Repurposing Agricultural Policies and Support

Gautam, Madhur; Laborde, David; Mamun, Abdullah; Martín, Will; Piñeiro, Valeria; Vos, Rob

doi:10.1596/36875

Cited by 37 publications

(30 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…However, if the typical elasticities of substitution between fuel and other inputs, such as 0.5, assumed in most CGE studies are anywhere near correct these effects will also be modest. This is an example of the challenge highlighted in Gautam et al (2022)-that it would extremely difficult to obtain the reductions in carbon emissions needed to control climate change without investing in technological changes that can both reduce emission intensities and increase productivity. Will Martin…”

Section: Global Impactsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This finding is likely to be particularly important for agricultural emissions, where the vast majority of GHG emissions are associated with processes like methane emissions from ruminants or from flooded rice fields-a category of emissions that attracted particular attention with the Global Methane Pledge at COP26 (IEA 2021). This finding also raises the importance of approaches that invest in developing new technologies that reduce emissions, rather than using incentives to choose between the currently available technologies if the transformative reductions in emissions needed to avoid massive global warming are to be achieved (Gautam et al 2022). This paper uses simple, transparent techniques to explore the key linkages between emissions and border measures as complements to carbon-taxes or equivalent approaches such as emission trading schemes.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Border carbon adjustments: Should production or consumption be taxed?

Martín¹

2023

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Border Carbon Adjustment (BCAs) may play an important role in lowering the economic costs of greenhouse gas mitigation and in overcoming political-economy constraints on use of carbon taxes or equivalent measures. A carbon tax plus a full BCA (CTBA) could deal with the competitiveness challenges arising from carbon taxes by using the WTO's National Treatment principle to apply equal levies on domestic production and on imports, and by symmetrically rebating the carbon tax on exports in the manner of a VAT export rebate. This approach would shift the base for carbon taxation from output to consumption and intermediate input use and potentially lower the cost of achieving reductions in emissions. It would avoid the massive measurement and compliance problems associated with BCAs based on foreign emission intensities. By contrast, proposals for import-only BCAs would distort prices of importables relative to exportables, create competitiveness concerns in export industries, generate economic waste and likely create highly divisive trade conflicts and deterioration in the terms of trade for developing countries.

show abstract

Section: Global Impactsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Border carbon adjustments: Should production or consumption be taxed?

Martín¹

2023

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Thus further research is needed to assist the search for politically, administratively and fiscally feasible solutions, as proposed by the Gautam et al. (2022), IMF et al. (2022), FAO, UNDP and UNEP (2021), Mamun et al.…”

Section: Recent Disruptions To Global Trade and Ways Forwardmentioning

confidence: 99%

Agriculture's globalization: Endowments, technologies, tastes and policies

Anderson

2022

Journal of Economic Surveys

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The history of agricultural trade stretches back more than ten millennia, but it became more inter‐continental from the 17th century and much denser in the 19th century following the repeal of Britain's protective Corn Laws in 1846 and major declines in international trade costs. Trade was chaotic in the period bookended by the two world wars, but trade policy anarchy gave way to greater certainty after the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) was signed in 1947. This paper seeks to identify the forces that shaped that history, and to re‐examine the case for continued openness to trade in farm and processed food products. It does so in the wake of uneven economic growth and structural transformation and as agri‐food systems respond to increased market and policy uncertainties this century—and to growing pressures for agricultural production to become more sustainable and for its food outputs to be safer and more nutritious. The paper points to better policy options than trade measures for achieving most national objectives—options that can simultaneously benefit the rest of the world. Areas for further economic research are noted before the paper concludes.

show abstract

“…More than 70% of this support is linked to either production levels or input use and is generally considered "harmful" for distorting markets and supporting unsustainable production practices(OECD 2021(OECD , 2022. Also, much support is for basic staple crop production seen to contribute to limited diversification of supply and keeping up the relative cost of healthy diets(Gautam et al, 2022;Laborde et al, , 2021; FAO, UNDP, & UNEP 2021). Studies show there is much scope for repurposing this support for more R&D in productivity-enhancing and greenhouse gas-reducing technologies, incentives for the adoption of those technologies with the potential of greatly contributing to climate change mitigation and adaptation, improving welfare of farmers, reducing poverty, improving food security, and reducing the cost of a healthy diet for all(Gautam et al 2022;Vos, Martin & Resnick 2022).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Also, much support is for basic staple crop production seen to contribute to limited diversification of supply and keeping up the relative cost of healthy diets(Gautam et al, 2022;Laborde et al, , 2021; FAO, UNDP, & UNEP 2021). Studies show there is much scope for repurposing this support for more R&D in productivity-enhancing and greenhouse gas-reducing technologies, incentives for the adoption of those technologies with the potential of greatly contributing to climate change mitigation and adaptation, improving welfare of farmers, reducing poverty, improving food security, and reducing the cost of a healthy diet for all(Gautam et al 2022;Vos, Martin & Resnick 2022). Reorienting market incentives in agri-food markets this way would moreover help crowd-in more investment finance to support a sustainable transition.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

The UN Food Systems Summit 2021: Lessons of the gender and finance levers

Díaz-Bonilla¹,

McNamara²,

Njuki³

et al. 2023

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The United Nations Food Systems Summit (UNFSS), held in September of 2021, aimed to move food systems transformation to the top of the global policy agenda. An important element of the UNFSS were "levers of change," areas of work expected to make a significant positive change within food systems. The UNFSS levers differed in the way they operated, their visibility, their impact on the Summit's outcome, and the extent to which they feature in post-UNFSS activities and plans. This paper reviews the operation and effectiveness of the levers by discussing and comparing two key levers: gender and finance. The Gender Lever of Change focused on strengthening the role of women in food systems transformation, while the Finance Lever of Change focused on reforming existing financial structures and broadening financial support for optimal food systems. This paper reviews the activities and engagement of these two levers, the main debates. and the process of consultations. It concludes that the levers were instrumental in framing key principles and concrete directions for action to mainstream gender dimensions and to leverage finance for food system transformation. Lacking an agreed outcome document, the UNFSS established a kind of 'social experiment' by forming multistakeholder coalitions behind specific areas for food system transformation and by encouraging governments to design, on a voluntary basis, national pathways for such transformations. The outcomes of this social experiment are highly uncertain but could well turn out a way to overcome existing weaknesses in current fragmented mechanisms for food systems governance.

show abstract

Repurposing Agricultural Policies and Support

Cited by 37 publications

References 0 publications

Border carbon adjustments: Should production or consumption be taxed?

Border carbon adjustments: Should production or consumption be taxed?

Agriculture's globalization: Endowments, technologies, tastes and policies

The UN Food Systems Summit 2021: Lessons of the gender and finance levers

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About