AGB 452 -Currency manipulation and its impact on U.S. agricultural exports.

CURRENCY MANIPULATION AND ITS IMPACT ON U.S. AGRICULTURAL EXPORTS

1. INTRODUCTION TO CURRENCY MANIPULATION

Currency manipulation means a situation where a country is involved in an act of changing the

value of his or her currency in an international market to enable him or her to have an added

advantage in the export market. This is often achieved through policy measures, which are

commonly implemented by the central bank of the manipulating country. One of them is the

direct and active intervention in the currency markets; this involves the buying of foreign

currencies especially the US dollar by using the manipulating country’s currency. This has the

consequence of pegging the value of the manipulator’s currency below other world currencies,

sectors including the agricultural export sector that was estimated to be over $ 140 billion in the

year 2018. Through manipulation of the value of their currencies these countries are able to price

out the US producers thus reducing the viability and profitability of important agriculture export

association in the United States such as soybean, corn and wheat farmers, livestock and dairy

producers. Subsequent US administrations have launched countermeasures against the

manipulation of currencies, which some of the most significant buyers of American exports have

been conducting, such as China and Japan. Currency manipulation will continue to be a key

factor that will continue to hinder improved trade conditions for the US agricultural produce

across the global markets. Dealing with this issue will be crucial to promoting the American

farmers and finding better conditions on the international markets.

1.1 Definition and concepts of currency manipulation

Currency manipulation means any act of the government or the central bank of a country to

devalue his or her country’s currency with the aim of presenting it as stronger than it really is in a

bid to outcompete other countries. In general, this is achieved through the manipulation of

foreign exchange, either direct through outright purchases of foreign currencies or through

restrictions on capital transfers, thus compelling domestic investors to invest within the

manipulating country rather in foreign markets. The key objective of the policy is to reduce

of exported agricultural produce. It also exaggerates the value of foreign earnings to the

producers and processers by converting them into domestic wages and inputs. Second,

manipulated countries can afford to offer export subsidies, excessively concessional tax

incentives, and immunity to adverse consequences of overproduction at below free market prices

because of the impacts created by the devaluation policies. Last but not least, the export

competitiveness moves up through the cross-importing country tariff line and overemphasizes on

the currency levels rather than macroeconomic phenomena. Therefore, the reduction and

fluctuating prices of export commodities and increased competition in third-country and

domestic importing markets take their toll on the agricultural interests in countries such as the

United States. If currency undervaluation is a subsidy mechanism, then it has to be understood

This has been another issue that has continued to affect the American farmers who have often

complained that their trading partners around the world have been involved in currency

manipulation. A number of Asian countries with rapidly growing economies starting the process

of intervening in forex markets to artificially keep their currencies down as a way of making

China especially through interventions and policies to devalue the Renminbi has emerged as a

force to reckon as its growth percentage soars. During these periods, undervalued currencies

make the export products of other countries cheaper, erode the competitiveness of US exports

and market share in those markets, limit the US economic growth and disadvantage US

producers including farming sector. Research shows that the value of currency manipulation has

contributed to higher average trade deficit of 0 billion annually for America. The US policy

measures have also developed over the years and include bilateral negotiations over exchange

rates and in trade liberalization agreements, such as the NAFTA and TPP, and even the “naming

and shaming” of currency manipulators. The influence of currency manipulation pressures on

agriculture in the USA has continued for decades but concerning several major Asian trading

There are several reasons why countries have an interest in manipulating their currencies to

attain some competitive edge in exports. One is to use it to adjust a country’s prices of export

companies will also benefit from greater export margins, sales, and market share that can crowd

out competitors with more robust currencies such as America’s agricultural sector. Likewise,

countries can increase exports through real exchange rate adjustments that effectively subsidize

exporters through lower exchange rates. Thus, artificially lowered currency values make foreign

inputs cheaper to producers of food in nations where such rates have been adjusted compared

with actual exchange rates. This enables export of goods at prices lower than the prevailing

world market price thus under-cutting the foreign rivals, it also encourages a higher level of

investment on the export sector which a country wants to bolster through currency

manipulation. Thus, the decision to facilitate an artificially weaker currency promotes greater

production capacity and market share growth in certain strategic sectors such as agriculture. This

to manage a low exchange rate relative to internationally accepted averages.

1.4 Key players in global currency markets

Actors in the global currency market include central banks, commercial banks, investment

American producers of goods and growers who are trying to sell their products in the country.

Commercial banks engage in the business of buying and selling currencies to enable the

execution of transactions internationally and risk management for its counter parties. Such high

transaction volumes place them in a position to significantly influence currency moves

irrespective of their location, whether New York or London the likes of Citi, Deutsche Bank and

HSBC have a lot of influence. For instance, hedge funds and asset managers at firms like

Bridgewater associates, JPMorgan, and BlackRock also engage in currency trading as a part of

their investment portfolio. The internet-based regulators fear that such a move may see them

engaging in speculative activities that destabilize currencies as was the case with the Asian

financial crisis where governments were hard-pressed to defend their currencies against short-

trading which appeared in the form of electronic trading platforms provided by the brokers such

as OANDA and IG Group have contributed to the growth of the retail in the recent decades. For

the price formation and risks associated with CFDs, it is essential to note that regulators pay

close attention to retail traders because the firms need to supply the necessary data.

Policymakers, regulators and police ensure the smooth functioning of financial currency markets

and prevent manipulation, nonetheless, because of the wide variety of these influencers,

measuring distortion on an international level is not easy. Those complexities only go to prove

that currency has a significant influence on exports and that export-sensitive industries such as

agriculture need to follow exchange rates.

In essence, there are several ways by which countries may inflate their currency in order to gain

an unfair competitive edge in the international market. One technique is direct intervention in the

Foreign exchange markets – where through its forex reserves, a central bank can buy Domestic

currency, thus, forcing up its value. They can also use their words to interject, by employing

oratory skills in an attempt to alter the flow of currency rates. Others are more covert that include

changing key interest rates and managing macroeconomic indicators such as; taming demand for

goods and services within the local market and easing monetary policy to influence downwards

the interest rates. This makes the currency less appealing therefore contracting the value of the

currency in the global market.

substantial disadvantages for the exporting industries in the countries with the fully flexible

exchange rates, such as, for instance, agriculture in the USA. Whenever the dollar strengthens

against manipulated currencies, it renders U. S. agricultural products unaffordable to foreign

buyers. Therefore, income levels are affected, employment opportunities decrease, and the

American farmer earns less from exports to other countries.

Foreign currency manipulation has of late been identified as a leading cause of trade imbalance

in the agricultural sector especially with such countries. It denies the U. S. agricultural suppliers

their export market share and revenue and passes the gains to the manipulative agricultural

sectors in the cooperating countries. Unfortunately, due to this the American farmers are faced

agricultural products.

2.1 Exchange rate interventions

One of the main ways that central banks and governments actively engage in currency

manipulation involves directly intervening in forex markets with an aim to altering exchange

rates. The purchase or sale of international currency forms a central part of policymaking in an

leaders want to increase the current account balance they can have the central bank intervene in

exchange rates, mass purchasing of foreign denominated assets results in the opposite effect.

Policy makers undertake these operations frequently for the purpose of stabilizing the market

fluctuations or to build forex reserves for sustainable macroeconomic purposes. Nevertheless,

economists consider more active and long-dated interventions as currency manipulation

especially when accompanied by capital controls or trade quotas. The intervention enables

governments to artificially maintain export industries; colonies make imports costly for domestic

clientele and producers who must purchase inputs or machinery from overseas. This entails an

implicit export tariff and import tax that disrupts trade flows: partitions keep local firms isolated.

intervention mechanisms. The IMF and other worldwide organizations cannot force the

enforcement of exchange rates and this has forced individual countries to single-handedly

retaliate through the use of commercial or macroprudential deterrents against suspected currency

2.2 Capital controls and restrictions

Capital controls and restrictions can be defined as the measures that are implemented and

exercised by the governments and central banks in order to control the inflow and outflow of

foreign capital. These are among the measures as follows: restricting acquisition of domestic

assets and currencies by foreigners, imposing taxes on foreign capital inflows, requiring that

foreign investors have minimum periods of stay in the domestic economy; placing quantitative

restrictions on the degree and manner of ownership that may be taken by foreigners; restricting

credit access of domestic firms and banks from international markets; limiting and controlling

overseas payments and remittances; and requiring foreigners to bring back export receipts to the

home

opportunities for speculative blowing up the local currency. Requirement for surrender and

conversion of foreign exchange earnings also strengthens the central bank reserves and the

power to intervene in the currencies markets. This way, capital controls enable countries to

sustain externally realistic exchange rate parities, preserve export competitiveness, shield

Fluctuations in exchange rates also heavily influence export competitiveness – a high dollar

value threatens the purchasing power of U. S. exports abroad, while a low dollar value improves

also matter a great deal – when it is easy and cost-effective to get US agricultural products

through ports, roads, rail, storage and information systems to international customers, the cost

and risk of delivery are cut down. Other influences include domestic government support levels

offered to specific sub-sectors of agriculture in competitor exporting nations affect the global

price setting as well as export viably. it is the interaction of all these factors that defines the

prospects for exports of agriculture production and inputs from the United States, including the

costs of production and trade architecture, including exchange rate values. The balance of these

factors is far from optimal and needs to be upheld for American agribusinesses to retain and

strengthen to attain the global advantage that has positioned the United States as the world’s

America is one of the largest exporters of agricultural goods since it supplies around 8 billion

worth of agricultural products to other countries every year, this puts the United States in the

second position in terms of total agricultural exports after the European Union. As of the year

2012, the most important export destinations of agricultural products from the United States

include China, Canada, Mexico, Japan and South Korea. Altogether, the five leading buyers

imported by Japan, Mexico, Colombia, South Korea and Taiwan. China, Mexico, Nigeria and

South Korea, and the Philippines are among the key countries that import wheat from the United

States. Among tree nuts, such as almonds and walnuts, the main destinations are Hong

Kong/China, the European Union, Turkey, India, and Japan. These countries form the largest

export markets for US pork with the top five being Mexico, Japan, China/Hong Kong, Canada

and South Korea. Main buyers of beef include Japan, South Korea Mexico, Hong Kong and

Taiwan. Most of the poultry meat produced is taken up by the likes of Mexico, Angola, Taiwan,

Georgia as well as Ukraine. The U. S thus ranks very competitively globally in agricultural

exports due to factors such as; the country’s agricultural productivity due to the availability of

opportunities for exports of agricultural products from the United States.

4. IMPACT OF CURRENCY MANIPULATION ON U.S. AGRICULTURAL EXPORTS

Some of its major trading partners of the United States have been involved in currency

manipulation of their currencies that has affected exports of agricultural produces in the United

States in the last few decades. When countries devalue their currencies to deliberately make them

global markets while the same exact products from the United States become more expensive.

markets for the sale of their produce.

For instance, the PRC, Japan, both Koreas and Vietnam have been accused of intervening in

foreign exchange markets with a view of propping up their currencies against the dollar. These

manipulations have to some extent crowded out agricultural exports from the United States its

major markets. For instance, in the case of agricultural products, a reversal of market share in the

favor of China has been witnessed since the year 2000, particularly in regions such as Japan,

South Korea, and the southeast Asia. In 2000, the United States was estimated to have a fifty-

the US agricultural industry has lost out on tens of billions of dollars in export earnings over the

past two decades. The same experts have put attempts to prevent currency manipulation as

having the potential to add billion to annual farm income in the United States. Thus, manipulated

exchange rates are easily detrimental to the international competitiveness and market access for

4.1 Effects on Export Prices and Competitiveness

Foreign exchange manipulation by major trading partners has also played a role in weighing

export prices and the relative cost-competitiveness of American agricultural exports in recent

years. For instance, the intentional manipulation of exchange rates by some countries has made

products from the U. S. to be priced expensively and therefore less competitive in the world

market. The depreciation of currency is a policy mainly followed by any country in order to

make their products cheaper and at the same time make the products imported into that country

expensive. For instance, available estimates indicate that the Chinese yuan has been Waterfall

have very thin operating margins. Also, the local developing countries which have manipulated

the exchange rates they use have a higher cost advantage on the cost of labor, land and material.

This leads to the establishment of a skewed ground where it becomes very hard for the products

from the United States to effectively compete for market share in the conventional as well as the

new export markets. All in all, it is understood that currency manipulation has indeed shaped

export costs as well as the long-term viability of American agricultural products. It thereby leads

Other countries have been shown to have significantly influenced trade volume, as well as

reorient trade flows of agriculture exports from the US in the last decade, through currency

manipulation. In particular, it locked its trading partners into a position where, for instance, by

devaluing their currencies and making their exports less expensive than the U. S. exports, they

have been exporting more. Thus, the current account imbalance has also allowed some of the

world’s largest exporters of agricultural products to expand their market share and exports at the

global exports of various agricultural products such as cotton, soybeans, and wheat over the last

decade. Other Southern developing countries like Argentina and India have also deformed

currencies at the same period of the 2000s to trigger agricultural export growth.

While these countries invaded the US market, new opportunities emerged that the US

agricultural exports aligned towards the exportation of horticulture and processed foods.

market for the full range of exports of U. S. agricultural products because it has upset the settled

trade flows and volumes. Buying and selling off misaligned currencies would help rebalance the

trade, restore balance in the global agricultural trade and reformulate the trade balance for bulk

commodity and value-added categories.

4.3 Commodity-Specific Impacts

For the past two decades, currency manipulation by several major trading partners including the

People’s Republic of China, Japan, Korea among others has negatively influenced the export of

growing markets since below-market prices as a result of currency undervaluation. Argentina is

another competitor that has seen a growth in the exports of wheat. However, exports of rice and

some of the coarse grains have also increased these being produced by China and India. These

statistics suggest that of all the major commodities, US agricultural exports would be higher by 5

– 8 % but for the manipulation of the currencies by these trading partners.

Argentina doubled to 8 percent. Likewise, reductions in the range of 8-14 percent are anticipated

for the coarse grain and wheat US global market share through currency manipulation. The

overall effect is tens of billions in lost and shredded U. S. agricultural trade surpluses, lower

commodity prices and lost market share across agriculture.

4.4 Short-term vs. Long-term Consequences.

Actions taken by other countries with regard to their currencies may affect exports of agricultural

commodities in the short-run, and may also have effects on exports in the long-run. In the short-

paid to the farmers from the U. S in the short term. However, these same practices also make U.

S. domestic agricultural products expensive to countries other than the U. S., thus lowering

export prospects initially in the first few years.

In the long-run, low and declining farm prices and the deteriorating market share can have

profound implications. Some of the poor farmers and ranchers in the United States might be

term threat to the capability and stability of agriculture. Also, consistently losing export market

share to others means their agriculture industries will be able to build and secure such

relationships, channels, and advantages in foreign markets which may be challenging for

American farmers to regain farther down the line. Therefore, while the act of currency

manipulation may offer some immediate benefits to certain consumers in terms of lower prices

for certain goods, the long-term consequences for the American agricultural industry and the

nation’s farmers could be grim.

5. POLICY RESPONSES AND INTERNATIONAL AGREEMENTS

matter of concern within the American policy circles. Foreign exchange manipulation allegations

have been made where some countries have deliberately sought to devalue their currencies in

order to enhance the competitiveness of their exports. This places the U. S exporters, including

the exporters of agricultural products at a disadvantage. A number of policy measures and

international agreements have been made over the years to address this problem but to little

effect.

The US government has claimed that it has acted through bilateral dialogues and negotiation to

deal with countries that practice this form of manipulation. However, this approach is based on

bilateral relations and cooperation mechanisms and has not contributed to systematic changes.

Internationally, it has been raised in the G7 and G20 settings, but it has not translated into legally

per the U. S. There are new proposed rules regarding trade within WTO but no changes have

been made as there is conflict between the developed countries and the emerging economies.

NAFTA included a provision on currency manipulation, although this was not imposed before,

while the proposed Transpacific Partnership (TPP) is expected to contain even stronger

disciplines on currency manipulation. Nevertheless, the Obama’s administration stopped the

process due to the Trump’s decision to quit TPP. Global policies continue to be insufficient in

dealing with this trade distortion prejudicial to the competitive interests of the United States

across sectors, including agriculture. The current and future approaches require new thinking and

stronger commitment and enforcement actions at the international level to address this

economy and undertake a comprehensive study of exchange rate policies of trading partners. In

accordance with OFTCA (Omnibus Foreign Trade and Competitiveness Act of 1988), the

Treasury must, on at least an annual basis, review exchange rate practices of countries that

translate to manipulation of their currency to the US dollar with the intent of unfair competitive

advantage in international trade. Specifically, the Treasury develops benchmarks and indicators

to identify three criteria signaling potential currency manipulation: a large merchandise trade

country manipulates its currency with a view to getting an unfair edge is technically challenging.

As a result, the Treasury has to turn to the ‘enhanced analysis’ and ‘enhanced engagement’ with

trading partners for a better solution, where political level bilateral talks are used to pressure the

trading partners on their currencies. For instance, China actually qualified as a manipulator in the

Treasury Department’s sense in 1997, and for more than a decade after, yet it was given

consecutive waivers. This run showed the limitations of the Treasury in their abilities and

statutes by which they can force policy changes in other sovereign states regarding currencies.

Therefore, the Treasury role evolved more towards surveillance and negotiation, than towards the

punishment of violations of the rules on the manipulation of the value of currencies prohibited by

The WTO has rules and constraints on the behavior of members in terms of currency practices

mostly to be found in the GATT and the GATS. For instance, Article XV of GATT and Article

XVIII of GATT as well as Article VII of the GATS are proposed to deal with aspects regarding

other currencies as well as the fluctuations in global commodity prices, import/export activities,

and domestic agriculture. It may also be useful to draw a parallel with Japan to other developed

Emerging market currencies, such as those from Brazil, India, and Russia, have increasingly

shaped the landscape of global agricultural trade, reflecting their growing roles as major

exporters in international markets. The volatility of these currencies plays a pivotal role in

determining the competitiveness and trade dynamics of their agricultural sectors. For example,

fluctuations in the value of the Brazilian real can significantly impact the cost competitiveness of

Brazilian agricultural exports. A devaluation of the real makes Brazilian products cheaper for

currency trends are essential for U.S. exporters to navigate the competitive pressures and

capitalize on opportunities presented by shifts in emerging market currencies. The interplay

between emerging market currencies and global agricultural trade underscores the

interconnectedness of international markets and the importance of currency risk management

strategies for agricultural exporters. As emerging economies continue to expand their agricultural

production and export capabilities, their currency movements will Some of the most popular

demonstrated through an analysis of the Chinese Yuan – China has gone through economic

reforms, and emerged as the second largest economy in the world, while the Yuan has become

one of the major emerging reserve currencies. While it is not fully convertible, the Yuan has been

pushed more into the global markets through dim-sum bonds, currency swaps, Yuan-

denominated commodities and the like. In the future, such as 2030, the yuan could account for 5-

10% of global forex reserves as Beijing continues to liberalize its capital account. This would be

a paradigm shift from the microscopic share as of now to ranking in one of the reserve leader

statuses.

Similarly, other new comer currencies are also being used more as trading pairs, for instance, the

decade. Projections based on the trends suggest that a third of the foreign exchange transactions

could involve emerging market currencies by 2030, a figure that was relatively at about 5% at the

current year. This growing influence also comes with some related outcomes: heightened and

fluctuating speculative capital flows, challenges in conducting monetary policy, and the

interdependence of currencies of developing nations. The increase of these players will

strategies and outcomes for U.S. agricultural exports in the years ahead.

6.4 Future Trends and Potential Scenarios in Currency Manipulation

Exchange rate policies by countries has thus been a concern which has affected the business of

international trade and finance for years. There are several trends and scenarios that many

envision in the future as follows. First, some of the analysts argue that the situation may worsen

if major currency manipulated nations such as China fail to change their behaviors. For instance,

one probable consequence is that other countries shift to implementing tariffs or other measures

currencies and exports cheaper vis-a-vis countries that used to exploit undervaluation as a growth

strategy. This trend could enable emerging markets to gain larger stakes in trades and

manufacturing sectors. Technology also trends to assist these nations to leap over some stages of

industrialization once deemed necessary.

Third, the coordination of the actions within organizations such as the IMF might reduce

manipulation. If through institutional mechanisms, developed and developing countries collude

multilateral pressure may become conducive for encouraging and preventing currency

manipulation in the long run.

It is impossible to forecast how the trends representing currency manipulation may develop

further according to the opinions of the experts. But comprehending several important potential

situations may assist some significant market participants, such as governments, businesses and

institutional buyers and sellers, to prepare for fluctuations and volatility in the global financial

system and markets. Cooperative agreements and their distribution will continue to be an area of

importance in which progress and pitfalls must be carefully tracked in the future.

REFERENCES

Acemoglu, D., & Restrepo, P. (2020). Robots and jobs: Evidence from US labor markets. Journal

of Political Economy, 128(6), 2188-2244.

Economic Review, 112(7), 2183-2209.

Amiti, M., Itskhoki, O., & Konings, J. (2019). International shocks, variable markups, and

domestic prices. The Review of Economic Studies, 86(6), 2356-2402.

Anderson, K., & Jensen, H. G. (2017). Grain price spikes and beggar-thy-neighbor policy

responses: A global economywide analysis. World Bank Economic Review, 31(1),

158-175.

Autor, D. H., Dorn, D., & Hanson, G. H. (2016). The China shock: Learning from labor-market

adjustment to large changes in trade. Annual Review of Economics, 8, 205-240.

Bai, L., & Stumpner, S. (2019). Estimating US consumer gains from Chinese imports. American

Economic Review: Insights, 1(2), 209-224.

Beckman, J., & Countryman, A. M. (2021). The importance of agriculture in the economy: Impacts

from COVID-19. American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 103(5), 1595-1611.

Bown, C. P., & Zhang, E. Y. (2019). Measuring Trump's 2018 trade protection: Five takeaways.

Peterson Institute for International Economics.

Burstein, A., & Gopinath, G. (2018). International prices and exchange rates. In Handbook of

International Economics (Vol. 4, pp. 391-451). Elsevier.

Carter, C. A., & Steinbach, S. (2020). The impact of retaliatory tariffs on agricultural and food

trade. American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 102(3), 789-812.

the store: Evidence from US trade policy. American Economic Review: Insights,

3(1), 19-34.

Cerutti, E., Claessens, S., & Rose, A. K. (2019). How important is the global financial cycle?

Evidence from capital flows. IMF Economic Review, 67(1), 24-60.

816-836.

Journal of Comparative Policy Analysis: Research and Practice, 20(3), 309-328.

a dominant currency. Journal of International Economics, 127, 103392.

Costinot, A., & Rodríguez-Clare, A. (2018). The US gains from trade: Valuation using the demand

for foreign factor services. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 32(2), 3-24.

Crozet, M., & Hinz, J. (2020). Friendly fire: The trade impact of the Russia sanctions and counter-

Cui, H., & Mao, R. (2023). Tariff pass-through in global value chains: Evidence from US-China

Devadoss, S., & Ridley, W. (2021). Effects of US-China trade war on agricultural trade and

welfare. Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, 53(2), 259-277.

Dixit, A. (2017). Currency manipulation: A theory and empirical evidence. IMF Economic Review,

65(3), 563-585.

Environmental Research and Public Health, 17(16), 5775.

protectionism. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 135(1), 1-55.

Farhi, E., & Maggiori, M. (2018). A model of the international monetary system. The Quarterly

Journal of Economics, 133(1), 295-355.

Feng, L., Li, Z., & Swenson, D. L. (2017). Trade policy uncertainty and exports: Evidence from

Fratzscher, M., Gloede, O., Menkhoff, L., Sarno, L., & Stöhr, T. (2019). When is foreign exchange

Fugazza, M., & Maur, J. C. (2018). Non-tariff measures and trade facilitation: WTO disciplines

and policy space for development. Journal of World Trade, 52(1), 1-36.

Gagnon, J. E. (2017). Do governments drive global trade imbalances? Peterson Institute for

International Economics Working Paper, 17-15.

2024.

Dominant currency paradigm. American Economic Review, 110(3), 677-719.

make a difference? American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 100(2), 518-534.

Greenville, J., Kawasaki, K., & Beaujeu, R. (2017). How policies shape global food and agriculture

value chains. OECD Food, Agriculture and Fisheries Papers, No. 100, OECD

Hoekman, B., & Nicita, A. (2018). Non-tariff measures and trade facilitation: WTO disciplines

and policy space for development. Journal of World Trade, 52(6), 1-36.

Ilzetzki, E., Reinhart, C. M., & Rogoff, K. S. (2019). Exchange arrangements entering the twenty-

first century: Which anchor will hold? The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 134(2),

International Money and Finance, 94, 97-115.

Global hunger and climate change adaptation through international trade. Nature

Jongwanich, J. (2020). Exchange rate volatility and capital flows in emerging East Asian

Kang, J. W., & Dagli, S. (2018). International trade and exchange rates. Journal of Applied

Laborde, D., Martin, W., & Vos, R. (2021). Impacts of COVID‐19 on global poverty, food security,

Liu, Y., Shen, J., Li, W., & Zhang, Y. (2020). The impact of the Sino-US trade war on China's

agricultural export trade: A perspective based on the gravitational model.

Sustainability, 12(16), 6490.