Assessing agricultural trade policies options with the European Union: a Brazilian perspective

Piketty, Marie Gabrielle; Weissleder, Lucie M.; Filho, Hildo Meirelles de Souza; Batalha, Mário Otávio; Adenäuer, Marcel; Becker, Andreas

doi:10.1111/j.1574-0862.2009.00390.x

Cited by 10 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 7 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Así, el trabajo de Boulanger et al (2016) analizaba el efecto acumulativo de los acuerdos de libre comercio recientes en el sector agrícola de la UE, siendo Mercosur el que implicaba un mayor volumen de importaciones de los doce acuerdos que se recogen en el estudio, y el quinto en exportaciones. Este sector agrícola también fue estudiado a fondo en el marco del modelo CAPRI por los trabajos de Weissleder, Adenauer y Heckelei (2008), Piketty et al (2009) y Burrell et al (2011. Todo ello permitía entender la posición negociadora de la Comisión Europea al ofrecer preferencias a Mercosur hasta un volumen limitado a través de contingentes arancelarios en productos agrícolas.…”

Section: La úLtima Y Larga Fase De La Negociación: 2010-2019unclassified

Acuerdo Unión Europea-Mercosur: una revisión de los efectos económicos previstos

Gómez-Plana¹

2021

BICE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Este trabajo realiza una revisión de la literatura empírica que ha estudiado el proceso negociador para alcanzar un acuerdo de libre comercio entre la Unión Europea y los países de Mercosur (Argentina, Brasil, Paraguay y Uruguay). Esta revisión ubica esta literatura en la perspectiva de todo el largo proceso negociador comenzado en 1992 y culminado con el Acuerdo de Asociación Estratégica de 2019. Se revisan los resultados cuantitativos de los estudios más próximos al acuerdo final y se muestra que este no permite alcanzar todas las ganancias que se derivan de la ventaja comparativa de España en manufacturas y servicios, y de Mercosur en productos agrarios.

show abstract

Section: La úLtima Y Larga Fase De La Negociación: 2010-2019unclassified

Acuerdo Unión Europea-Mercosur: una revisión de los efectos económicos previstos

Gómez-Plana¹

2021

BICE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…For instance, in international climate negotiations, US unwillingness to compromise has been credited partly to its decreasing status as a world power and fears of being overtaken by emerging economies, notably China (Gupta 2010;Hurrell and Sengupta 2012;Roberts 2011). Finally, agriculture, too, is perceived by many countries as a strategic sector for employment creation, foreign exchange earnings, or cultural and landscape conservation (see Potter 2006;Piketty et al 2009). Unsurprisingly, it has hindered advances in the Doha Round of negotiations under the WTO, which is ongoing since 2001 (Clapp 2006).…”

Section: Strategic State Behavior and International Non-regimesmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Politics for a Fairer Bioeconomy

Lima¹,

Mairon²

2021

The Politics of Bioeconomy and Sustainability

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Bioeconomies are yet to meet their sustainable development potentials. Thus far, mostly unsustainable production has prevailed, due to reasons on four different levels. First, domestic regulatory and economic incentives have favored conventional, input-intensive monocultures and big agribusiness-controlled systems. Second, some norms have been crucial in underlying those policies: (i) the economic but not political inclusion of smallholders and low-income countries; (ii) the preeminence of climate and wild biodiversity conservation over other sustainability issues, assuming "renewable" to mean "sustainable" and disregarding the performance of bio-based production on other social and environmental criteria; and (iii) an implicit urban bias that limits rural development strategies and prioritizes the provision of resources to cities. Third, state and private agroindustry agents who espouse those norms have formed winning coalitions to concretize policy beliefs held in common. Ultimately, there are feedback loops between agency, governance architectures, and allocation and access patterns. Therefore, the prevailing production patterns' very distributive outcomes can be identified as a cause underlying their dominance. As such, social equity reveals to be not just a normative goal but also a key determinant of governance. To not aggravate inequalities and be more sustainable, bioeconomy promotion needs policies that reconfigure allocation patterns and promote structural change.

show abstract

Nitrogen Tax and Set-Aside as Greenhouse Gas Abatement Policies Under Global Change Scenarios: A Case Study for Germany

Henseler

Delzeit

Adenäuer

et al. 2020

Environ Resource Econ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The ambitious climate policy objectives of the COP21 agreement require the design and the implementation of effective and efficient policy instruments. The effectiveness and efficiency of agricultural abatement options depend on regional climate and natural conditions, changes in the global economy, global agricultural markets and regional agricultural production. Thus, the assessment of abatement options requires consideration of the global scale, the market scale and the regional producer scale. We investigate two abatement options discussed controversially in literature. Both have been partially applied to reduce environmental pollution from agriculture: a tax on nitrogen and the obligatory set-aside of agricultural land. Our study provides an assessment of the ecological effectiveness and the economic efficiency of both abatement options under different global scenarios. In our policy analysis we combine three applied policy simulation models to develop an integrated economic model framework. This model framework considers the global, the national and the regional scale and consists of the global general equilibrium model DART-BIO, the partial-equilibrium model CAPRI and the regional supply model RAUMIS. In the different global scenarios, the results show that both abatement options create relatively high marginal abatement costs and that the maximally reached abated greenhouse gas emissions represent only 15% of the quantity required to fulfill the policy targets. Compared to the obligatory set-aside option, the nitrogen tax is in both scenarios the more efficient policy. With respect to impacts on production and environment, a nitrogen tax is less forecastable than the obligatory set-aside option. Our study illustrates the relevance of considering global economic and market change in the assessment of producer-targeting environmental policies.

show abstract

Assessing agricultural trade policies options with the European Union: a Brazilian perspective

Cited by 10 publications

References 7 publications

Acuerdo Unión Europea-Mercosur: una revisión de los efectos económicos previstos

Acuerdo Unión Europea-Mercosur: una revisión de los efectos económicos previstos

The Politics for a Fairer Bioeconomy

Nitrogen Tax and Set-Aside as Greenhouse Gas Abatement Policies Under Global Change Scenarios: A Case Study for Germany

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About