200 likes | 322 Views
Impact on EU agriculture of Falconer’s draft modalities. DG for Agriculture and Rural Development European Commission. Measuring the impact of Falconer’s proposal…. … by using of the OECD Aglink model… Partial equilibrium, large country and product coverage Model available to co-operators
E N D
Impact on EU agriculture of Falconer’s draft modalities DG for Agriculture and Rural Development European Commission
Measuring the impact of Falconer’s proposal… • … by using of the OECD Aglink model… • Partial equilibrium, large country and product coverage • Model available to co-operators • But weak for trade simulations • … and improved its EU trade component • Replacing exogenous imports with import equations • Developing import equations for high and low quality for beef and poultry
Description of the model used • The OECD AGLINK model… • Partial equilibrium • Models explicitly 14 countries/regions, mainly in the OECD area • Covers the majority of products of temperate climate
Description of the model used • … and the FAO COSIMO component… • Adding 32 developing countries • Planning to cover more products, mainly tropical • ... result in a large model of world agriculture • 7380 equations provide results for production, consumption, imports , exports, domestic and world market prices • Results are provided for each year of the projection period (2005-2014), allowing for adjustment path
Scenario 1: The EU’s offer of October 2005 • Export competition • export subsidies to be phased-out • Domestic support • 70 % cuts for EU, 60 % cuts for US in AMS and total support • 80 % cut in de minimis • new blue box disciplines to come from disciplines in support price gap • 5% ceiling part of the framework agreement as recognition of reform • Market access • thresholds at 30/60/90, cuts at 35/45/50/60 • flexibility in lower band, formula for TRQ expansion, Deviation for SePs: 50% (mid-point of EU sliding scale)
Scenario 2: Falconer’s proposal of 8 February 2008 • Export competition • export subsidies to be phased-out • Domestic support • 70 % AMS cuts for EU, 60 % cuts for US • 80% OTDS cut for EU, 70% cut for the US • 50 % cut in de minimis • new blue box disciplines and cap • Market access • thresholds at 20/50/75, middle range cuts at 50/57.5/63.5/69.5 • SePs: deviation of 2/3rd, 4% of partially allocated DC
Scenario 3: G20 full proposal • Export competition • export subsidies to be phased-out • Domestic support (not included) • 80 % AMS cuts for EU, 70 % cuts for US • 80% OTDS cut for EU, 75% cut for the US • D.m.: same as overall • new blue box disciplines, cap and reduction • Market access • thresholds at 20/50/75, cuts at 45/55/65/75 • SePs: deviation of 30%, 6% of DC of full sector
Caveats of analysis • Domestic support • positive impact from US domestic support commitments on cereals, cotton and oilseeds missing • Export subsidies • positive impact from STE, export credit and food aid disciplines on cereals and dairy missing • Market access • full tariff cut scenario will affect all players and markets, which means substantial potential gains for EU exports
Conclusions • Overall impact of Falconer’s proposal not significantly different from EU’s offer; • New medium-term projections for prices and exchange rate will play a key role; • Impact underestimates EU’s potential gains stemming from increased MA for EU products.