WTO agricultural trade battles and food aid

Recent agricultural trade battles at the WTO between the US and the EU have important implications for the Global South, in particular with respect to food aid. The current Doha round of trade talks hinges closely on agreement in the area of agriculture, and a key issue of disagreement between the US and the EU is the question of whether the WTO should impose disciplines on food aid and agricultural export credits. The US has also challenged the EU at the WTO over trade in genetically modified organisms (GMOs). The outcome of this dispute will affect food aid, as many countries have in recent years rejected GM food aid from the US on the grounds that it would harm their export markets in Europe. Decisions on both of these battles should be forthcoming within the next year or two, and the outcomes will affect food aid policies.     

wto Agriculture negotiations: implications for the Global South

The Doha ‘Development’ Round of trade negotiations at the wto has featured agricultural trade liberalisation as one of its key aims. But developing countries were frustrated with both the process and the content of the agricultural agreement negotiations early on in the round. This prompted these countries, through a number of developing country groupings such as the G-20 and others, to call for changes in the talks to ensure that developing country voices and concerns were heard. Although developing countries were in many ways successful in registering their concerns in the latter half of the negotiations, and have maintained a fairly high degree of cohesion across the Global South, it remains unclear whether this cohesion will last as the uneven impacts of agricultural trade liberalisation become apparent.     

Food Price Volatility and Vulnerability in the Global South: considering the global economic context

Abstract

Most official analyses of the recent food price crisis have focused on the market fundamentals of supply and demand for food as key explanatory factors. As a result, most of the policy recommendations emanating from the major international institutions include measures to boost supply and temper demand. In this paper I argue that international macroeconomic factors played a key role in fostering both price volatility and vulnerability, and as such they need to be recognised. With respect to the recent price volatility, the weak US dollar and speculation on agricultural commodities futures markets greatly influenced agricultural prices. With respect to price vulnerability, global economic forces played an important role in dampening production incentives in the world's poorest countries over the past 30 years, leading to a situation of food import dependence. Policy responses to the food crisis must consider the role of these broader international macroeconomic forces—both in the immediate context and their longer term impact.     

The trade-ification of the food sustainability agenda

This contribution argues that the food sustainability agenda in global food governance arrangements is becoming ‘trade-ified’. It shows that international trade has become normalized in these settings not only as being compatible with, but also as a key delivery mechanism for, food system sustainability. The paper first explains the rationale for this dominant narrative, which revolves around the efficiency gains from trade. Second, it outlines two important critiques of this approach – one that stresses the need to look beyond food as an economic commodity, and one that reveals the internal flaws of trade theory – which together provide important counterpoints to this dominant narrative. Third, the paper offers three interrelated explanations for why trade continues to be presented as a key ingredient to food sustainability despite the weaknesses of the dominant approach: institutional fragmentation in global food governance; the carryover of previous normative compromises regarding trade and the environment in other governance settings; and the influence of powerful interests.