|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
| Meilke, Karl D.; Lariviere, Sylvain; Martin, Craig. |
| The world dairy industry is one of the most heavily protected in the agri-food sector. Exports of dairy products are dominated by the EU, the United States, New Zealand, and Australia. The major importers of dairy products are far less concentrated but include the EU, Japan, Mexico, Russia, the United States, and many others. The Canadian dairy industry came out of the Uruguay Round of trade negotiations with the continued ability to practise supply management, thereby allowing it to: (1) maintain prices above world market levels and (2) control the allocation of output to the domestic market. In fact, the Agreement on Agriculture opened the door for Canada to become a more aggressive exporter of dairy products by practising price discrimination between... |
| Tipo: Journal Article |
Palavras-chave: Dairy; Dispute; Export competition; Price discrimination; Processors; Tariffication; International Relations/Trade. |
| Ano: 2001 |
URL: http://purl.umn.edu/23855 |
| |
|
| |
|
|
| Beghin, John C.. |
| This background paper is devoted to US sugar policy. A first section describes the features and economics of the US sugar program; a second section is devoted to the welfare and trade effects of the US sugar program; and a final section reports on potential emerging reforms, their expected effects, and implications. Beyond well-established findings on the social cost and inefficiency of the US sugar program, the main findings of this paper are as follows. The current sugar program is becoming unsustainable because sugar imports are progressively creeping into the US market through regional trade agreements, eventually inducing large sugar inventories, or contracting domestic production to unpalatable low levels in order to maintain high internal prices.... |
| Tipo: Working or Discussion Paper |
Palavras-chave: Dispute; HFCS; NAFTA; Sugar; Sugar program; Sweetener; Trade; TRQ; US farm bill; Agricultural and Food Policy. |
| Ano: 2007 |
URL: http://purl.umn.edu/9374 |
| |
|
|
| Korotana, M.S.. |
| Article 22 of the Dispute Settlement Understanding (DSU) of the WTO offers, as last resort countermeasures, withdrawal of the concessions the state parties had agreed to in their schedules of commitments. The problem is that such a withdrawal of concessions would have very little impact on the economy and consequently on the behaviour of the respondent state if that party happened to be a developed state vis-à-vis a small, developing country. To deal with this situation a remedy of “collective countermeasures”, contained in Article 54 of the Draft Articles on State Responsibility of the International Law Commission (ILC), has been proposed; it has been argued that this remedy should apply, as a general principle of public international law, as a last... |
| Tipo: Journal Article |
Palavras-chave: Collective; Retaliation; WTO; Dispute; Settlement; System; Food Consumption/Nutrition/Food Safety; International Relations/Trade. |
| Ano: 2009 |
URL: http://purl.umn.edu/48802 |
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
