Crina Viju

Common Markets Measuring Price Integration in European Agricultural Markets

The accession of Austria, Finland and Sweden to the European Union (EU) is assessed from the perspective of market integration in key agricultural sectors. An empirical investigation is conducted using monthly data for two periods: from 1975:01-1994:12 (the pre-EU period) and 1995:01-2004:12 (post-EU period). The existence of market integration both within the countries and within the EU is tested using time-series methods. A long-run equilibrium between prices for the same good in different markets does not exclude the possibility of short-run deviations in the individual data, so part of this analysis consists of estimating an econometric model (error correction) to uncover long-run effects of price deviations. Only a subset of agricultural prices moves together after EU integration. 1 Corresponding author. Department of Agricultural Economics, University of Saskatchewan, 51 Campus Drive, Saskatoon, SK, S7N 5A8. E-mail address: crv058@mail.usask.ca 2 Department of Agricultural Economics, University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, SK, Canada Review of European and Russian Affairs vol. 2 issue 1/2006

Market Access and Trade

The study of international trade is divided into three general areas—trade policy analysis, trade theory, and empirical studies of trade. Trade policy analysis focuses on the economic impacts that different forms of government intervention have on international trade. It is well known that any government intervention in the economy has a redistributive role, resulting in winners and losers. The role of trade policy analysis is to identify the two groups, to estimate the benefits and costs of any measure that impacts trade and to improve the overall policy making process (Kerr 2007). Several approaches can be utilized to quantify the impacts of different trade/domestic measures, the choice of which depends on the type of research question.

Agricultural Biotechnology and Food Security: Can CETA, TPP, and TTIP Become Venues to Facilitate Trade in GM Products?

Abstract Strong evidence has shown that increased agricultural productivity and opened international trade are required to maintain and enhance food security. The multilateral trading system has been unable to keep trade open for one subset of agricultural products – those that use biotechnology in production. This chapter assesses whether preferential trade agreements can represent potential alternative sources of trade rules for dealing with trade in the products of biotechnology. This chapter analyzes and compares three case studies of preferential trade agreements (Canada-EU Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement, EU-US Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership, and Trans-Pacific Partnership), by focusing on negotiations pertaining to products of biotechnology. The three preferential trade agreements have shown little inventiveness in their attempts to put in place rules of trade for the products of modern agricultural biotechnology and have established forums where only issues can be discussed. They are forums to talk and talk without any means to force closure on negotiations. Given the inability to deal with the issue of biotechnology at the WTO or other multilateral forums, the recent and current negotiations of major preferential agreements represent the second best alternative which still needs to be analyzed and still needs to be understood by policy makers, academics, and the population at large. This chapter represents a first step in that direction.

Do the Rules of International Trade Constrain Protection? Global Recession and EU Trade Policy

Many feared that governments around the world would resort to protectionism in the wake of the global financial meltdown and economic recession that commenced in 2008. Protectionism tends to be pervasive during economic downturns and the Great Depression experience proved that beggar-thy-neighbour trade wars have disastrous effects. However, governments have a predilection for imposing trade restrictions in times of economic hardship to shelter domestic industries from foreign competition and to save jobs. During the Summit on Financial Markets and World Economy of 15 November 2008, the leaders of the Group of Twenty (G20) declared that they understand the devastating effects of trade protectionism and that they would refrain from imposing new barriers to trade and investment (G20, 2008). Based on the Great Depression experience, however, not many believed those promises.