P a g e | 1
REGIONAL AGRICULTURAL TRADE AGREEMENTS AND THEIR INFLUENCE ON
AGRICULTURAL TRADE FLOWS
1. OVERVIEW OF REGIONAL TRADE AGREEMENTS
There has been an exponential increase in the formation of regional trade agreements (RTAs) in
the last few decades due to the lack of progress in the formation of global trade policies under
WTO. RTAs afford member countries access to each other’s markets for products and services
through the establishment of mechanisms that ease trade restrictions. As of now, more than 300
RTSs are effective; they account for a significant percentage of global commerce. Some of the
most widely known RTAs are the free trade agreements, Customs unions and the Common
markets. These accords are intended to stimulate export and import activities by easing market
access; cutting the cost of transactions; enhancing competitiveness and increase transfer of
technologies; attracting foreign direct investments; and making possible economies of scales for
producers within member countries. The overall effects of RTAs on the global nature and
structure of trading remain a subject of discussion among scholars who have used theories such
as the new trade theory to predict:
RTAs are rapidly transforming agricultural trade and leave profound influences on the agri-food
sector within member countries. Although enhancing market access, RTAs exert a competitive
pressure on producers of agricultural goods in member countries to enhance
efficiency. Consequently, the tendencies observed in the framework of RTAs over the course of
trade policy can bring about differentiated effects among economically diverse members. It is
therefore often more complex for competitively vulnerable agricultural products in relatively less
competitive developing countries to adjust to import surges by larger trade partners and hence,
longer periods of tariff liberalization coupled with safeguards measures are warranted. To
P a g e | 2
provide an understanding of the relationship between RTAs and agricultural trade performance it
is necessary to re-examine policy changes and trade effects at the country and commodity level
with reference to the RTA, as well as to consider complementary domestic policy reforms within
the member countries. Subsequent studies can examine the effects of RTAs on agricultural trade
by cross-section, product, and time to determine the advantages of international agreements on
agricultural trade and analyze policy measures to achieve the greatest level of trade liberalization
and little adjustment costs.
1.1. Types and structures of RTAs
Regional Trade Agreements (RTAs) are agreements of variable complexity and can cover a
number of structural forms and styles. One striking difference that can be made concerning the
RTAs is based on the degree and density of the RTAs. Partial scope agreements are mainly
concerned with the gradual elimination of tariffs, quotas, and other similar measures affecting
chosen products between the countries, and often, these are oriented towards industrial products.
Deep integration RTAs, on the other hand, create harmonized policies, laws, and norms in a far
broader number of areas of economic activity covering agriculture, investments, as well as the
basic systems of regulation. RTAs can be deep, cutting beyond the border costs of trade and seek
to achieve a comprehensive harmonization of standards for trade, though the process is slower
and more complicated among countries than shallow RTAs. RTAs can be grouped according to
the number of member countries as bilateral, which involves two countries, and plurilateral
which involves more than two countries but can also be regional in nature. Bilateral agreements
are most common they have a constraint of quicker to negotiate but contain constraints on trade
and investment diversion to the nonmembers. Some new generation of RTAs called plurilateral
RTAs which include a larger number of members are being developed such as Comprehensive
P a g e | 3
and Progressive Trans-Pacific Partnership (CPTPP). Some of these FS relationships include
greater coordination in the areas of food safety, animal and plant health regulatory measures,
standards associated with production of food and feed and other ingredients and processes.
Members can have their own unique foreign trade policy but this usually means a more open
trade policy for members of the RTA and effectively ending discrimination of members.
However, variations in the income and the level of agricultural advancement may require more
specific and different ARMS in the agricultural products trade. This includes special and
differential treatment measures such as non-recognition of reciprocity in the opening up of
markets to avoid erosion of preferences and adjustment costs for the developing country
members. The characteristics and formations of RTAs will persist in changing to suit the
dynamics of the growing agricultural trade flows with directed emphasis on the extension of
regional trade agreements like the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership of the Asia-
pacific region.
1.2. Historical development of agricultural RTAs
International relations within the agriculture sector have not been long but, the agreements
reached on this field are very influential. International disciplines on the agricultural sector in the
context of trade started to emerge only first in the 1990s. Prior to that time, the overwhelming
majority of trade deals were largely dedicated to the reduction of tariffs on industrial and
manufacturing products. Moving toward addressing agriculture trade barriers mainly originated
due to the challenges that were experienced in the Uruguay Round of the multilateral WTO
negotiations in promoting real liberalization in agriculture trade. As progress in multilateral
settings stalled, countries turned to the second-best option which involved signing bilateral and
regional agreements.
P a g e | 4
The initial RTAs that impacted agricultural trade embracing regional partnership were NAFTA
and MERCOSUR initiated in early 1990s for North and South American nations
respectively. These agreements were meant to promote the movement of foodstuffs across
member countries through the negotiation of tariff and non-tariff barriers to trade. It symbolized
a political benchmark in the sense of liberation for countries to open up their normally heavily
guarded agriculture markets to each other. After the initial RTAs deal in the American region,
countries in the Asian, European, African and the Middle East started entering and executing
agricultural trade agreements. ASEAN was among the pioneers of such a move and launched the
free trade area for agricultural products and even synchronized the measures of regulation. In
2000 and afterward, hundreds of regional trade agreements with agriculture-related aspects were
enacted.
Some of the measures that have been cited frequently to explain the increase in agricultural trade
liberalization are economic objectives with regards to export creation and import substitution as
well as political objectives such as enhanced bargaining power. Through trading liberalization,
agricultural powerhouses and developing countries have opened up the markets and made them
more accessible to farmers and agri-businesses. However, there are issues such as subsidies,
sanitary standards and domestic support measures which entail complicated political implications
that present challenges during negotiations. These sources of change cause differences in the
structure and implementation of commitments in trading partners that lead to agreements with a
range of effectiveness in reducing impediments to agricultural trade commodity, country, and
region wide.
P a g e | 5
1.3. Key components of agricultural provisions in RTAs
Trade Liberalization elements found in RTAs for agriculture usually include progressive
elements for the opening up of trade over time. The first one is the provision of special
preferential access to markets for agricultural products between the RTA member countries
through the use of Tariff Rate Quotas which are arrangements which allow a specific number of
imports to enter at a preferential or zero tariff rate before the higher rates of duty are applied on
the subsequent imports. In the case of RTAs for sensitive products, RTAs may require minimum
access commitments that ensure a specified level of domestic consumption of product is
available at a lower cost of imported products. Other agricultural provisions aim at coordinating
precedents and policies concerning trade, which comprises SPS – sanitary and phytosanitary –
measures focused on food safety and animal/plant health. RTAs include provisions for
recognition of equality and non-discriminatory treatment of the various SPS measures that are
adopted by the trading partners to enhance trade. The following contains provisions for the
creation of fast-track notification procedures for SPS issues relating to imports and the exchange
of information and cooperation for the purpose of aligning standards.
WTO provisions also typically cover domestic agricultural support and export subsidies. These
can skew the trade balance by making costs of production appear lower or exports of the partner
party more competitive. To ensure that RTAs do not lead to trade distortions, such agreements
often rule out distortions from domestic subsidies and restrict the use of export subsidies in the
parties’ trade. Many governments also employ non-discrimination standards that compel the
domestic treatment of imported agricultural goods when purchasing them. Aspects of RTAs
include technical trade barriers in agriculture, trade facilitation in technology transfer and
innovation within the agricultural sector and cooperation in research and development of
P a g e | 6
agriculture infrastructure. Antidumping measures prevent trade price manipulation for the
purpose of gaining an unfair import market share. It establishes measures that aid in the
resolution of disputes on implementation of agricultural obligations.
More specifically, agriculture needs to be placed into regional agreements with specific
provisions and longer time to get liberalization commitments right. These elements enable and
promote trade flows by opening up markets selectively, whereas, the efforts to make the trade in
agriculture more balanced through harmonizing the rules and attempting to level the playing
field through banning of policies that distort trade.
1.4. Differences between bilateral and multilateral agreements
International relations in a broad manner involve factors that have bearing on the cross-border
exchange of agricultural produce and these include regional trading agreements that the two
countries can adopt and these may be bilateral agreements between two countries or multilateral
between several countries. Bilateral Trade refers to a business relationship which is usually
entered into by two countries so as to remove quotas and tariffs on some of the goods that are
exported between the two countries. Their main objective is to encourage exports as the partners
within the agreement offer better access to their markets than countries outside the agreement.
Bilateral agreements have more focused benefits in the sense that they are directed to the sectors/
goods/ services the two countries consider most important. However, they can also lead trade
diversion because partner country may turn to each other to source their imports even if they are
produced at higher costs or lower quality compared to non-partner sources. On the other hand,
multilateral agreements refer to three or more countries coming together to develop standard
policies and requirements, tariffs, and access to the market within the agreement’s group and
within countries outside the agreement. Even with RTAs, there is more access to the market for
P a g e | 7
all the members across a larger number of partners and the variety and cost of trade flows are
established at a more favorable level due to collective bargaining and scale economies. But the
decision making may involve more debates because several members are involved and each of
them may have own interests to pursue. However, trade rules and commitment must be
generalized in the process to ensure that identical rights apply across all members and this makes
it difficult to have highly individualized bi-lateral sweeteners for specific products. Summing up,
it can be noted that the possibility of providing selective preferences is one of the advantages of
bilateral RTAs, while one of the disadvantages is trade diversion effects. On the other hand,
while multilateral RTAs have potential generalizable gains, it may be difficult to bargain for and
manage because several parties are involved. The decision as to whether a country should engage
in a bilateral or multilateral RTA depends on the trade relations, trade motives, relative economic
strength or power, and political willingness of the countries.
1.5. Interaction between RTAs and WTO agreements
The phenomenon of an increasingly large number of RTAs is closely associated with the
development of the WTO system and has provoked many issues relating to interrelation and
impact between the two. its essence, RTAs grant advantages to member nations that are not
available to parties outside the RTA, thus introducing discrimination that deviates from WTO
agreement non- discrimination principles. However, the GATT Article XXIV allows the
establishment of RTAs where they should provide no barriers on “substantially all trade” among
members as well they cannot increase trade barriers towards the non-members. Thus, we find
efforts to ensure that the RTAs do not contravene the WTO. Yet in practice, the gray areas of the
Article XXIV make a lot of leeway. More specifically, to qualify for the exclusion, some barriers
were not ‘required to be reduced to a level that is substantially below the low level achieved by
P a g e | 8
industrial goods’, which meant that agriculture could allow more protective agreements than
industrial goods. Furthermore, other WTO rules such as GATS, Enabling Clause and so on offer
further freedom to services, developing nations and other. Therefore, the conflicts between
international, non-discrimination based, open multilateral rules and RTA preference forming
continue to persist. These interact closely when RTAs need common external policies to
nonmembers for their functioning. For instance, the EU’s Common External Tariff commits its
members to apply specific tariffs on agricultural products imported from outsiders, which can
violate WTO tariff schedules they undertook if not very watchful. The liberalizing provisions of
the RTAs also extend beyond the existing WTO provisions in services, investments, and
regulatory measures often referred to as ‘WTO-plus’ This puts pressure on the multilateral rules
to liberalize further. On the other hand, WTO provision creates disciplines for RTAs. This is true
because the WTO has some commitments which when implemented have specific effects. Thus,
the interactions between multiple new RTAs and slow-moving WTO commitments define mixed
effects on international and agriculture trade.
2. ECONOMIC THEORY AND MODELS
It is impossible to overemphasize the role of economic theories and models in explaining the
impact, which regional trade agreements has on the movement of agricultural commodities
across countries. The concepts from trade theory like the comparative advantage offer an
understanding of the pattern of trade that is expected in light of the relative cost and efficiency
differences between and among the trading nations. Heckscher-Ohlin model predicted that the
specific pattern of trade will be in a way that a country will export goods that require the factors
of production that are abound in their country and will import the goods that require the factors
of production that are scarce in their country. Since Heckscher-Ohlin model suggests that
P a g e | 9
countries with more abundant land and labor, which is the case for many developing countries,
are supposed to export products where they have relative advantage, we could expect to see that
after entering the trade agreements, developing countries export more agricultural goods. Other
theories describe the impact of trade policy instruments on welfare and trade flows among
members of a given country. Partial equilibrium models simply consider a single market like rice
or dairy, and can even work out the number of price changes, production changes, consumption
changes, and trade changes that would result from eliminating a tariff or a subsidy in a certain
trade area. The general equilibrium models incorporate the interactions that are present at the
national level and can also quantify the way resources will be reallocated across industries of a
country after it joins an RTA. Based on the theoretical predictions of new gravity models have
been widely used in empirical trade research for predicting how much extra trade will be
generated by reducing trade barriers among a given group of countries while controlling for their
economic size and distance. It is crucial for future policy-making to take cognizance of theories
and models derived from neo-classical, new trade, and the specific trade theories, in order to
fully capture the potential or risk associated with gains and losses from trade liberalization for
both agricultural producers and consumers at home and farmers in developing partners.
2.1. Trade creation and trade diversion effects
It is the inception of trade among the member countries of regional trade agreements with the
help of elimination of barriers and synchronizing the standards of the products which is known
as trade creation. Through reducing costs through regional trade agreements can encourage
consumers to buy products from partner countries which would have been beyond their reach.
For instance, the liberalization of agricultural tariffs within ASEAN has facilitated increased
sales of regional products such as palm oil and rubber between the member countries. Trade
P a g e | 10
creation liberalizes and enlarges markets to its lowest producer unit by the provision of cheaper
products to consumers. Changes in trade flows provide a more global economy benefit – NAFTA
studies estimate the overall increase in welfare in Mexico and Canada from further agricultural
movement of goods like maize, wheat, and livestock.
However, regional agreements may also lead to trade diversion, whereby the bloc’s members are
required to source products from other members even if the non-member country is a more
efficient producer. Thus, there is trade diversion when ASEAN countries import sugar from
within the bloc when they enjoy preferential access even though Brazil can supply the
commodity cheaper. Another disadvantage is that import-competing sectors in member countries
may face even more competition from exporters from other regions who are able to penetrate the
market. According to the economic theories, regional blocs, although foster efficiency within the
bloc through trade creation also give a negative impact with trade diversion which affects the
global welfare by distorting efficient trading networks.
In empirical studies there have been efforts to measure the magnitude of these two offsetting
effects. Exogenous trade costs have been modelled through computable general equilibrium
(CGE) and gravity models that estimate likely effects of imaginary region-specific trade
agreements on trade and welfare. These numerical models based on economic theory help
understand the trade and welfare implications of hypothetical prospective trade
agreements. Another reason involves an econometric analysis of regional past agreements, which
aims at estimating effects such as trade creation and trade diversion quantitatively. It is asserted
that, based on the mainstream theoretical constructions, the welfare effect of regionalism is
contingent upon specific bloc policies and country characteristics, but it uncovers lessons by
creating winners and losers within and outside the integration zones.
P a g e | 11
2.2. Gravity models in agricultural trade analysis
The gravity model has emerged as an indispensable instrument for assessing agricultural trade
patterns and the effects of integration at the regional level. They have their foundation on the
belief that there is a positive relationship between the trade flow of two nations and on their
economic sizes as represented by their Gross Domestic Products and a negative relationship
between the flow of trade and distance between the two nations. The rationale behind the
hypothesis is that bigger economies trade more in general, and, therefore, two comparatively
bigger economies should trade more with each other leaving out the fact that when two
economies are located far apart from each other, trade costs are higher. Gravity models have
therefore been widely employed by agricultural economists when analyzing the impacts of
preferential trade agreements, common markets on certain products. For instance, Philippidis and
Sanjuán (2006) used a gravity model with an aim of assessing the effects of EU enlargement on
agricultural exports of Central and East European countries. The policy makers successfully
managed to estimate increases in agricultural trade resulting from preferential access for new
member countries that have been achieved by incorporating dummy variables of trade
agreements.
Scholars have endeavored to enhance the gravity models in an agricultural context by including
other variables that may explain the trade flows of agricultural products, such as the production
volumes, regulatory policies on the environment, the seasonal effects, and the relative exchange
rates. Santos Silva and Tenreyro (2006) have constructed a Poisson pseudo-maximum likelihood
estimation approach for gravity models which surpasses the simple log-linearized model in terms
of its ability to tackle issues of zero trade flows and heteroskedasticity, which are typical with
micro level agricultural trade databases. Some of other innovations include Utilizing estimation
P a g e | 12
by fixed effects to account for multilateral resistance factors, utilizing dynamics using
autoregressive or moving average terms while working with time series trade flow data. In
general, the attempts to apply the gravity approach to the agricultural trade have demonstrated
that it can accommodate the intricacies of the subject while yielding fairly sound estimates of the
effects of PTAs on individual products and destinations. In the case of estimating gravity
equation applications, there is a clear expectation that ongoing improvement of the specification
and estimation techniques will enhance the effectiveness of this important analytical instrument
in evaluating the progress of economic integration at the regional level in the agricultural field.
2.3. Computable General Equilibrium (CGE) models
Computable General Equilibrium (CGE) models are econometric models that tend to simulate
the economic situation that an economy might be in, given a certain policy change, technological
advancement or otherwise change in the external environment. Simulations of CGE models
involve sub-sectors of an economy and depict the actions and relationships between economic
actors such as industries, consumers, administrations and trading partners. An important
characteristic of CGE models is that it tries to account both the first round effects of an economic
change such as the change in trade policy as well as the second round effects which occur as the
various links in the economic chain react. For instance, lowering of tariffs by a new trade deal
will clearly be positive for export-oriented industries but other industries could also be affected
through demand effects or higher resource prices. The concepts of ‘general equilibrium’ in
reference to the CGE models are a result of the endeavor to simulate the position after all of the
sectors in the economy have responded to the policy change.
P a g e | 13
More specifically, CGE model involves the employment of sector wise and trade wise data,
consumption data, government fiscal position, tax details and other characteristics of an
economy. It can also use this to predict the impact of the changes in policies by manipulating the
parameters to represent aspects such as reduced trade barriers or technology advancement and
then determining the new equilibrium based on the relations and behaviors assumed in the
model. As it has been earlier mentioned, COGE models have been applied widely by national
governments as well as international organizations in order to investigate impacts of trade
policies within agriculture and trade streams. For instance, the impact of becoming a member of
common market or free trade area on the production, prices, export and import of agricultural
produce could be modeled and quantified. The advantages over more partial equilibrium
approaches are the system-wide linkages and responses that are observed and incorporated.
However, the limitation is that model structure assumption and the estimate of the parameters
involved come with a certain degree of uncertainty. However, there are possibilities to get an
insight of directions and approximate magnitudes of policy impacts on Agricultural trade flows
through CGE models. However, as more data has been availed and as the models are elaborated,
then the CGE models have been used widely in explaining major economic policy shifts on trade
and agriculture.
2.4. Partial equilibrium models for sector-specific analysis
Partial equilibrium models are advantageous for the sectoral evaluation of policy shifts and their
effects. These models focus on the changes in policies that occur in one market or a single sector
while assuming that all the other variables remain constant. When it comes to the examination of
the regional trade agreements in relation to the changing patterns in agricultural trade, the partial
equilibrium models may serve as valuable tools to describe how the given accord will influence
P a g e | 14
particular markets and segments of the agriculture industry, for instance, instead of using a
general equilibrium model, a specific application that can be employed is the partial equilibrium
model where the focus is on one industry, for instance, the wheat market. The model would
comprise of equations depicting the supply and demand of the agricultural produce particularly
wheat in the countries involved in trading agreement. The amount of wheat available in the
market would data be collected on factors that affect supply like the price, yield, cost of
producing the grain, and polices in place. Similarly the demand side would also be modeled
based on theoretical and empirical micro economic concepts of price, income, tastes and
preference and other factors that shift demand. The partial equilibrium would facilitate the
introduction of a policy change, say shift in the preferential tariff rates or other changes in non-
tariff barriers that exists between parties to the RTA. It was then possible to forecast the effects of
such changes and simulate the effects on the trade and volumes of import/export for wheat and
on domestic prices. It is important to note that partial equilibrium models are not as
comprehensive as general equilibrium models, as they only address the effects on one market and
not on the whole economy; however, they offer a great deal of insight into the effects that occur
on a more specific sector. Such type of modeling exercise could be done for a number of
agricultural commodities which may be affected by new and prospective trade liberalization
regimes for evaluating distributional effects on producers, consumers and governments. The
findings could set the course for negotiating stances of countries that are contemplating
becoming members of RTA and in setting suitable transition lags or phase-in periods that may be
necessary in liberalizing barriers to agricultural trade. It is still possible for researchers to employ
these sector-specific models while recognising the pitfalls of employing a partial equilibrium
approach that does not consider the system-wide implications of shifts in trade policy regimes
P a g e | 15
through an integration of quantitative partial equilibrium analysis with qualitative components
which look at the politico-social environment. Finally, the theories of partial equilibrium are
more appropriate for marginal analysis, instead of indicating the results that can be expected
when general equilibrium is achieved for the economy. Nevertheless, for agricultural trade
questions these techniques can still enhance the comprehension of shorter- and medium-term
effects of trade liberalization on different subsectors.
2.5. Econometric approaches to measuring RTA impacts
Several techniques in the field of econometrics are employed to predict the effects of RTAs on
agricultural trade. The most commonly used method is the gravitation model which gives the
flow of trade between the countries in relation to the force of gravity. The gravity model shows
how bilateral agricultural trade flows of the RTA’s members depend on the economic sizes which
are expressed in GDP and distances between the centers and binary variables that stand for the
existence of the RTA or not. For the estimation there are different methods which can be used,
for instance, pooled ordinary least squares which do not correct for differences across
observations over time and across countries and fixed effects which estimate the model
correcting by time-invariant differences across the country-pair and random effects which take
into account the variation in country-pair variables. Smarter gravity equations take account of
concerns such as absence of trade flows between two countries through the application of non
linear models, such as Poisson PML estimator. Gravity models can be used to obtain the average
treatment effect of RTAs on members’ agricultural trade; yet, GTMs face challenges to identify
causality from RTAs to trade and are normally based on assumptions. Another type of models is
the general equilibrium one that allows for several markets, numeration agents and parameters
using economic theory. It is integrated models of the economy informed by data from a base year
P a g e | 16
that can predict counterfactuals comparing welfare and trade effects of hypothesized RTAs
against a no-RTA benchmark. Unlike other models that are more directly derived from
theoretical frameworks, CGE models are highly data-demanding and need modeling skills. The
third method uses fixed effects OLS regression with panel data, where the difference-in-
differences estimator is used to compare the changes in agricultural trade values or quantities of
member country-pairs and non-members before and after the implementation of RTA. Being able
to fix unidentified confounding factors that remain constant over time and other time varying
factors, the difference-in-differences approach solves for endogeneity and ensures
causality. Finally, using a combination of techniques that are econometrically robust allows for
more robust identification of causal effects of RTAs and the pathways through which they affect
agriculture trade.
3. CASE STUDIES OF MAJOR AGRICULTURAL RTAS
There has been a trend in the formation of RTAs in the last two decades and most of these
agreements have had agriculture as a key sector. The most exemplary one is the North American
Free Trade Agreement that was signed in 1994 between Canada, Mexico, and the United States
of America. Several empirical studies that focus on the impact of NAFTA on the intersectoral
distribution of agricultural commodities across the North American region have been conducted.
It has been ascertained from previous studies that after the signing of this NAFTA, trade in
agricultural produce increased exponentially amongst member nations. For instance, Mexican
agricultural exports to the US and Canada raised its value from 1993 to 2002 by three
folds. Some of the important export products that have boosted this growth include fruits and
vegetables, livestock and processed meals. Experts explain the above shifts in trade flows as a
P a g e | 17
result of NAFTA measures that removed previous barriers which included tariffs and non-tariff
barriers on most agrifood products traded in North America.
The European Union is another active RTA, which a lot of cases have investigated the effects on
member state agricultural trade flows. This is a single market the internal barriers as well as the
measures affecting agriculture have been brought down to a negligible level in the EU. Several
quantitative studies that follow trade patterns in the recent decades agree that this policy
environment has helped to boost intra-EU agricultural trade up and down. This expansion was
most notable in the categories of processed consumer foods, meats, and horticultural product.
Individually there was evidence of some specific agricultural sub-sectors in some countries
shrinking when they faced more competition from the neighboring countries post reforms but
overall, the case evidence points towards traded enhancing effects, product differentiation and
product specialization within the European Agri food markets due to the EU’s trade integration
measures.
These two leading RTAs suggest that the developing preferential liberalization of intra-regional
trade barriers can overhaul current agricultural trade patterns. The empirical analysis
demonstrates that access to regional markets and exports improved considerably, while there
may have been some decline in the import-competing sectors. The country level results indicate
that lower trade costs due to RTAs cause agricultural producers and food firms to adjust
production and export destinations for the final markets in the regional RTA blocs.
3.1. North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) and agriculture
Analyzing the role of North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) in agricultural trade
among Canada, Mexico, and United States that was established in 1994. According to NAFTA,
P a g e | 18
trade barriers including tariffs and quotas were gradually reduced across various agricultural
products traded in the free trade area resulting to promotion of market access for the three
countries. Thus, examining the selected impacts particularly for the agricultural sector of the
three NAFTA members proves to be rather instructive as it reveals how a major RTA of this kind
can alter and link agricultural markets on the regional level.
NAFTA was also particularly beneficial to Canada by creating new export markets in wheat, live
cattle and beef to Mexico. As the tariffs have been reduced under NAFTA, the exports of the
Canadian agriculture and agri-food products to Mexico rose significantly to the extent that
Mexico became the third largest export partner of Canada for the agriculture and agri-food
products by early 2000s excluding USA and Japan. The trade increase with Mexico was due to
the removal of trade barriers in the case of certain Canadian agriculture products. NAFTA also
saw US agriculture exports to Canada rising and for this, the Canadian sectors in beef and grains
felt pressures of increased competition.
Thus, for Mexico, NAFTA engendered massive alterations and restructuring of Mexican
agriculture in the 1990s and 2000s. And with lowered input costs and increased access for US
and Canadian agricultural and agri-food imports for NAFTA, Mexico modernized and also
reshaped agriculture to include fruits and vegetables, livestock, and fish products to become the
largest exporter of agriculture products like avocados and berries in the North American market.
However, NAFTA also brought some problems that affected the small scale farmers from
Mexico who could not compete with the low prices offered by subsidized produce from the US
under the FTA. Consequences of these impacts, and other changes associated with economic
liberalization, was the displacement of agricultures and rural poverty in Mexico.
P a g e | 19
3.2. European Union's Common Agricultural Policy (CAP)
The CAP of the European Union is one of the largest and the most consistent examples of an
agricultural policy connected to a regional trade agreement. Introduced in 1962, CAP was
developed at the same time as the union and its objectives were to raise productivity of
agriculture, ensure a decent income for farmers and producers, stabilize markets and guarantee
supply. To this end, the CAP initially offered price support schemes that included market
mechanisms that protected minimum price levels as well as export subsidies to encourage the
exportation of EU agronomical products. These measures caused an increase in productivity but
negative impacts such as excessive production for inventory and high costs of storage and
exports. Therefore, starting from the 1990s several attempts at liberalization have been made
with the aim of lowering market imperfections. Relative support prices have been drifting
downwards while direct income payments have largely been decoupled from output. Restrictions
have also been placed on export subsidies to control the level of subsidies given. The reforms
were in some ways motivated by external pressures such as leading agricultural exporters
claiming that CAP price support distorted world prices, as well as internal pressures associated
with the budgetary effects of the CAP programs. These changes in the CAP and its system of
agricultural support and protection demonstrate that there exists the possibility of conflict and
contradiction in the formulation of a stable and enduring long term agricultural policies that are
linked with regional trade liberalization initiatives. On the one hand, the generous level of
subsidies to European farmers caused trade conflicts with agricultural exporters in the
developing world during earlier phases of CAP. On the other hand, the recent modifications,
which can be defined as more moderate as for their impact on the market interventions, prove
how policies evolve over time responding to pressures of domestic politics as well as to a
constantly shifting international trade system. As organizations such as the EU strive to redefine
P a g e | 20
their policies on agriculture they should also think of their vision and goals relating to the
reshaping of markets and trade relations with the remainder of the world.
3.3. ASEAN Free Trade Area (AFTA) and its effects on regional agriculture
The ASEAN Free Trade Area (AFTA), implemented since 1992 aims at enhancing the region’s
competitiveness as the production location towards the global market. One significant goal
within the framework of AFTA is the progressive removal of tariff and non-tariff barriers among
the ten ASEAN member countries. Essentials like agricultural products had tariffs lowered to 0-
5% under the CEPT Scheme starting January 1, 2010. This has been through the gradual removal
of intra-regional agricultural tariffs which has helped to lead to increased trade volumes for
ASEAN countries. For instance, the trade within this bloc has seen a rising trend especially in
palm oil; Malaysia and Indonesia now account for over 90% of international palm oil
market. The removal of trade barriers has facilitated the ASEAN states to leverage on their
perceived competitive strengths in the production of some agricultural products. For instance,
Thailand and Vietnam have enhanced the exportation of food items from rice to fruits,
vegetables, nuts, and animal feed to nearby countries. However, Indonesia and Malaysia focused
on exports of palm oil, natural rubber and tropical fruits. The increased availability of cost-
effective imported basic food products has also resulted in the lowering of food costs in some
ASEAN countries, which in turn has enhanced food security. However, some critics point out
that a large-scale industrialization of the regional agriculture has occurred due to AFTA
liberalization of agricultural trade where the benefits of this industrialization has largely
benefited the large agri-business conglomerates at the expense of the small-holder farmers.
While most ASEAN members have low post-tariff barriers, there is still concern over high post-
tariff barriers in some countries for sensitive commodities such as rice and sugar due to food
P a g e | 21
security and rural development agendas. As noted above, free trade within the ASEAN region
has reflected positive trends towards higher productivity and export-led growth in agriculture,
although its effects on the distribution of benefits to the small farmers and poverty reduction are
still areas of controversy. All in all, the liberalization of trade barriers under AFTA have
benefited the ASEAN member states in achieving the optimum utilization of their comparative
advantage in agricultural production as well as agricultural export. Nonetheless, national
agricultural policies still help determine the final results of more intense regional agricultural
trade.
3.4. Mercosur and agricultural trade in South America
Agricultural trade has not been immune to the effects of liberalization with Mercosur, the
Southern Common Market comprising of Argentina, Brazil, Paraguay, and Uruguay formed in
1991. When Mercosur was being planned leaders thought that it would be a tool for promoting
industrialized trade and development but today it has become a strong influential factor in
determining agriculture in the region. This was based on the fact that the Mercosur countries had
comparative economies in early 1990s as Argentina and Brazil were food exporting countries
while Paraguay and Uruguay were importing countries thus offered an opportunity to enhance
the agricultural markets. Crops of production in the Mercosur countries include soybeans, maize,
wheat, and beef from extensive farming due to good weather conditions as well as technology
that has enhanced productivity. For example, Argentina and Brazil are delivering a massive
amount of soya on the international market due to increased production and land use change tied
up to Mercosur industrial and trade policy. The Mercosur has provided market preferences, and
relatively low tariffs than those encountered in the global markets. It has elicited environmental
consequences with escalating deforestation, and socioeconomic ramifications attributable to
P a g e | 22
large-scale farming succeeding modest producers. Some efforts made in an attempt to
synchronize agricultural policies of members have been effective due to the fact that due to
national interest there are usually pull factors. Some issues are conflictive, for instance,
Argentina placed a ban on the exportation of wheat to ensure food security in that country, which
violated trade liberalization principles of Mercosur. Though there has been enhanced intra-
regional agricultural trade, it has been a major question whether Mercosur has restrained the
members from being more competitive in the international markets because there are very few
motivations for improving efficiency and productivity confronting protected regional trading
partners. It is imperative to note that Mercosur is one of the largest agricultural trade blocks that
influence the production and land use within the South American region while it still faces
internal conflict of member states pushing forward the different policy frameworks. Its prospects
may be measured by how well it evolves from what laid down it initially as a means of
increasing regional agricultural markets toward competing in global agricultural exports.
3.5. African Continental Free Trade Area (AfCFTA) and agricultural prospects
AfCFTA, effective from 2021, is a trade agreement between the 55 member states of the African
Union that will provide a protocol for a free trade area for goods and services for the people of
Africa totaling over 1. 3 billion. Due to the fact that the AfCFTA is the world’s largest free trade
area since the WTO, the arrangement has serious implications in trade and development in
Africa. Within the agricultural sector more broadly, the AfCFTA provides potentialities for
developing larger economies of scale in production, attaining better access to markets, increasing
investment and competitiveness, and advancing modernization in general. Depending on the
products that are traded, different opportunities exist and this is especially the case with high
tariffs, quotas and other barriers to trade in agricultural goods being eliminated. Specialization
P a g e | 23
and productivity gains can also be gained relatively on comparative advantage on crop or
livestock production. For instance, inter regional trade in basic foods such as maize, rice and
beans could see food secure countries supply the required grains to countries in this list. Other
inputs used in production such as fertilizer and farm equipment could also be aided by the
freeing up of trade. The same technologies can further improve efficiency in terms of their
shared use, thus, it is important to note that the levels of agricultural trade that AfCFTA is
capable of boosting can help enhance food security and living standards in Africa. However,
achieving these outcomes requires tackling such issues as competition with imported goods,
effects on domestic production, admissibility criteria, hygiene standards, and support for
transportation and infrastructure. It is important to note that serious policy coordination is
necessary for the achievement of the objective of creating a liberalized, competitive and well-
coordinated African agricultural market structure that will allow vulnerable countries and the
disadvantaged groups to benefit from the prospects of this new market. With proactive support,
the AfCFTA can be used in not only increasing the volumes of agricultural trade within the
region, but also achieving a sense of value addition, where the trade flows will result in poverty
eradication, resilience building and inclusive rural transformation.
4. EFFECTS ON AGRICULTURAL MARKETS AND TRADE FLOWS
These agreements can have substantial impact on the agricultural markets and related trade and
exchange of goods among its members as they eliminate tariffs and import quotas which leads to
the liberalization of markets and the introduction of competition. This opens opportunities for the
export base rivals farmers in the agricultural sector but will likely crowd out inefficient domestic
producers who are unable to meet the challenge posed by the massive imports transforming the
nature of trade as countries begin to export products that used to have domestic markets.
P a g e | 24
While it is true that trade barriers affect the international trade of food products and their prices,
the elimination of these barriers will benefit consumers and food processors. This leads to
increased demand for purchase of agricultural products by individuals and food manufacturers
benefitting from the low prices. This has to be done in a way that would spur higher agricultural
yields and greater exchange of products between member countries. The degree of these effects
depends on more of the details of the agreement, especially, the depth and speed of tariff and/or
quota cuts, number of products and the relative export competitiveness of producers in member
countries.
This also has potential medium and long-run effects on productivity, output, investment and
consumption patterns within the member countries in reaction to the shift in the trading
environment. Firms will respond to change and engage in new exporting strategies or seek to
guard against import threats. The alteration of production platforms to orient them toward the
pursuit of competitive advantage rather than coddling domestic industries alters trade patterns
over time.
By liberalizing regional trade through these agreements, they lead to redeployment of agriculture
production as well as trade in the partner countries. This make some gainers and some losers but
the net impact of it is that there is overall economic welfare as a result of division of labor,
capital formation, and access to cheaper goods. The last effect may vary due to the details of the
agreement, the competitive position of the member countries in the products that are traded, and
the flexibility that producers exhibit when facing new conditions.
P a g e | 25
4.1. Changes in trade volumes and patterns
Trade liberalization within a region through RTAs can imply profound consequences on the
levels and patterns of agricultural trade among its members. As a result of liberalizing domestic
markets through the elimination of tariffs and other trade barriers, these agreements can be
expected to enhance the total trade flows within the trading bloc. However, the impacts are
normally unbalanced, and there are challenges of changing an existing pattern of trade where
some of the member economy gets better access to the markets that were protected while others
face opened up to competition in their home markets. For instance, if there is a signed deal
between a developed agricultural economy and a developing agricultural economy then it will
promote export of more processed and value added foods and seeds to the developing country
and also there will be a significant increase in importation of tropical crops and labor-intensive
crops from the developing country into the developed country. The developing country can also
see its domestic production of such necessities such as wheat or diary reduced considerably due
to cheaper imports from the developed nation. The effects of trade liberalization and reduction on
the domestic markets implied that smallholder farmers may be worst of affected due to lower
prices and deteriorating terms of trade while large scale export orientated farms in the developing
country may increase production of cash crops that are preferred under the agreement.
These asymmetric effects are also evident where nations at the same level of development
engage in regional trade agreements. This shift is as tariffs reduce, agricultural sectors that enjoy
scale, infrastructure or competitive advantages gain new export destinations previously protected
via barriers. For instance, although Mexico have upped production and export of labor-intensive
produce and livestock products to the US under NAFTA, its domestic corn farmers continued to
battle with cheap imports from the US and need constant protection of local markets.
P a g e | 26
Simplification of rules and norms connected with health and quality of products also leads to the
benefit of large, modernized farms in the search for new outlets for exports for the members of
trading blocs. These fluctuations in trade volumes and the flow of commodities engender sectoral
and regional re-orientations within member countries.
4.2. Price effects and market access improvements
The impact of regional trade agreements on specific agricultural markets and the overall trade
with the member countries can be rather profound. One of these is the impacts of the competition
on price and access to the markets. As it opens the borders for member countries by eliminating
tariffs and other trade barriers, regional trade agreements can put competitive price pressures on
domestic agricultural products in member countries. Uncertainties such as tariff are thus removed
and products from one member country can be offered at a cheaper price in other member
countries. These liberalization measures help to put pressures on producers in the import markets
by making them lower their prices. Some domestic producers may experience the pressure to
reduce the prices of their products or to increase efficiency so as to compete favorably with the
imported products Since consumers end up paying less for such products. Regional agreements
also lead to the harmonization of technical and the regulatory requirement among members thus
lowering the cost of transporting goods across borders. These effects were witnessed for instance
in the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) where elimination of tariffs led to the
following impacts, a downward effect on the consumer prices of many agricultural products in
Mexico.
In addition to these price effects, RTAs can open vast market access among members more than
multilateral trade agreements. With the elimination of trade barriers, exporters are granted
improved market access within member countries, causing higher trade flows among partners.
P a g e | 27
Preferential access gives exporters a special right over other manufacturers who are not part of
the organization to access members’ consumers. The case of NAFTA brought a large increase in
the exportation of agricultural products from the United States to Mexico since it granted
American exporters a stronger access to the Mexican market. Likewise, the European Union
common market also promoted a twofold expansion of imports and exports of agricultural
products within member countries. Therefore, Regional trade agreements can open markets
through trade liberalization and lead to improved choice and access for consumers in member
states, higher sales of export products in members’ markets as well as overall welfare gains from
trade by increasing intra-state trade among members.
4.3. Non-tariff measures and technical barriers to trade
Trade liberalizations promoted by free trade areas, which reduce what has been considered
conventional to trade such as tariffs and quotas, will facilitate the trade between member
countries. However the use of non-tariff measures and technical barriers to trade can distort the
intended outcome of these agreements. Such types of non-travitonal barriers establishes
standards and procedures of products that the agricultural imports have to meet in order to enter
into the market. It is true that when standards are significantly divergent between countries, they
affect the crossing of borders. For instance, sanitary and phytosanitary measures such as that
which set specific maximum pesticide residue allowable or permitted food and veterinary
chemical residues can create significant trade barriers for agricultural products. If an exporting
country uses different chemicals or production methods that are not compliant with an importer’s
permissible levels, their products may be legally kept out of that market. Other strictly technical
trade barriers include such measures as labelling, packaging or shelf-life standards intended to
safeguard health of consumers but which in fact tend to restrain imports from overseas markets.
P a g e | 28
Where RTAs result from the grouping of countries with significant differences in development
levels, their regulations and, therefore, quality standards’ parameters are more likely to deviate
further apart, hence amplifying trade-distorting impacts of these, hidden barriers. These
limitations can be seen as negating regional liberalization processes through the provision of
restricted market access even where tariffs have been lowered, it also opens a cost front that
undermines the flexibility of exporters as they seek to adapt their supply chain in order to
conform to the cross-border environment. This disproportionately affects the smallholder farmers
that cannot afford to put their money in procuring better quality equipment, inputs or practices.
Tariff and Non-tariff measures and technical requirements erode intended trade creating and
diverting effects, and also restricts the advantages of gains from trade and economies of scale.
They discourage anticipated price, supply and consumption changes by duty-free access to
member state markets. They can even cause members with less burdensome rules to import more
from non-members compared to members with stringent regulations. Thus, while regional
agreements may have the potential of providing for free trade that is guaranteed to enhance the
flow of commerce then non-tariff measures emanating from regulatory policy dissimilarities are
capable of militating against market integration and intended outcomes.
4.4. Impact on domestic agricultural policies and subsidies
These are the regional trade measure that may impact significantly on domestic agriculture
policies and subsidies within the member countries. In turn, as borders are lifted amongst
member states, there is increased competition on home based farmers and agribusiness. It
becomes possible that countries may be pressured to cut or withdraw subsidies and trade
distorting support measures in order to enable producers set a level playing ground. For instance,
under NAFTA agreements, Mexico was forced to discontinue many subsidies and state trading
P a g e | 29
operations that had been essential to corn and other staple crops farmers. This saw the
competition from the US and Canada for cheaper agricultural produce which put many Mexican
farmers under pressure. On the other hand, the United States continues to operate many of the
traditional Price Support Programs and Insurance Subsidies contrary to NAFTA agreements that
provided for more decoupled forms of Income Support. Some agreements have revealed that the
agricultural subsidy reform is often uneven and thereby has resulted in trade conflicts of
remaining or residual farm support. Concerning the impact on domestic policies, it is also
noteworthy that the nature of the regional agreement plays an important role. Customs unions
wherein the member states have common external trade policies like MERCOSUR in South
America can allow for the harmonization of support provided on agriculture and creation of
reasonably harmonized levels of protection across the region. Nevertheless, essentially the
promotion of domestic agricultural policies has remained practically untouched for the trading
groups with relatively feeble institutional framework as for example ASEAN in South-East Asia.
In all these, the effects on domestic agricultural policies are tightly linked up with the political
economy elements in the member countries. In the case of politically powerful farmers, their
lobby groups tend to counter the effects of globalization and liberalization, which normally call
for subsidies to be cut. To sum up, regional integration agreements set certain pressure for policy
c-ordination and procedural changes to domestic agricultural policies but these pressures do not
necessarily translate into comparable shifts in government support across members due to
differences in treaty provisions, institutional setting and domestic political factors. These
findings imply that regional agreements contain diverse trade policy reforms and domestic
agricultural policies with a consistent but unpredictable impact on the agricultural sectors of
member countries.
P a g e | 30
4.5. Effects on agricultural value chains and market integration
RTAs can therefore impact agricultural value chain and market integration among member
countries in the regions of the world. Erasing tariffs and non-tariff barriers as provided for in
these agreements help to promote the expansion of trade in agricultural commodities, and in so
doing enable countries to produce items at their comparative advantage, this has the effect of
increasing competition while at the same time offering exporters chances of accessing even
bigger markets. Cost pressure adjustment pressures may come about if domestic producers
cannot compete with subsidized imported agricultural products. However, consumers utilize
these services and hence would enjoy cheaper prices. Integration of markets in the process means
that resources are channeled progressively towards uses that are more productive.
Under a trade agreement, what ‘preferential’ access does for export-competitive sectors is to
entail liberalized access due to lowered trade costs. Exporters can more easily become connected
in the regional and global networks of value addition. In this case, specialization in the
production of specific crops or rearing specific livestock can help countries unlock the benefits
of economies of scale. This is because the latter area is characterized by fixed codes of conduct
and legal requirements that promote the exchange of agricultural products, these may take the
form of investments in transport, storage and processing facilities intended for export.
Import competition may pose a problem in certain industries through an RTA, meaning policy
intervention during some transition phases. Subsectors such as staple grains may further be
protected to sustain food security in the country. Support to facilitate the transition in terms of
production or changing technologies provides farmers with the necessary protection. That is why
it is necessary to have social protection for these populations during their shifts in market
demand.
P a g e | 31
Sectors by sectors welfare effects of RTAs considered, outcomes that global integration of
markets and enhanced agricultural trade yields net welfare benefits. Consumption and processing
of agricultural products that are linked to global demand assists in moderating the price swings
of basic food crops. Higher availability of farm inputs at lower costs increases productivity in
agriculture. Improving the world’s food safety also requires investments to meet international
SPS standards and traceability. Competition to the extent eliminates the less efficient firms and
enhances the existence of dynamic firms and support rural incomes. However, another important
thing which should be noted is that the complementary policies are needed to make the benefits
non-exclusive and durable.
5. IMPLICATIONS FOR GLOBAL FOOD SECURITY
The type of RTAs that reform the agriculture trade remain with various consequences on world
food security. These agreements help to liberalize commerce by reducing trade hindrances like
the tariffs and quotas thereby enabling large volumes of staple foods to be imported from regions
of abundance to those that are in deficit. The smoothing effect also contributes directly to the
stabilization of food quantities and prices addressing issues of nutrition and access to food in
impoverished and rural communities. But the effects within countries may be more varied with
positive effects being observed more likely in some groups than others. While net food-exporting
regions may attain improved incomes for exports of commodities that are characteristic of those
zones, net food-importing regions may not be able to compete with cheaper imports by regarding
a flood of imports that destroys rural livelihoods. It is also relatively easy to transfer food price
inflation from other countries through integrated regional markets. One of the areas of concern is
that such agreements may spur on monocrop development and industrialization of farming for
export earnings rather than varieties for local consumption. The adverse effects of increased
P a g e | 32
production and productivity through intensified agriculture practices can also put a jeopardy the
future food security. There are other concerns that food and agribusiness TNCs may achieve even
more market domination in the food chain under regional agreements, which results in
oligopolistic conducts that are detrimental to producers and consumers. Hence, anticipatory
policy actions are needed to assure that such liberalization in agriculture leads to positive rural
development and incremental positive food security for all segment of the partner country’s
population. Policy makers must ensure that trade adjustment assistance, farm subsidies,
infrastructure aid, climate-smart agriculture support and supply management policies are applied
judiciously so as to prevent undesirable effects. Domestic institutions are also relevant
surveillance and check and balance bodies with regards to corporate consolidation and
sustainable effects on agricultural value chains in the trade partners’ regions. There is a role for
well-structured regional trade liberalization to assist in the increasing in trade of staple foods for
the improvement of food security, but there is always the downside if poor policy makes the
wrong decisions on distribution of the gains, environmental impact and competition control.
5.1. RTAs and food availability in member and non-member countries
Historical analysis of RTAs reveals that the flow of food and food production has been
inconsistently influenced by RTAs within member nations and other nations over time. Overall,
through easing trade of products between members, RTAs can enhance productivity within
agriculture and food availability in general. These gains are not always reflected in improved
food security, particularly where the excess food is exported or where the more vulnerable
groups in the members states’ societies are left out. At the same time, the terms of trade of a non-
member country could decline if the exports from the RTA member countries adversely affects
the non-members competitiveness. Food access in non-member countries may decrease in the
P a g e | 33
event that domestic production of food becomes unprofitable or in the case that non-member
countries lack the foreign exchange to afford adequate food imports. Many effects and
interactional variables exist, including the governing structure of the RTA, the compatibility
between the resources and production specialties of member countries, and the stages of
development. Due to multiple linkages, the overall implications of RTAs to food availability and
accessibility in the global level still hang in the balance. Ideally, more research work is required
to analyze the effect of specific regional agreements over time with the least interference from
other variables. It becomes even more difficult as there are numerous such interlinking and
intersecting relations and agreements between the parties. That is, through better coordinating the
geographical distribution of RTAs, it is feasible to improve the distribution of agricultural
production and the total availability of food internationally, yet current RTAs do not necessarily
improve food security in individual member and non-member nations. Export controls may be
necessary to limit export sales for food, or to use local markets to limit competition from
imported food. Another way of addressing issues of food insecurity may also be through
conducting targeted programs in a bid to support farmers who may require some assistance
during national periods of transition. In turn, whether and how RTAs do translate to the on the
ground increased food availability might best be determined by complementary policies and
programming regarding trade openness.
5.2. Effects on smallholder farmers and rural development
Trade liberalization in the form of RTAs may cause far reaching impacts in the livelihoods of
small holder farmers and rural development as well as the international community’s food
security status. On the one hand, further liberalizing trade of agricultural products within a
specific trade block might open up new opportunities for gaining new markets and exports for
P a g e | 34
large-scale commercial farms that might be ready to meet the quality and quantity demanded by
the supermarket chains of the global north. However, such a market integration usually come
with the strong and cheap imported inputs from more efficient producers due to subsidies,
flooding the local markets and reducing market prices leaving smallholder farmers who are
selling staple crops and have no access to scale, technology and capital to compete or meet new
standard. The effect of displacement, indebtedness and disruption to rural livelihoods has equity
implications within developing nations. If many better endowed family farms, and those with
ready access to credit and markets, capture a greater share of value through agro-processing and
exports this can lead to further concentration of people in urban areas and increased polarization
of income between commercial agricultural regions and disadvantaged smallholders’ zones, thus
worsening poverty and malnutrition in the most vulnerable rural regions. Nonetheless,
engagement in GVCs is not necessarily detrimental to smallholders – connection deriving from
trade liberalization could unlock upgrading opportunities in contractual farming value chain
linking growers to buyers and exporters. While it frequently excludes the broader range of
mostly non-commercial, smallholder producers, such inclusion can indeed increase overall
productivity, rural revenues, leaks of advanced practices and technology and a more meaningful
connection between smallholders, national policy and global markets. Hence, the distributional
effects, which smallholders are likely to experience on account of regional integration are
diverse, conditional on complementary measures for improving competitiveness, access for
disadvantaged groups, formulation of strategies for non-farming income sources in inapt farming
zones and diffuse spending on public items, institutions and infrastructure for widespread
development of agriculture. Although trade liberalization arrangements always generate winners
P a g e | 35
and losers, how trade liberalization and adjustment is executed dictates whether the food security
in the global and poverty reduction among rural population is strengthened or hindered.
5.3. Environmental sustainability considerations in agricultural RTAs
The trends and concerns affecting agricultural trade in regional integration agreements have
potential to enhance or jeopardize environmental standards and world food security. Trade
liberalization through RTAs in agricultural produce can encourage specialisation and investment
in agriculture with a resultant overall improvement in food production for the whole
world. Nonetheless, these processes can hurt the environment when certain measures are not put
in place to protect it. The increase in agricultural production in the wake of trade liberalization is
likely to cause farmers to increase output through practices that are unsustainable such as using
more agrochemicals or expanding into marginal or fragile lands or clearing forests or
wetlands. Hence, the decline in the ecological relationships and functions is a potential danger to
sustaining agriculture as a profession. Additionally, there are trade policies that advocate for
increasing yields to enhance the amount of food produced without regard to the quality, which is
also essential for food security. Such a diet dependency could raise the energy supply relative to
micronutrients for vulnerable population groups that rely on such crops. there is also the
possibility that the liberalization of trade could lead to the flood of cheap and unhealthy foods
which are highly processed and this would come and replace the better foods that are available in
the developing countries hence lowering their dietary diversity. Environmental concerns can be
dealt with in a non-proactive manner where they are only responded to through regulations or in
a proactive manner where there are incentives for companies to produce products that are
environmentally friendly. RTAs therefore provide the possibility for standard setting in the
environmental field for agriculture across the region, as well as the possibility of including
P a g e | 36
sustainability objectives into trade rules directly. They facilitate Cooperation initiatives in areas
of environment that can be tuned to the regional context unlike the multilateral WTO
agreements. However, some critics have complained that environmental measures can be utilized
as one of the means to disguise protectionism by trading partners. With regard to trade,
environment and food security issues, no general agreement has emerged about the policy
instruments that need to be deployed to effectively address these global challenges. However,
solving these interactions will be essential as countries remain coherent in integrating the
agricultural markets of the regions. If appropriately implemented, agricultural RTAs could help
improve the productivity of agriculture and food production in such way that does not harm the
economy, the environment, and the welfare of farmers.
5.4. Food safety standards and harmonization in regional agreements
Bilateral and multilateral trade liberalization that sets the same quality of food safety across
member countries has far-reaching consequences for the global food security. Sanitary and
phytosanitary measures are policy and technical barriers that include food safety standards,
inspection and certification systems that vary among countries and can hamper cross-border
agricultural trade. Nonetheless, these standards have been aligned to the existing standards in the
regional trade agreements through provisions that expand the cross-border food trade without
compromising public health safeguards. For instance, the maximum residue levels of pesticides
and veterinary drugs permitted on imported foods or the agreed procedures that concern the
inspection and certification of processing facilities might be included in a regional agreement.
Thus, imports from member countries would not trigger any further costly additional inspections
or certification at the border, and would become legally compliant with the national food safety
standards by virtue of harmonisation of the regulations. Through harmonized standards, the flow
P a g e | 37
is simplified to mean that one of the key hurdles to the increase in the trade in safe and nutritious
foods within the trade block has been addressed. Additionally, these standards are common and
are developed based on the scientific data as well as best practices from around the world,
including the food safety standards widely accepted across the globe. The increase and extension
of harmonized food safety approaches within regions by means of these agreements can
therefore help upgrade the protection of the standards and disseminate better practices more
extensively. When the developing countries that lack strong food safety capability join these
regional trade organizations, they get broader market access to export while at the same time
importing advanced safety management systems. This improves their domestic population health
and allow higher integration in high standard global supply chains crucial for feeding the world.
However, problems may be encountered especially whenever food safety frameworks of
different regions are mutually exclusive to the various trade agreements, or where standards are
simply set at levels that are beyond any reasonable expectations of producers from developing
countries. Appropriate measures of harmonization should capture the qualities of public health,
fairness of market access and the need to balance agriculture development needs of the countries
in different levels of economy. Proper coordination of FS requirements could significantly
support the optimization of safer regional agricultural trade and enhance access and consumption
of the necessary nutraceuticals to tackle global food insecurity, such average standards must
incorporate the credible requirements and capabilities of the participating countries to avoid
either leaving out significant exporting countries or limiting domestic people’s food purchase.
5.5. Policy recommendations for balancing trade and food security objectives
When countries enter into regional trade agreements, the question of how far freedom of trade
should be achieved and how food security, for their domestic populations and globally, should be
P a g e | 38
preserved arises. Several policy options can be deployed to assist in the achievement of this
balance. First, it was possible to stipulate effective safeguard measures that enable transitory
closure of markets for domestic agricultural producers due to competitive pressure from import
surges. But these measures have to be implemented in a way that is transparent especially where
they involve restrictions on certain freedoms, and should be implemented for a specified period
of time to avoid misuse. Another way to facilitate food imports would be liberal rules of origin
for food products that would allow food imports while maintaining policy space for domestic
agricultural policies. However, policymakers must also spend in the promotion of activities that
will improve productivity and stability of domestic agriculture apart from protecting it through
the use of border measures. Even subsidies that flow out to international markets may need to be
rebalanced in a way that provides a fairer base for global competition. International and regional
organizations and platforms may afford chances to the nations to solve the matters of integrated
policies of trade and food security at once. This includes agreeing on the objectives for
sustainable agricultural development and the right sort of policies that can further these global
goals in ways that also achieve food security, income generation for farmers, and poverty
reduction while allowing countries leeway to protect their national interest. Other forms of
support include technical help in strengthening policy-making institutions and exchanging
experiences of successful reforms in such areas as supply chain development and minimization
of trade-affecting measures. Therefore, the compromises that must be made between trade
liberalization in agriculture and food security are complex, and policy interventions at various
levels must take into account effects across countries and within societies. The approach needs to
be more an integrated, cooperative one that unlocks trade opportunities while at the same time
enhancing the social protection systems and supporting the producers and consumers in other
P a g e | 39
structural changes associated with trade liberalization. Contrary to the notion that freer trade and
food security cannot be achieved simultaneously, it is possible if policy is well designed, and
stakeholders work together.
