularly manufactures, as industrialization proceeds. On a global basis, agricultural exports now account for less than 10 percent of merchandise exports, compared to about 25 percent in the early 1 960s.
The tendency for agricultural trade to lose relative importance in external trade has been common to all regions, but in the developing country regions the process was particularly pronounced during the 1960s and early 1970s (Figures 12 and 13).
Thereafter, the share of agriculture in total exports has stabilized at around 2 to 7 percent in the Near East and North Africa region; and around 10 percent in Asia and the Pacific. More pronounced fluctuations in the share were recorded in sub-Saharan Africa and Latin America and the Caribbean, where the general decline in the agricultural trade share was punctuated by temporary upsurges (particularly during the late 1970s in the "commodity boom" years and in 1986, a year of high coffee prices caused by drought-reduced crops in Brazil and its suspension of export quotas) (Figures 14A and 14B).
A similar pattern is observed on the side of imports. The declining weight of agriculture in total imports, which is a good indicator of a country's rate of development, was remarkably strong in the Asia and the Pacific region; less marked in the Near East and Latin America and the Caribbean regions (the latter having a comparatively low agricultural to total import ratio, however); and hardly noticeable in sub-Saharan Africa.
Agricultural exports have also tended to lose importance as a source of import financing. This long-term process has been interrupted only during exceptional periods, such as when particularly favourable conditions for agricultural exports prevail (as in the late 1970s); or, more notably, in the years following the debt crisis of the 1980s when many developing countries sharply contracted their total imports.
However, in Latin America and the Caribbean and in sub-Saharan Africa, agricultural exports still finance about one-fifth of the total import bill. Furthermore, economic dependence on agricultural exports has remained very high in many individual countries (Figures 15). In 1993, 17 out of 46 countries in Africa depended on agriculture for half or more of their total export earnings. In Latin America and the Caribbean 16 out of 40 countries were in the same situation (nine of them in the Caribbean).
Extreme cases, where 80 percent or more of export earnings were agriculture-based, included Cuba and Paraguay in Latin America; and Burundi, the Comoros, Guinea-Bissau, Malawi, Uganda and the Sudan.
The regional distribution of world total and agricultural trade has changed significantly since the early 1960s. While the developing countries gained market share for total merchandise exports (from about 20 to over 25 percent of the world total) their share for total agricultural exports has declined from over 40 to about 27 percent (Figure 16).
The counterpart to the developing countries' market share losses was the increasing weight of the developed countries, mainly the EC, in world agricultural markets. Indeed, while in the early 1960s the EC-12 accounted for slightly more than 20 percent of world agricultural exports, this share is now around 45 percent. Most of this increase reflects intensified trade among EC member countries. Excluding intracommunity trade, however, EC exports still represent approximately 13 percent of the world total, up from 8 percent in the early 1960s. The EC has also remained by far the largest importing area in the world, although its share in world imports from outside the Community has tended to decline.
The United States, after having lost some market share during the late 1960s, managed to recapture it after 1973, when the export sector benefited from liberal fiscal and monetary policies and a weak dollar. However, from 1982 onwards the tightening of macroeconomic policies, the strengthening of the dollar after the second oil shock and the ensuing world recession resulted in a marked deceleration in the growth of United States exports.
All the developing country regions, with the exception of Asia and the Pacific, progressively lost world market share for their exports. That Asia and the Pacific has actually gained share in world agricultural exports since the mid-1970s is all the more remarkable as this is also the region that has been most successful in diversifying its export base away from agriculture. In contrast, despite the persistently strong agricultural component of its external trade, subSaharan Africa's presence in world agricultural markets has tended to lose significance since the early 1970s and is now of a magnitude comparable to that of the Near East and North Africa. Latin America and the Caribbean experienced pronounced market losses since the second half of the 1980s, a period of slow growth in the volume of agricultural exports and of strong decline in export prices (Figures 17 and 18).
Until the late 1970s, the agricultural exports of the developing countries as a whole exceeded agricultural imports by a significant and relatively stable margin. The economic crisis of the early 1980s caused a sharp decline in the demand for developing countries' exports and led to a temporary reversal of their agricultural net trade position. As the crisis progressed, however, financial constraints imposed a drastic cut in imports, including of food, and the developing countries as a whole emerged again as net agricultural exporters, a position they maintained until 1991 . Generally disappointing export performances the following two years led, once again, to a reversal in the trade balance.
Regional situations, however, differed widely within this general pattern. Overall, Latin America and the Caribbean has maintained a strong agricultural surplus position although imports have tended to rise much faster than exports in recent years. Sub-Saharan Africa has recorded wide fluctuations in its agricultural export-import ratio, but recent trends suggest increasing difficulties for the region in maintaining its traditional net exporter status. Asia and the Pacific has moved into a net agricultural importer position since the mid-1970s, with a steady expansion of both imports and exports interrupted only during the first half of the 1980s. Finally, the Near East and North Africa, a net agricultural exporter during the 1960s, has seen foodimport dependence soar during the 1970s and early 1980s and remain extremely high since then. The agricultural trade gap widened dramatically in the oil-exporting countries in this region, but food deficits of a structural nature also emerged in several non-oil-exporter countries (Figure 19).
Two general tendencies have characterized the direction of agricultural trade flows during the past decades. The first is a growing geographic diversification of exports and imports and the second is the increasing intensity of exchanges within the individual regions.
These general tendencies have been far from uniform, however, and have not resulted in large shifts in the overall patterns of agricultural trade. The developed countries' agricultural trade has remained largely, and increasingly, self-centred, with the developing countries accounting for a declining share of total imports. The developing countries, on the other hand, still depend to a very large extent on developed country markets troth as suppliers of imports and as outlets for exports.
Dependence on traditional developed country markets, particularly those of the EC, has remained high in Africa. Indeed, the developed countries currently account for three-quarters of the region's total agricultural exports and nearly 70 percent of its agricultural imports. African agricultural exporters have increased the share of intraregional trade in total exports from 5 to 11 percent between 1970 and 1990. However, this has contributed little to reducing Africa's heavy reliance on food imports from the developed country markets.
All other developing country regions have shown varying degrees of market diversification and regional integration. The Far East already the most selfcentred region for agricultural trade, intensified intraregional exchanges while also reducing the share of its total agricultural exports that go to the developed countries, particularly the EC. Latin America and the Caribbean maintained a fairly balanced export pattern between markets in the EC, North America, developing countries and the former centrally planned economies. Nevertheless, the region also significantly increased the developing country and intraregional share of agricultural trade, the latter by intensifying efforts towards regional economic integration. The Near East has tended to rely on the EC for an increasing share of its food imports, the respective shares of North America and the Far East remaining broadly equivalent.
The closely integrated agricultural markets of Eastern and Central Europe and the former USSR had tended to open significantly to imports, in particular from North America and the EC, even before the reforms of the 1990s and the breakdown of the traditional intraregional trading systems. By 1990 the EC had also emerged as the main outlet for these countries' agricultural exports (over 31 percent of the total, compared to 23 percent for intraregional exports). A growing share of the region's shipments had also been towards the developing countries. In the most recent years the breakup of the Council for Mutual Economic Assistance (CMEA) and the efforts by Eastern and Central European countries to tighten economic and political links with Western Europe, have led to an even further weakening of trade within the transition economies. The introduction in 1993 of a Central European Free Trade Area involving the Czech Republic, Hungary, Poland and Slovakia may reactivate intraregional trade of agricultural products to some extent (Tables 16 and 17).
Throughout the 1960s and 1970s agricultural export unit values in the developed and developing countries followed virtually identical upward trends. Both groups of countries also shared in the decline in prices that followed the economic crisis of the early 1980s. However, while prices of products exported by the developing countries remained depressed until recently, those of the developed countries resumed their upward trend in the mid-1980s.
Table 16 Destination of agricultural exports by region(percent)
Source : FAO based on UNCTAD data.
Note : the figures in the shaded areas, representing subtotals for developed market economies, developing countries and Eastern and Central Europe/former USSR, should add to 100 horizontally. In most cases thet do not, due to rounding and/or statistical discrepancies.
Table 17 Origin of agricultural imports by region (percent)
Source : FAO based on UNCTAD data.
Note : the figures in the shaded areas, representing subtotals for developed market economies, developing countries and Eastern and Central Europe/former USSR, should add to 100 horizontally. In most cases thet do not, due to rounding and/or statistical discrepancies.
In contrast to these movements in prices, the volumes of exports showed a steady upward trend overall. However, the early 1980s marked a shift in the relative export growth patterns of the two country groups. Export volume growth decelerated markedly in the developed countries (chiefly due to lower export volumes from the United States caused by economic policy shifts following the 1979 oil shock) and accelerated somewhat in the developing countries (reflecting, to a large extent, the booming export performances of Asia and the Pacific and the pressure to generate foreign exchange to alleviate debt in Latin America and the Caribbean). Nevertheless, because of the price increase differential the current value of agricultural exports rose on the whole much faster in the developed countries - roughly 50 percent between 1979-81 and 1991 93 - than in the developing ones where over the same period the comparable increase was only slightly above 20 percent (Figure 20).
The increase in the agricultural export unit values of the developing countries also lagged behind that of other major traded products, resulting in a pronounced and almost uninterrupted deterioration of their real agricultural prices (or net barter terms of trade) in international markets after the world food crisis years of the early 1970s. Taking 1979-81 as a base, the developing countries' net barter terms of trade had deteriorated by nearly 40 percent in 1993. All the developing country regions shared in the deterioration but to varying degrees (Figure 21).
The general decline in agricultural commodity prices can be explained by many factors, including: governmental support and protection, particularly in the industrial countries, that provided incentives to production often well above those offered by international markets; the efforts of many countries to counter the decline in prices through expanding volumes of shipments; the plantings and investment made during the more favourable years that preceded the 1980s; and stabilization and structural adjustment policies affecting exchange rates, taxation and marketing systems, which in some cases raised prices paid to growers relative to international market prices.
Gains in productivity and/or the expansion of the area under export crops enabled developing countries to offset the decline in prices to a certain extent. Indeed, as noted earlier, the growth of their export volumes actually accelerated somewhat during the depressed 1980s relative to the previous decades.
Overall, however, prices fell to such depressed levels that they outweighed the expansion of production and export volume, thus reducing overall earnings. As a result, the purchasing capacity of agricultural exports (income terms of trade) deteriorated for a large majority of developing countries. By 1991 -93 the index of income terms of trade of the developing countries as a whole was 8 percent below the 1979-81 levels.
Within this general context regional experiences diverged. Asia and the Pacific benefited, on the one hand, from a less traumatic fall in real export prices than the other regions and, on the other hand, from a strong acceleration in shipment volumes (which nearly doubled between 197981 and 1992-93). At the other end, sub-Saharan Africa suffered a collapse in export prices coupled with widely fluctuating, but overall stagnant, volumes of exports. Latin America and the Caribbean also experienced declining export prices but maintained a positive growth of export volumes.
To a large extent the different regional export performances reflected the market behaviour of the main commodities exported by the respective regions. Generally, the international prices of products exported by Asian countries were less depressed and underwent less-pronounced fluctuations than the tropical products exported by Africa and Latin America and the Caribbean. For instance, the nominal dollar prices of rice fell 13 percent between 197981 and 198991, those of rubber fell about 20 percent and those of palm oil 46 percent. On the other hand the prices of tea and, more markedly, jute and cotton, tended to strengthen. In the cases of coffee and cocoa, the main export crops for many African and Latin American countries, prices declined by respectively 56 and 58 percent during the same period.
An issue of considerable importance is the extent to which the developing countries have been able to shift from exports of non-processed primary commodities towards value-added products. The different developing country regions recorded varying degrees of success on this account. In both Asia and the Pacific and Latin America and the Caribbean the share of processed products in total agricultural exports rose from around 10 percent in the early 1960s to about one-third of the total in recent years. This share has risen to considerably higher levels in the more industrialized countries in these regions. Thus, in Argentina and Brazil the comparable figure is about 50 percent while in Malaysia it is over 70 percent.
In sub-Saharan Africa, on the other hand, the share of processed products in agricultural exports has remained around 15 percent throughout the past three decades. Behind this stagnating pattern some countries showed pronounced temporal variations. In the case of Kenya the ratio of processed products to total agricultural exports was relatively high (at around 17 percent) during the 1960s and early 1970s, hut declined to less than 10 percent over the following decades. In Cфte d'lvoire the ratio increased markedly between the early 1960s and the mid-1970s (from around 3 to 22 percent), but fell to around 15 percent during the 1980s. For most countries in the region, however, the general picture is one of a high and undiminished dependence on a limited range of primary product exports. In the Near East and North Africa, the high share of value-added products in the total generally reflects the strong weight of a few processed products in a relatively small agricultural export base. Processed shellfish and other sea products, as well as canned and preserved fruits and vegetables accounted for much of the total. Among individual countries the high share of processed products is largely explained by wine in Algeria (although this product has lost considerable importance in recent years); by processed fishery products and pistachios in Iran; and by tobacco, hazelnut and fruit confections in Turkey (Figure 22).
Trade being a relatively small part of the economic activity of most countries, the ways in which it is regulated and conducted are closely related to the policy orientations governing the overall economy. Thus, the major transformations that have taken place in many of the world's economies during the past decade, and especially since the late 1980s, are likely to have profound and permanent effects on trade policies and, indeed, on the way trade will be conducted.
The 1980s marked a move away from government intervention in developed, developing and centrally planned economies. Developed market economies began to reduce internal government intervention in a variety of ways and removed restrictions on capital flows and investment. More significant changes took place in the developing countries, which began to abandon their inward-looking trade and investment policies and embarked on major reforms. Developing economies reduced the government intervention that had caused exchange-rate overvaluation, reduced or removed capital controls and privatized state owned enterprises. In the greatest shift of all, the political and economic system collapsed in the former USSR and in Central and Eastern Europe and these countries began adopting market-oriented principles of economic management. Starting in 1979 the People's Republic of China also began major internal reforms of its economic system. As a result, a large portion of the world economy, which had been under the control of state planning systems, moved towards a market system.
The developed countries had already removed many direct government controls over their economies in the years prior to the 1980s. They had been confident enough in their policy direction to sign the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) in 1947 and to adopt a set of common trade rules. Among other things, the GATT rules barred the use of quantitative import controls except in special circumstances, and this meant that tariffs became the only way of protecting non-agricultural products. GATT also prohibited the use of export subsidies in export competition for all but primary products. The original GATT, however, only covered trade in goods. Recognizing the difference in national policies related to agricultural markets, it set out exemptions for agriculture that were to persist for more than four decades. Export subsidies for agriculture were allowed, as was the use of quantitative import quotas, in recognition of the fact that many countries would keep internal markets for agricultural products isolated from world markets.
The developing countries began their major economic reforms in the 1980s. Although the form and pace of these reforms varied from country to country, they usually included the removal of controls and interventions on capital movements and exchange rates. In many cases, government-owned enterprises were sold to the private sector, thus ending the drain on public resources of supporting inefficient activities. Special measures were introduced to attract foreign investors, who had often been rebuffed in the past, and to encourage the repatriation of capital that had fled the country to avoid economic instability, uncertainty and government controls.
As internal reforms took hold, developing countries were in a position to reform and liberalize their foreign trade policies as well. Foreign exchange was made more freely convertible, import restrictions and tariffs were reduced and state trading entities dismantled. The various internal and trade reforms rendered national policies more compatible with GATT trade rules, and developing countries moved to join GATT and become active participants in the Uruguay Round of trade negotiations.
The shift in perceptions and policies also manifested itself with regard to intervention in international commodity markets (see Box 7).
A recent study concluded that, in contrast with earlier periods, the recent liberalization of trade was unidirectional and continual in most developing countries outside Africa. Liberalization was most rapid in Latin America and is beginning to accelerate in South Asia, East Asian countries varied in the speed of reform, but generally made continued progress towards neutrality and.
The first United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD) took place in 1964 to deal with the trade and development concerns of developing countries. The countries that led in the formation of UNCTAD had a different agenda from that of members of GATT. UNCTAD's activities centred on the development of a trading system for commodities that were of major concern to the developing countries through international commodity agreements. Commodity agreements were negotiated in the 1960s and 1970s for tin, rubber, coffee, cocoa, wheat and sugar. The interest in this type of agreement increased in the wake of the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries' (OPEC) initial success in increasing and stabilizing oil prices through its producer cartel.
In the GATT Tokyo Round there was an attempt to extend the internal market interventions in agriculture, practiced by many governments, into the international trade sphere. The EC proposed a series of international commodity agreements that would attempt to maintain minimum and maximum prices in world markets and allocate supplies to needy developing countries in the case of shortages. Agreements were proposed for grains, oilseeds, dairy products and meat.
It turned out that countries with markedly different internal systems and objectives were unwilling to adhere to an international system of commodity agreements. As a result of this, the Tokyo Round ended with modest agreement in agriculture and without effective international commodity agreements. The existing agreements in coffee and sugar were to collapse under the economic pressures of the 1980s.
In some ways the end of the Tokyo Round marked a turning point in the movement for government involvement in international markets. The world had already been forced off the fixed exchange rates of the Bretton Woods Agreement in 1973. Worldwide inflation, shortly followed by a widespread debt crisis and a collapse of international commodity prices in the 1980s, made many of the old interventions impossible and, in many cases, too expensive to maintain. liberality. Only Africa has shown little progress in trade liberalization, with several countries actually reversing reform when confronted with renewed foreign exchange constraints and/or import competition.
Changes in both developed and developing market economies were well under way before centrally planned economies began to make significant internal reforms. Centrally planned economic systems were generally linked to the political system and thus changes in political power were required before significant economic liberalization could occur. Incipient forms of internal reform had begun in these economies in the late 1970s and early 1980s. China had also begun some reforms in the late 1970s, including reform of the agricultural system and opening up to outside investors. By the late 1980s, the monopoly of the communist party over political power was broken in the former USSR and Central and Eastern Europe and the centrally planned economic system as it had been operated in these countries effectively ended. Economic reforms were initiated and have been pursued to varying degrees and with varying rates of progress. Generally these reforms have involved a reduction in government intervention in internal markets and more market-oriented trade policies.
In both developed and developing countries agricultural interventions were very firmly entrenched politically and this made them among the most difficult interventions to remove. The political influence of agricultural groups in the developed countries far exceeded their numbers in the electorate. These groups fought vigorously to protect government interventions that, in their view, increased their incomes and reduced competition from more efficient or more heavily subsidized producers. In many developing countries government interventions were heavily focused towards reducing the cost of basic foods to urban consumers, especially those consumers important to political stability. Moves towards agricultural reform came, as in the other parts of the economy, because the old system was not working well, was too expensive or because there were changes in political regimes.