Evaluation of a “Critical Mass” agreement on agriculture

The stale­mate in Gene­va on the Decem­ber 2013 Bali Agree­ment con­cern­ing both Trade Facil­i­a­tion and agri­cul­ture sub­si­dies has revived some inter­est in the poten­tial for a pluri­lat­er­al agree­ment on Agri­cul­ture among WTO members.

I attach to this brief post a pre-print of the sum­ma­ry that Andy Stol­er and I wrote for the jour­nal Glob­al Gov­er­nance (2009) of our study eval­u­at­ing such a crit­i­cal mass agreement.

The full eval­u­a­tion report for the Rur­al Indus­tries Research and Devel­op­ment Cor­po­ra­tion, con­tain­ing the tables of reports from the UNCTAD ATPSM mod­el that I used for the quan­ti­ta­tive esti­mates is avail­able here.

1 Comment

  1. While any agree­ment might sem bet­ter than none, the sor­did facts of the mat­ter are that both the Unit­ed States and to a maybe even greater extent the Euro­pean Union are stonewalling all attempts (and in doing so effec­tive­ly starv­ing the third world) to reach agree­ments. The prob­lem is that with­out them the major­i­ty of agri­cul­tur­al yields would be out of bounds of any agree­ment and thus the agree­ment might look nice on paper but have very lit­tle effect.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *