Market-oriented Trading System Research Articles

Legal Issues on Subsidies of The Agricultural Products on WTO Frame Work

The WTO was founded with the main objective of building a fair and market-oriented trading system. Fair trade means free and no intervention from anywhere to regulate the market. This applies to all sectors of the economy but especially concerns the agricultural sector which is the basis of a country's defense. Various efforts have been made by the WTO in terms of making trade regulations in the agricultural sector which of course aims to realize this goal. It is well known that in order to stabilize food prices, ensure abundant food production, guarantee farmers' basic income, and in general strengthen the agricultural segment of the national economy, the government has implemented various assistance in the form of assistance to agricultural product producers in the country. This assistance is called a subsidy which can take various forms, namely in the form of tariff barriers, non-tariff barriers, tax levies, positive regulations and direct subsidies to both agricultural producers and exporters. In this study, the authors examine the legal issues regarding subsidies for agricultural products within the WTO framework. The main issue in this legal research is how the legal issues regarding subsidies for agricultural products within the WTO framework. The main objective of this legal research is to find out the legal issues regarding subsidies for agricultural products within the WTO framework. This legal research is a normative legal research in which legal sources are collected through literature study. A relatively detailed review of the content of legal issues regarding subsidies for agricultural products in the WTO framework is discussed in this paper. The results of this study indicate that agriculture is one of the important trade negotiations in the WTO through the rules contained in the AoA. Agreements to implement commitments from disciplines in the AoA, from WTO member countries, are expected to be reached by both developing and developed countries

Free Trade, Ottoman Empire, and Mercantilism

This paper analyzes how free trade and mercantilism had confronted to each other in the Ottoman Empire and how free trade in the Ottoman Empire had yielded to mercantilism. It particularly, analyzes the case of Aleppo a trading city in the Ottoman Empire. Aleppo evidences that how its liberal and free market oriented trading system had failed and why the protectionist trading system espoused by the some of the major European countries had been triumphant over the free trade regime of Aleppo. The concluding message of this paper is that free trade can succeed only when it is coupled with the institutions of democracy and market based rules. This paper is basically a review of the book by BRUCE MASTERS, THE ORIGINS OF WESTERN ECONOMIC DOMINANCE IN THE MIDDLE EAST: MERCANTILISM AND THE ISLAMIC ECONOMY IN ALEPPO, 1600-1750, (New York, New York University Press, 1988) pp. xvii, 240.

Non-Trade Concerns and Agriculture in a Post-Doha Environment: Thinking outside the Green Box

International agricultural trade regulation is once again at the heart of the Doha Development Round's collapse. Even if a deal had been reached on the basis of the Draft Modalities on Agriculture, it is not clear that a fundamental problem would be resolved: the relationship between trade and non-trade concerns, crucially the protection of the environment. Currently, members can use domestic support measures for non-trade objectives, but only if they do not impinge significantly on free trade in agricultural products; an ethos reiterated in the Draft Modalities. However, if the ultimate goal of the Agreement on Agriculture is to reduce agriculture support and protection over time so that distortions to the market are removed, it is difficult to reconcile this goal whilst the Agreement simultaneously allows members to use trade-distorting measures to support non-trade objectives. Even if one accepts that the Agreement on Agriculture's goal is freer trade and not free trade per se, this inconsistency is not removed, as a decision still needs to be made regarding what level of ‘protection’ is acceptable at any given time during the operation of the existing rules. Despite suggested changes to the levels of protection in the Draft Modalities, there seems no indication what this acceptable level might be. Until a decision is made to this effect, a conflict exists within the Agreement and the current tension between members will remain. This article argues that the problem is not the existence of a balance between removing trade barriers whilst protecting non-trade concerns, but rather the theoretical approach driving conclusions about how that balance should be achieved. In addition to moving towards a general commitment to the reduction in agricultural support measures, the Agreement on Agriculture also emphasises the need to achieve a ‘ fair and market-oriented trading system’ ‘having regard to non-trade concerns’. Current thinking assumes that fairness is achieved by interpreting rules on the basis of an economic efficiency rationale (free trade): this approach is not inevitable, however, but only reflects contemporary views of trade rules' purpose and how they should be interpreted in the light of that purpose. As our views of trade rules' purpose changes, so the theoretical underpinnings driving the rules' interpretation evolve. This article proposes such an evolution.