Trade, Uncertainty, and New Farm Programs

Tweeten, Luther G.

doi:10.1007/978-1-4615-1543-2_3

Cited by 1 publication

(2 citation statements)

References 9 publications

(5 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…I have contended that instability arising from markets, governments, and nature is the major economic problem facing commercial agriculture. Based on estimates individually for feed grains, soybeans, wheat, and aggregate farm output since 1950 in the United States, the coefficients of variation by decades and commodities were greater for exports than for domestic utilisation or for production [Tweeten (1999)]. However, system variation as measured by the variation in stock requirement came mainly from domestic production and utilisation because quantities of the latter two sources of variation dominated export quantities.…”

Section: Gains From Ending Agricultural Trade Distortionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Directions of U.S. Farm Programmes under a Freer Trade Environment

Tweeten¹

2022

pdr

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

For the new round of WTO multilateral trade liberalisation negotiations to be successful, the world will need to be more enthusiastic and flexible about opening markets. Partisans will need to submerge their self-interests, and the U.S. will need to take the initiative for more open markets. This paper makes the case that only modest changes in the U.S. domestic grain, oilseed, and cotton programmes are needed for compatibility with global free trade. The Federal Agricultural Improvement and Reform (FAIR) Act of 1996 and related policy changes in the 1990s brought fundamental reforms compatible with freer domestic and foreign markets. Chief among these were a shift from coupled deficiency payments to decoupled direct payments, an end to supply management, and less engagement of government in commodity stock accumulation and export subsidies. Converting commodity price support to recourse loans while ending all but administrative cost subsidies to crop insurance would go far to liberalise grain, oilseed, and cotton policies. Unilateral termination of commodity programmes including direct payments totalling 42 percent of net cash farm income in year 2000 would appear to be traumatic to producers. However, reduction of direct payments could be offset (for farm income) by rising farm commodity prices and receipts resulting from (1) less farm output attending lower loan rates and crop insurance subsidies, and (2) world farm commodity price-enhancement from freer global trade.

show abstract

Section: Gains From Ending Agricultural Trade Distortionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…It follows that exports typically helped to dispose of a large domestic supply and hence to stabilise commodity prices. In only 2 of the 20 cases did exports overshadow domestic utilisation and production as sources of variation in the commodity market system [Tweeten (1999)].…”

Section: Gains From Ending Agricultural Trade Distortionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Directions of U.S. Farm Programmes under a Freer Trade Environment

Tweeten¹

2022

pdr

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Trade, Uncertainty, and New Farm Programs

Cited by 1 publication

References 9 publications

Directions of U.S. Farm Programmes under a Freer Trade Environment

Directions of U.S. Farm Programmes under a Freer Trade Environment

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About