scholarly journals Impacts of supply-side climate change mitigation practices and trade policy regimes under dietary transition: the case of European agriculture

Author(s):  
Francesco Clora ◽  
Wusheng Yu ◽  
Gino Baudry ◽  
Luis Costa

Abstract The EU’s Green Deal proposal and Farm to Fork strategy explicitly call for both demand and supply measures to reduce food system emissions. While research clearly illustrates the importance of dietary transitions, impacts of potential supply-side measures are not well understood in relation to competitiveness concerns and leakage effects. This study assesses trade and GHG emission impacts of two supply-side mitigation strategies in the EU (plus UK and Switzerland), against a 2050 baseline featuring healthy/sustainable diets adopted by European consumers. To capture potential leakage effects arising from changing external trade flows, two supply-side strategies (intensification and extensification) are assessed against three trade policy regimes, resulting in six scenarios formulated with detailed inputs from the EUCalc model and simulated with a purported-designed CGE model. Our results show that intensification, while improving the EU+2’s external trade balance, does not reduce its emissions, compared to the baseline. In contrast, extensification leads to a substantial emission abatement that augments reductions from the assumed dietary transition embodied in the baseline, resulting in a combined 31.1% of agricultural emission reduction in EU+2 during 2014-2050. However, this is at the expense of worsening agrifood trade balance amounting to US$25 billion, and significant carbon leakages at 48%, implying that half of the EU+2’s emission reduction are cancelled out by rising emissions elsewhere. Furthermore, implementing the EU+2’s prospective regional trade agreements leads to increased EU emissions; however, a border carbon adjustment by the EU+2 can improve its trade balance and partially shifting mitigation burdens to other countries, but ultimately only marginally reduce global emissions (and carbon leakage). Finally, different trade and emission effects are identified between the crop and livestock sectors, pointing to the desirability of a mixed agriculture system with intensified livestock sector and extensified crop agriculture in EU+2 that balances emission reduction goals and competitiveness concerns.

2019 ◽  
Vol 6 (1-2019) ◽  
pp. 27-46
Author(s):  
Hubert Zimmermann

Brexit is a huge challenge with enormous consequences for future UK trade policy. But it will also have an impact on the common external trade policy of the EU, and, thus, on one of the core components of EU foreign policy. This contribution analyses Britain’s role in the formulation of EU trade policy and the likely repercussions of its departure, particularly regarding the effectiveness of the EU as trade negotiator and the preferences it represents internationally. I use three theoretical lenses to address these questions: the first lens focuses on likely changes in the material power and interests of the EU; the second looks at the institutional consequences of Brexit for the formulation of EU foreign trade policy, and the third addresses potential changes in external perceptions of the EU as a trade power. It will be argued that neither the effectiveness of the EU as global trade power, nor the substance of its interests, will change substantially.


Ekonomika ◽  
2004 ◽  
Vol 65 ◽  
Author(s):  
Algirdas Miškinis

The task of the study was to identify the impact of EU membership on Lithuanian trade in food products. The author has carried out an analysis of the inevitable and likely changes which will affect Lithuanian trade policy. terms of trade within the EU and the third countries, export and import volumes, and social consequences of these changes. The conclusions are based on a comparison of the existing Lithuanian and EU tariffs for key items of Lithuanian foodstuffs exports and imports.


Author(s):  
Johan Adriaensen

In 1958, the European Economic Community was formed as a customs union with a common external tariff. From then on, the Common Commercial Policy—also known as the European Union’s (EU) trade policy—served as the interface between the increasingly integrated common market and its external trade partners. Like the creation of the single market, contemporary trade policy has long transcended discussions about tariffs and quotas at the border and has focused increasingly on the impediments to trade caused by regulatory divergences. Whether they concern agricultural subsidies or cultural protections, rules on public procurement or food standards, insofar as a regulation discriminates against exporters, it can potentially be part of a trade negotiation. The evolving nature of trade policy has triggered a redefinition of both the scope of the EU’s exclusive competencies as well as the procedures to govern this policy domain. The central actor in EU trade policy is the European Commission, which is the designated negotiator for external trade agreements. Whereas member states always played a crucial role in overseeing such negotiations in the Council, the European Parliament has only taken up a position of power since 2009. Beyond securing market access abroad and protecting domestic sectors at home, post-material values have come to feature more prominently in the balancing act of contemporary trade discussions. This has galvanized a far wider range of societal actors to lobby the EU institutions in order to tilt the balance in their favor. Complicating matters even further, the EU conducts a large part of its foreign policy through the Common Commercial Policy. Contrary to most other instruments of the EU’s external action, trade policy is an exclusive competency of the EU. Fostering development, promoting stability, providing humanitarian aid, and the promotion and enforcement of human rights and sustainable development commitments are but a few of the many objectives pursued via trade policy. However, there are clear limitations to the fungibility of the EU’s large market power for foreign policy objectives. It should therefore be clear that the literature on the Common Commercial Policy is extremely diverse. Situated at the nexus of international political economy, regulatory governance, and foreign policy, it has become a well-studied policy domain through a great variety of theoretical and disciplinary lenses. The prominence of trade scholarship in EU studies is unlikely to change soon as developments at the international level, where the Western liberal order is under increasing pressure, but also domestically, where the contestation of several trade negotiations and the position of trade policy within the EU’s broader external action, are set to animate future debates.


2021 ◽  
Vol 58 (2) ◽  
pp. 219-233
Author(s):  
Valerie D’Erman

The European Union’s (EU) external trade policy has long been championed by scholars and practitioners alike as one of the great accomplishments for European integration. The UK’s exit from the EU in 2020 offers many precedents; one of which is the current negotiation of a trade deal between the EU and a former important member of the single market. This paper outlines the trade negotiation process between the EU and the UK and the resulting Trade and Cooperation Agreement (TCA) against the backdrop of the COVID-19 pandemic to forecast the broader potential evolution of EU trade policy. The increasing visibility of nationalist and protectionist statements in various instances of political communication suggests a major shift in multilateral norms away from the liberal-international emphasis on heightened trade and interdependence. The implications for the EU external trade policy are a re-direction of efforts toward internal single market cohesion, and a more cautious approach to future potential trade agreements.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document