Policy Innovations
IDEAS INNOVATORS EVENTS ABOUT US SUPPORT US
 
Ideas
  Search Engine
  Audio/Video
  Innovations
  Commentary
  Briefings
  Policy Library
  Blogs
  Newsfeeds
 
 

SEARCH CORE NETWORK

This search includes our partner sites:

SEARCH OUR SITE

 
 

NEWSLETTER SIGN-UP

Please enter your email address to subscribe to our email newsletter.
 
 
 
RSS FEED
  Subscribe to our RSS Feed.
> More

 
 
MOST EMAILED PAGES
1. Yoga Bends the Globalization Stereotype
2. The Race to the Middle
3. Free Trade with a Human Face
4. The Perfect Storm of a Global Recession
5. The Digital War on Poverty
 
Print Page Mail Page
     
 

Fairness, Export Subsidies, and the Fair Trade Movement

By Mathias Risse

 
 

December 7, 2006

Mathias Risse
Mathias Risse

For years, agricultural subsidies in the US, the EU, and Japan have been summoned for debate. Their existence is widely regarded as indicating the unwillingness of these countries to design the trading system for the benefit of the poor. Even globalization proponents target subsidies in that spirit. According to Wolf (2004),

total assistance to rich country farmers was $311 billion in 2001, six times as much as all development assistance, indeed more than the GDP of Sub-Saharan Africa. In 2000, the EU provided $913 for each cow and $8 to each Sub-Saharan African. The Japanese, more generous still, though only to cows, provided $2,700 for each one and just $1.47 to each African. Not to be outdone, the US spent $10.7 million a day on cotton and $3.1 million a day on all aid to Sub-Saharan Africa. (p 215)

Wolf concludes that “the priorities shown here are obscene.” Similarly, Oxfam accuses developed countries of applying double-standards: while they insist that developing nations liberalize trade, they continue to protect their own economies. “Nowhere,” Oxfam says,

are the double standards of industrialized-country governments more apparent than in agriculture. Total subsidies to domestic farmers in these countries amount to more than $1 billion a day. These subsidies, the benefits of which accrue almost entirely to the wealthiest farmers, cause massive environmental damage. They also generate over-production. The resulting surpluses are dumped on world markets with the help of yet more subsidies, financed by taxpayers and consumers. (Oxfam (2002), p 11)

The same Oxfam report praises the Fair Trade movement as one of the most powerful responses to problems facing commodity producers. It aims to give consumers an opportunity to use their purchasing power to tilt the balance, however slightly, in favor of the poor (p 165). The view in the Oxfam report is widespread: support for Fair Trade is called for, agricultural subsidies are unjustifiable. Yet there are curious similarities between these scenarios.

By Malgorzata Kurjanska & Mathias Risse 

Download: Fairness, Export Subsidies, and the Fair Trade Movement (DOC, 116.50 K)

 
 

RELATED

Biography:
Mathias Risse
 
Keywords:
Ethics, Globalization, Trade
 
Regions:
Americas, Asia, Europe
 
Countries:
Japan, United States
 
 
 
INNOVATIONS
  Click here to submit an innovative idea.
 
     
 
BLOG
Credit: Krzysztof J. Kokowicz, Lublin, Poland (First Place, Carnegie Council Poster Contest, Global Social Justice Category).
FAIRER GLOBALIZATION
Reflections on articles and events related to Policy Innovations.
 
 

AUDIO / VIDEO

10/07/08
Heather Grady, Norine Kennedy, Jill Kubit, Peter Poschen, Michael Renner, Sean Sweeney
Green Jobs
 
10/07/08
Leif Wenar
Shaking the Resource Curse
 
09/03/08
Thomas Pogge
Pharmaceutical Innovation and Essential Medicines
 
08/26/08
Paul Collier
Voluntary Standards and the Resource Curse
 
08/19/08
Hans Rosling
Debunking Third World Myths
 

PODCAST
Carnegie Council Podcast
Subscribe to
Policy Innovations audio via the Carnegie Council Podcast.


 
   SITE MAP    HELP    LEGAL