{"title":"Global value chains in agriculture and food: A synthesis of OECD analysis","authors":"","doi":"10.1787/6e3993fa-en","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1787/6e3993fa-en","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":141853,"journal":{"name":"OECD Food, Agriculture and Fisheries Papers","volume":"37 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-02-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"133658253","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"China’s grains policy","authors":"S. Kimura, Wusheng Yu","doi":"10.1787/AED5174B-EN","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1787/AED5174B-EN","url":null,"abstract":"Reforming China’s grain policy could have significant implications for both domestic and international markets. China has begun to reform its price support policies for several commodities, replacing them with commodity specific area payments. The assessment of policy reform scenarios for grains, using two partial equilibrium models, show that China would maintain more than 80% of self-sufficiency in wheat and maize, and more than 95% in rice. The increase in its grain imports could increase international prices, in particular for wheat and rice. A gradual approach to reforming market price support with compensatory payments would smooth the potential impacts on domestic and world commodity markets, as well as on domestic farm income. While the reform of price support policies benefit consumers the most, more decoupled area payments could also have a greater impact on farm income without increasing the overall cost to society as well as environmental performance of agriculture. Lower costs of managing public grain stocks would equally reduce the budgetary cost of reforms.","PeriodicalId":141853,"journal":{"name":"OECD Food, Agriculture and Fisheries Papers","volume":"49 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-05-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"123107621","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Encouraging policy change for sustainable and resilient fisheries","authors":"C. Delpeuch, B. Hutniczak","doi":"10.1787/31F15060-EN","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1787/31F15060-EN","url":null,"abstract":"How can policy makers successfully implement the policy changes needed to achieve greater economic, social, and environmental sustainability and resilience? This report combines lessons from the available literature, discussions with experts and stakeholders, as well as information on past policy change processes. Results suggest that, over the last decade, changes to fisheries policy have largely been triggered by the performance of the sector itself and how it is perceived, particularly with respect to resource management and to socio-economic outcomes. Other important factors stand out, in particular initiatives by people in charge of fisheries management and legal commitments to adopt changes. Macroeconomic and macro-political factors, however, appear to have had less impact on fisheries policy than on other policy domains. Key recommendations are proposed to facilitate policy change in the future through better use of data, commitment mechanisms, non-sectoral policies, and consultation processes.","PeriodicalId":141853,"journal":{"name":"OECD Food, Agriculture and Fisheries Papers","volume":"38 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-03-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"133080604","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"The Evolution of the Treatment of Agriculture in Preferential Trade Agreements","authors":"Clara Thompson-Lipponen, J. Greenville","doi":"10.1787/751D274F-EN","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1787/751D274F-EN","url":null,"abstract":"Preferential trading agreements are becoming a more common feature of the global agro food trading environment, a trend that has increased since the early 2000s. While they increasingly cover the majority of trade worldwide, there remains a question as to the extent to which their treatment of agriculture has changed over time, and whether the liberalising elements contained in these agreements are increasingly addressing distortions in world agro-food markets. This paper presents findings on the evolution of the treatment of agriculture within preferential trade agreements. Changes in various aspects of liberalisation achieved through these agreements have been explored, such as provisions related to market access, export competition and domestic support. The report finds that agriculture appears to be increasingly treated in a similar manner to other goods trade, with expansion in the scope of agreements extending to agriculture. Agreements are delivering reduced tariffs among members across the majority of agricultural commodities – however, heterogeneity of rules of origin between agreements is likely to be undermining these benefits. Reflecting multilateral rules, provisions related to Sanitary and Phytosanitary measures and Technical Barriers to Trade have become a standard feature of agreements. Overall, preferential trade agreements are strongly influenced by the multilateral framework.","PeriodicalId":141853,"journal":{"name":"OECD Food, Agriculture and Fisheries Papers","volume":"68 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-02-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"123991445","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
J. Greenville, K. Kawasaki, Dorothee Flaig, Caitlyn Carrico
{"title":"Influencing GVCs through Agro-Food Policy and Reform","authors":"J. Greenville, K. Kawasaki, Dorothee Flaig, Caitlyn Carrico","doi":"10.1787/9CE888E0-EN","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1787/9CE888E0-EN","url":null,"abstract":"Global value chains (GVCs) in agriculture and food sectors contribute to sector growth and development. However, agricultural trade is subject to significant distortions that limit trade which in turn impacts on its competitiveness world-wide. Using the OECD Metro model, this study analyses the impact of trade and domestic support policies on participation in agro-food GVCs and the benefits that flow from them. The results show that current market access barriers and distorting forms of domestic support have a negative effect not only on welfare, but also on the possible benefits from participation in agro-food GVCs. If barriers, i.e. tariffs and quotas, were removed this would offer the potential to increase welfare, increase exports of agro-food domestic value added from all countries, and promote trade by furthering GVC links through value added. This study also shows that regional trade agreements have the potential to deepen GVC linkages amongst members.","PeriodicalId":141853,"journal":{"name":"OECD Food, Agriculture and Fisheries Papers","volume":"11 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-02-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"115300659","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Value Adding Pathways in Agriculture and Food Trade","authors":"J. Greenville, K. Kawasaki, Marie-Agnès Jouanjean","doi":"10.1787/BB8BB93D-EN","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1787/BB8BB93D-EN","url":null,"abstract":"Global value chains (GVCs) in agriculture and food sectors have the potential to influence trading relationships and the gains from trade for different sectors along the value chain. This report explores the way in which value from trade and GVC participation is created for the agriculture sector. It examines differences in returns to the sector from participation in GVCs and trade either directly in contrast to participation that relies on downstream domestic processing. The study makes use of a database on trade in value added for 22 agro-food sectors derived from the Global Trade Analysis Project (GTAP) database. The evidence presented in this paper suggests that aggregate value to the agriculture and to the economy overall from direct participation in trade and GVCs generates at least as much value as participation that relies on domestic downstream processing. Similar overall gains from primary exports are associated with greater volumes and the value created from ‘value addition’ to these exports – the embodied service and other inputs. Indeed, countries that specialise in primary exports have higher shares of service value added in these exports, with this also being a determinant of value growth for middle-income countries.","PeriodicalId":141853,"journal":{"name":"OECD Food, Agriculture and Fisheries Papers","volume":"54 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-02-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"124161914","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Relative Effects of Fisheries Support Policies","authors":"R. Martini, J. Innes","doi":"10.1787/BD9B0DC3-EN","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1787/BD9B0DC3-EN","url":null,"abstract":"The effects of six common forms of fisheries support are estimated using a bioeconomic model of the global fishery. The results show that all have the potential to provoke overfishing, to lead to fish stocks being overfished, to encourage illegal, unreported or unregulated (IUU) fishing and to increase fleet capacity, but that their effects can vary significantly both in scale and how they are distributed at the fleet level. The fisheries management system can mitigate, though not entirely eliminate, these impacts. Supports based on reducing the cost of inputs purchased by fishers provoke the greatest increase in fishing effort, with associated risks of overfishing. This includes fuel subsidies, which are also shown to deliver less than 10% of their value in actual benefits to fishers in some cases, making them the least effective means of transferring income to fishers of those evaluated. Payments based on improving fishers’ business operations provided the greatest benefit to fishers and had relatively less tendency to increase fishing effort. If only USD 5 billion in fuel support was converted into support of this type, fishers would see increased income of more than USD 2 billion, while at the same time reducing effort and improving fish stocks. Such a change would also provide relatively more benefit to smaller fishers.","PeriodicalId":141853,"journal":{"name":"OECD Food, Agriculture and Fisheries Papers","volume":"105 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2018-12-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"122420521","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Land use and ecosystem services","authors":"J. Hardelin, J. Lankoski","doi":"10.1787/C7EC938E-EN","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1787/C7EC938E-EN","url":null,"abstract":"This report assesses the crucial drivers of ecosystem services and proposes actions to develop a more effective policy mix. Several elements form the basis of this report. First, a literature review provides an overview of the state and trends of ecosystem services linked to agriculture, including issues related to land use. Secondly, results are presented from a quantitative model developed to illustrate the potential benefits of improving policy design as well as to investigate synergies and trade-offs among ecosystem services. This report also includes a review of experiences in an inventory of ecosystems in selected countries and policy initiatives that address ecosystem services linked to agriculture.","PeriodicalId":141853,"journal":{"name":"OECD Food, Agriculture and Fisheries Papers","volume":"623 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2018-09-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"133129423","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Reforming water policies in agriculture","authors":"G. Gruère, C. Ashley, Jean-Joseph Cadilhon","doi":"10.1787/1826BEEE-EN","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1787/1826BEEE-EN","url":null,"abstract":"Agriculture’s water quality and quantity challenges continue to grow in many regions of the world. Policy solutions have been identified, but not always applied where needed nor implemented effectively. This report analyses eight past water and agriculture policy changes in OECD countries with the aim to identify steps towards adopting and implementing such solutions effectively. Selected reforms are assessed systematically via an institutional change analysis and a cross-cutting comparison of political economy factors. A characterisation of reforms is proposed according to the scope of the reform process, the scope of the reform’s action, and the involvement of governments in the design of reforms and their implementation. The comparison of agriculture and water policy changes shows that introducing reforms can be facilitated by exogenous factors, including droughts and floods, and reform design features. Meanwhile, the outcome of reforms can be affected by their geographical scale and scope, the dynamic pattern of reform pathways, and compensation for farmers. There are, however, trade-offs between the effects of these factors on the reform’s ambition, effectiveness, efficiency, and flexibility.","PeriodicalId":141853,"journal":{"name":"OECD Food, Agriculture and Fisheries Papers","volume":"42 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2018-09-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"114669047","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"The role of agriculture in global GHG mitigation","authors":"D. Blandford, Katharine Hassapoyannes","doi":"10.1787/DA017AE2-EN","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1787/DA017AE2-EN","url":null,"abstract":"Agriculture is a major emitter of greenhouse gases. Its potential to contribute to limiting global warming to less than 2oC by the end of the century is substantial by reducing direct emissions in crop and livestock production, by reducing indirect emissions associated with changes in land use, and by increasing carbon sequestration. Technological advancements and changes in consumer preferences that result in land-sparing are particularly promising options given food security concerns. Gains in total factor productivity will also enhance the sector’s competitiveness. Changes in domestic and trade policies are essential to maximize mitigation potential. In the absence of global application of carbon pricing, international co-ordination is needed to ensure that national mitigation efforts result in carbon reallocation, i.e. shifts in the location of production to low emissions sources. Measures of emissions relative to the economic contribution of agricultural activities can be insightful for identifying national mitigation priorities.","PeriodicalId":141853,"journal":{"name":"OECD Food, Agriculture and Fisheries Papers","volume":"163 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2018-08-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"121087859","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}