Re-evaluating the Harbinson Proposal - Prospects for the EU25: A Note

In this study, we use the Harbinson Proposal and July Framework to compare a 'likely' Doha scenario with a realistic baseline. The novelty of this study is that we focus exclusively on the trade-led welfare impacts in selected EU member states. The important features of this note are the:...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published inJournal of agricultural economics Vol. 58; no. 2; pp. 368 - 375
Main Authors Philippidis, G, Hubbard, L.J, Renwick, A
Format Journal Article
LanguageEnglish
Published Oxford, UK Oxford, UK : Blackwell Publishing Ltd 01.06.2007
Blackwell Publishing Ltd
Wiley Blackwell
SeriesJournal of Agricultural Economics
Subjects
Agricultural economics
Agricultural policy
Agricultural trade
C68
computable general equilibrium
D58
European Union
F11
F13
International trade
Q17
Q18
Tariffs
trade analysis and policy
Trade negotiations
Trade policy
Online AccessGet full text

Cover

More Information
Summary:In this study, we use the Harbinson Proposal and July Framework to compare a 'likely' Doha scenario with a realistic baseline. The novelty of this study is that we focus exclusively on the trade-led welfare impacts in selected EU member states. The important features of this note are the: (i) usage of the latest Global Trade Analysis Project (version 6) data; (ii) focus on EU25 regions incorporating all major Common Agricultural Policy instruments and reforms; and (iii) inclusion of binding tariff overhangs into the Harbinson tariff reductions. Results show the damping effects of tariff-binding overhangs on welfare outcomes. This and other factors which limit the gains to liberalisation mean that the EU25 only realises 10% of its long-run welfare gain potential, as defined by complete liberalisation.
Bibliography:http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1477-9552.2007.00094.x
istex:34F6FA1F1C802A492EB3883D3701EE13528A48C6
ArticleID:JAGE094
ark:/67375/WNG-N98B07ST-2
The authors would like to thank the Department of Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA), Government of the UK for sponsoring an earlier version of this research. The authors would also like to thank two anonymous referees, the Associate Editor and the Editor for their helpful comments on earlier drafts.
ObjectType-Article-2
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-Feature-1
content type line 23
ISSN:0021-857X
1477-9552
DOI:10.1111/j.1477-9552.2007.00094.x