Abstract
One common assumption about international trade law is that its main function as a regulatory system is to reduce the occurrence of trade distortions. Another related assumption is that the development of the contemporary regime of international trade, historically, has been driven by one single overarching doctrine, the principle of trade liberalisation. This article seeks to dispute these assumptions by showing that the contemporary regime of international trade is, in fact, the product of interaction involving three closely related but analytically distinct doctrines: the principle of market stabilization, the doctrine of freer trade, and the principle of food security. Proceeding from this starting point, this article aims to map out an alternative way of approaching the history of international trade law, by exploring how the interaction between these three doctrines has influenced the construction of the contemporary international trade regime, how each of them has come to be defined at different moments, and how these definitions have changed and evolved over time. In doing so, it also offers an alternative understanding of the institutional reality of international trade regulation by placing at the centre of the last seven decades of international trade law history the question of agriculture and by including FAO, UNCTAD, and international commodity agreements alongside the GATT and the WTO.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
- 1.
Gathii (2011).
- 2.
This was exemplified by the public debates in 2009 and 2011 between Olivier De Schutter, in his capacity of Special Rapporteur on Right to Food, and Pascal Lamy, in his capacity of Director of the WTO. For further background and summary, see Fakhri (2015), p. 68.
- 3.
WT/MIN(13)/DEC (11 December 2013).
- 4.
The five agricultural issues identified at Bali were the following: (1) export subsidies and other policies known collectively as export competition; (2) tariff rate quota (TRQ) administration focused on managing persistently under-filled quotas; (3) a temporary peace clause for a developing country’s above-market purchases of commodities for food-security stockholding programs; (4) a proposed list of green-box-eligible general services of particular interest to developing countries; and (5) cotton, in response to a proposal from four African members.
- 5.
WT/MIN(13)/38 - WT/L/913 (11 December 2013). See also WT/L/939 (28 November 2014).
- 6.
WTO Agreement on Agriculture, Annex II(3).
- 7.
WTO Agreement on Agriculture, Article 6.
- 8.
https://www.wto.org/english/news_e/news14_e/dgra_13nov14_e.htm. See WT/L/939 (28 November 2014); WT/L/940 (28 November 2014).
- 9.
For a timeline tracking these ideas in WTO negotiations (2002–2014) see: http://www.fao.org/3/a-i3867e.pdf; https://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/agric_e/factsheet_agng_e.htm.
- 10.
The countries in this group are the following: Antigua and Barbuda, Barbados, Belize, Benin, Bolivia, Botswana, Côte d’Ivoire, China, Congo, Cuba, Dominica, Dominican Republic, El Salvador, Grenada, Guatemala, Guyana, Haiti, Honduras, India, Indonesia, Jamaica, Kenya, Korea, Republic of, Madagascar, Mauritius, Mongolia, Mozambique, Nicaragua, Nigeria, Pakistan, Panama, Peru, Philippines, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Senegal, Sri Lanka, Suriname, Tanzania, Trinidad and Tobago, Turkey, Uganda, Venezuela, Zambia, and Zimbabwe. On the matter of food security, India and China seem to be taking the lead, see Press Trust of India, India, China to Highlight Food Security Issues at WTO Meet (30 July 2015), http://www.ndtv.com/india-news/india-china-to-highlight-food-security-issues-at-wto-meet-1201891.
- 11.
The Cairns group, led by Australia and sometimes Argentina or Canada, formed in 1986 at the advent of the Uruguay Round. It was primarily a response to the accelerating trade subsidies of the European Union's Common Agricultural Policy and the United States’ Export Enhancement Program. It is a diverse coalition bringing together 20 developed and developing countries from North and South America, Africa and the Asia-Pacific region. The group accounts for over 25% of the world’s agricultural exports. The countries in this group are the following: Argentina, Australia, Bolivia, Brazil, Canada, Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, Guatemala, Indonesia, Malaysia, New Zealand, Pakistan, Paraguay, Peru, the Philippines, South Africa, Thailand, Uruguay, and Vietnam.
- 12.
The G-20 Coalition is highly heterogeneous group of 23 developing countries led by Brazil and sometimes India with divergent interests. These countries are pressing for ambitious reforms of agriculture in developed countries with some flexibility for developing countries. It formed around the 2003 Cancún Ministerial Conference in response to US and EU proposals. Generally, the group is seeking restrictions in subsidies predominantly used by developed countries. The countries are the following: Argentina, Bolivia, Brazil, Chile, China, Cuba, Ecuador, Egypt, Guatemala, India, Indonesia, Mexico, Nigeria, Pakistan, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, South Africa, Tanzania, Thailand, Uruguay, Venezuela, and Zimbabwe.
- 13.
- 14.
- 15.
- 16.
- 17.
WT/MIN(15)/DEC (19 December 2015).
- 18.
Joint Ministerial Statement On Next Steps in WTO Agriculture Reform by the European Union and Members of the Cairns Group (9 October 2017), http://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/docs/2017/october/tradoc_156256.pdf.
- 19.
Kanth (2017); see also https://www.wto.org/english/news_e/news17_e/mc11_13dec17_e.htm.
- 20.
- 21.
- 22.
- 23.
Margulis (2013), p. 53.
- 24.
The preamble of the Agreement on Agriculture states: ‘commitments under the reform programme should be made in an equitable way among all Members, having regard to non-trade concerns, including food security…’.
- 25.
Trebilcock and Pue (2015), p. 233.
- 26.
- 27.
- 28.
- 29.
What I mean by doctrines are systems of principles, rules, and procedures intended to implement the ideas derived from social demands, expert advice, and delegates’ political positions. This approach is heavily influenced by food regime analysis. The literature on this approach is extensive, see most recently Friedmann (2009), McMichael (2009). See also Smythe (2014), p. 471, Orford (2015), p. 1, Cohen (2015), p. 101.
- 30.
Fakhri (2014a), p. 75. Market stabilization is a term that was more popular after 1945. During the time of the League of Nations, the same ideas and debates were in the form of industrial policy (rather than commercial practice), and people employed the term ‘rationalization’.
- 31.
Fakhri (2014a), p. 75.
- 32.
Fakhri (2015), p. 68, Rayfuse and Weisfelt (2012). The term ‘food security’ is now more contested than ever especially with the prevalence of concepts such the right to food, food justice, and food sovereignty. I leave it open as to whether the concept of food security makes any room for transformative social change, see Holt Giménez and Shattuck (2011), p. 109.
- 33.
- 34.
Since my study is on public stockholding, which is regulated by the AoA, I do not address how the WTO affects agricultural production and food security more broadly through other agreements such as SPS, TBT, CVD, TRIPS, and GATS.
- 35.
For an account of food security in GATT negotiating rounds see Margulis (2017), p. 25.
- 36.
Fakhri (2014a).
- 37.
In previous work, I suggest that one could even start with the late nineteenth century, see Fakhri (2014a). In that account, however, I end the story in the early 1980s. This is an opportunity to bring my historical account up to the present situation, after Bali.
- 38.
Fakhri (2014a), pp. 156–157. The most influential texts were Economic, Financial and Transit Department, Commercial Policy in the Interwar Period: International Proposals and National Policies, 1942; Economic, Financial and Transit Department, Industrialization and Foreign Trade, 1945.
- 39.
Staples (2003), p. 495 (497–498). Boyd Orr would later receive the Nobel Peace Prize.
- 40.
FAO (1946). ‘Food security’ as a distinct term would not gain prevalence until the 1972 FAO World Food Conference, but its origins can be found in this text.
- 41.
FAO (1946), p. 4.
- 42.
- 43.
- 44.
Boyd Orr (1966), p. 173.
- 45.
Shaw (2007), pp. 15–57.
- 46.
Trentmann (2006), p. 13 (32).
- 47.
L/301 (22 December 1954).
- 48.
Note By Secretariat, TRE/W/17 (7 September 1993), para. 16. It does this by referencing ECOSOC Resolution 30 (IV) (28 March 1947). This resolution was passed in response to the pending status of the ITO.
- 49.
BISD 3S/239.
- 50.
United Nations Economic and Social Council, Interim Co-ordinating Committee for International Commodity Arrangements, March 28, 1947, Res. 30 (IV).
- 51.
BISD 3S/34-5.
- 52.
BISD 3S/39.
- 53.
- 54.
The Marshall Plan turned ‘food producing developing countries into importers of American wheat surpluses’, Trentmann (2006), p. 13 (34–5).
- 55.
Winders (2009), pp. 90–92. See also ibid., pp. 110–124.
- 56.
Matusow (1967), pp. 79–109.
- 57.
USDS (1945).
- 58.
United States Department of Agriculture, A Post-War Foreign Trade Program for United States Agriculture, 1945.
- 59.
Haberler et al. (1958). See McMahon, The WTO Agreement on Agriculture: A Commentary, 2006, pp. 4–6, Josling/Tangermann/Warley, Agriculture in the GATT, 1996, pp. 35–41.
- 60.
L/77 (5 December 1957), (BISD 6S/18).
- 61.
Eslava et al. (2017).
- 62.
Orford (2015), p. 1.
- 63.
Haberler et al. (1958), pp. 35–41.11.
- 64.
Haberler et al. (1958), p. 7.
- 65.
BISD 5S/87; United Nations General Assembly, Establishment of the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development as an Organ of the General Assembly, December 30, 1964, Res. 1995 (XIX), para. 23(a).
- 66.
Haberler et al. (1958), pp. 72–79. This allayed fears that ICAs would be used to raise prices to the benefit of exporters.
- 67.
Fakhri (2014a), pp. 178–179.
- 68.
Fakhri (2014a), p. 179. This new development theory manifested through a variety of different policies. The main idea behind the export promotion policy was that a stable, global, and liberal agricultural market would provide developing countries with the requisite amount of revenue they needed to invest in more remunerative sectors like industrial production. This plan, however, depended on active cooperation from the principal agricultural importers, namely the US and EECs, especially in what concerned the reduction of their domestic agricultural support and lowering of their agricultural tariffs.
- 69.
‘The most satisfactory measure of the degree of agricultural protectionism in such [complicated support] schemes would be a comparison between the total return actually received by the domestic farmer for his production and the return which would correspond to the ruling world price.’ Haberler et al. (1958), p. 9.
- 70.
GATT, ‘Expansion of International Trade: Decision of 17 November 1958 and Appointment of Committees’ L/939 (27 November 1958), p. 2.
- 71.
See, e.g., GATT, ‘First Report of Committee II on Expansion of Trade’ Com.II/5 (16 March 1959), p. 2; ‘Measuring the Degree of Agricultural Protection: Note By the Delegation of the United States’ Com.II/16 (23 September 1959); GATT, ‘Measuring the Degree of Agricultural Protection: Note By the Delegation of the United States’ Com.II/16 (23 September 1959).
- 72.
GATT, ‘Second Report of Committee II’, Spec (60)99/Rev. 1 (13 May 1960), p. 3; https://www.wto.org/english/thewto_e/whatis_e/tif_e/agrm3_e.htm (Under ‘What is Distortion’): Fakhri (2014a), p.179.
- 73.
GATT, ‘Second Report of Committee II’, Spec (60)99/Rev. 1 (13 May 1960), p. 6.
- 74.
Haberler et al. (1958), p. 11.
- 75.
L/1771 (24 May 1962); EEC Council: Regulation No 25.
- 76.
Instrument No 80 (16 July 1962); EEC Regulation No 49 of the Council (29 June 1962).
- 77.
GATT, Trends in Agricultural Trade: Report of Committee II on Consultations with the European Economic Community (1962) [which can also be found as L/1910 (13 November 1962)].
- 78.
L/1902 (9 November 1962); SR.2016 (15 November 1962). The EEC statement that Contracting Parties were responding to is L/1887 (31 October 1962).
- 79.
TN.64/WSpec(63)301 (18 November 1963).
- 80.
TN.64/WSpec(63)301 (18 November 1963).
- 81.
- 82.
Spec (63) 301 (18 November 1963); TN.64/23/Rev.1 (4 May 1964).
- 83.
TN.64/AGR/2 (11 March 1964); TN.64/23/Rev.1 (4 May 1964).
- 84.
GATT/994 (30 June 1967); ‘Agriculture Within World Trade: Address by Eric Wyndham White’ INT(67)212 (11 September 1967).
- 85.
- 86.
Article XXXVI(5).
- 87.
- 88.
Commonwealth Economic Committee, Grain Crops: A Review, Issue 12 (1967), pp. 139–143; Commonwealth Economic Committee, Grain Crops: A Review, Issue 13 (1969), p. 160, O’Connor (1982), p. 225.
- 89.
The 2012 Food Assistance Convention is the latest iteration of the 1967 food aid treaty.
- 90.
Davies and Woodward (2014), p. 376.
- 91.
FAO (1954). This was after an unsuccessful attempt by Australia to pass a new provision within GATT to address the non-commercial disposal of agricultural surplus (BISD 5S/87).
- 92.
Meunier (2005), pp. 74–101.
- 93.
In fact, today, cotton remains one of the few commodities singled out as its own agenda item for the Doha Development Round and was part of the Bali Package.
- 94.
- 95.
Rietkerk (2016), p. 788.
- 96.
Sen’s prize work was the Freedom From Hunger Campaign (1960–70) and the 1963 World Food Congress. See Singer (1962), p. 69.
- 97.
Shaw (2007), pp. 77–84.
- 98.
FAO (1962), p. 25.
- 99.
FAO (1962), p. 41.
- 100.
Johnson (1973). Johnson’s tract reflected a rising movement within US agricultural toward more policies linked more to market prices instead of price supports and production control. In 1973, President Richard Nixon attempted to phase out price supports all together. Even though he was unsuccessful the Agriculture and Consumer Protection Act introduced more market-oriented system of support. See Winders (2009), pp. 82–83.
- 101.
Josling et al. (1996), pp. 74–75, 87.
- 102.
- 103.
TIME, ‘The World Food Crisis’, Vol. 104 Issue 20, p. 94 (11 November 1974): ‘Harsh winters, droughts or typhoons cut output in the Soviet Union, Argentina, Australia, the Philippines and India. Off the coast of Peru, a change in ocean currents and overfishing decimated the anchovy catch, a major source of protein for animal feed. In Southeast Asia and parts of Africa, the peanut crop—providing mainly animal feed and cooking oil—fell far below normal. All told, the world's food output dropped for the first time in 20 years, down 33 million tons, from 1,200 million tons.’.
- 104.
The Sahel covers parts of Senegal, Mauritania, Mali, Burkina Faso, Algeria, Niger, Nigeria, Chad, Sudan, and Eritrea.
- 105.
Sen (1981).
- 106.
Sen (1981), pp. 135–136.
- 107.
Alston and Tomaševski (1984).
- 108.
George (1976).
- 109.
Sen (1981).
- 110.
Friedmann (1993), p. 29 (40).
- 111.
The common account of the 1973 oil shock is that Arab oil-producing countries imposed an embargo through OPEC in order to punish the countries like the United States and Netherlands for their support of Israel in the Yom Kippur/October war against Egypt. But recent scholarship suggests that the price of oil may have been more effected by other factors such as: the financial instability created by the end of the Breton words system, the global rise of primary commodity prices, nationalizations and spreading fear of natural resource exhaustion, US oil production peaks, and the rise of environmental concerns. See Garavini (2011), p. 473.
- 112.
Ruggie (1982), p. 379.
- 113.
Stephey (2008).
- 114.
- 115.
- 116.
The conference was a blow to FAO. It was not granted the authority to lead on any of the proposals and was relegated to the margins by proposals for new food institutions. This reflected the little confidence that the global policy-making community had in FAO’s ability to address questions on a global scale and the Soviet aversion to FAO which the USSR thought to be a Western stronghold. Developing countries had proposed the conference be held under the auspices of UNCTAD. See Weiss and Jordan (1976), p. 104.
- 117.
Universal Declaration on the Eradication of Hunger and Malnutrition, para. 11: ‘All States should strive to the utmost to readjust, where appropriate, their agricultural policies to give priority to food production, recognizing in this connection the interrelationship between the world food problem and international trade. In the determination of attitudes towards farm support programmes for domestic food production, developed countries should take into account, as far as possible, the interest of the food-exporting developing countries, in order to avoid detrimental effect on their exports. Moreover, all countries should co-operate to devise effective steps to deal with the problem of stabilizing world markets and promoting equitable and remunerative prices, where appropriate through international arrangements, to improve access to markets through reduction or elimination of tariff and non-tariff barriers on the products of interest to the developing countries, to substantially increase the export earnings of these countries, to contribute to the diversification of their exports, and apply to them, in the multilateral trade negotiations, the principles as agreed upon in the Tokyo Declaration, including the concept of non-reciprocity and more favourable treatment.’.
- 118.
UN (1975), p. 36.
- 119.
Shaw (2007), pp. 155–158.
- 120.
MTN/GR/W/1 (27 May 1975).
- 121.
MTN/GR/W/1 (28 May 1975).
- 122.
MTN/GR/1 (10 June 1975); MTN/GR/W/3 (24 June 1975).
- 123.
BISD 26S/84; BISD 26/91 (1980).
- 124.
Shaw (2007), p. 125.
- 125.
United Nations General Assembly, Declaration for the Establishment of a New International Economic Order, May 1, 1974, Res. 3201 (S-VII); United Nations General Assembly, Programme for Action on the Establishment of a New International Economic Order, May 1, 1974, Res. 3202 (S-VI).
- 126.
United Nations General Assembly, Declaration for the Establishment of a New International Economic Order, May 1, 1974, Res. 3201 (S-VII); United Nations General Assembly, Programme for Action on the Establishment of a New International Economic Order, May 1, 1974, Res. 3202 (S-VI).
- 127.
Fakhri (2014a), p. 204.
- 128.
- 129.
Weiss (2005), p. 198.
- 130.
- 131.
- 132.
Fakhri (2014a), pp. 200–205.
- 133.
Winders (2009), pp. 157–158.
- 134.
McMichael (2005), p. 265.
- 135.
UN (1975), p. 36. See also U.N. Commission on Transnational Corporations, Transnational Corporations: Issues Involved in the Formulation of a Code of Conduct, U.N. Doc. E/C.1011976117 (1976).
- 136.
- 137.
See for e.g. CG.18/W/58 (16 September 1981); CG.18/W/59/Rev.1 (20 January 1982); CG.18/W/68 (8 April 1982).
- 138.
Moyer (1993), p. 95.
- 139.
Echols (1982), p. 109.
- 140.
GATT/1328 (29 November 1982).
- 141.
- 142.
GATT/1328 (29 November 1982).
- 143.
A global commitment to freer trade in agriculture did not solve problems of the time. But the tense meeting of the newly formed Committee on Trade in Agriculture clarified all the different positions at play within this particular commitment to freer trade. See Josling et al. (1996), pp. 111–132.
- 144.
MIN. DEC (20/09/1986).
- 145.
Schmidt (2015).
- 146.
Draft Final Act Embodying the Results of the Uruguay Round of Multilateral Trade Negotiations, MTN/TNC/W/FA (20 December 1991).
- 147.
Ingersent et al. (1993).
- 148.
- 149.
Ballenger and Mabbs-Zeno (1992), p. 264.
- 150.
DeRosa (1992), p. 755 (759).
- 151.
Hopkins (1993), p. 143.
- 152.
- 153.
- 154.
Paarlberg (1989), p. 39 (41).
- 155.
Canada Library of Parliament Research Branch, GATT, the Dunkel Report and Canadian Agricultural Policies (Library of Parliament, Research Branch, 1995.
- 156.
Thomas et al. (1994), p. A42.
- 157.
- 158.
- 159.
Nanjundaswamy (1993), p. 1334.
- 160.
- 161.
McMichael (1993), p. 198.
- 162.
Fakhri (2011), p. 64.
- 163.
Throughout these talks there has also always been discussions over defining nontrade concerns and providing special and differential treatment for developing countries.
- 164.
‘Public Stockholding for Food Security Purposes,’ Annex II, Paragraph 3, Agreement on.
- 165.
Annex II, Paragraph 3, Fn 5, Agreement on Agriculture.
- 166.
Article 6, Agreement on Agriculture. As a result above-market public stockholding gets calculated as a Contracting Member’s total aggregate measurement of support (AMS). The Agreement on Agriculture reflects Contracting States commitment to reduce domestic support that falls within AMS calculations. This means that if a government purchases foodstuffs at a price that exceeds a certain threshold of fair market price, then the doctrine of freer trade is triggered, which demands a gradual but inevitable reduction of support.
- 167.
See also Clapp (2015).
- 168.
I leave discussions of regional trade agreements aside for now. For further background on this subject, see, however, Ewing-Chow et al. (2015), p. 292.
- 169.
There is some evidence that there was some (albeit unclear) political will to this idea since in the draft Doha Round Modalities of December 2008 ICAs were put forward a way to stabilize agricultural export prices. TN/AG/W/4/Rev.4 (6 December 2008), paras. 95–102, https://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/agric_e/agchairtxt_dec08_a_e.pdf.
- 170.
See, e.g., the International Assessment of Agricultural Knowledge, Science and Technology for Development was an intergovernmental process (2005–2007), under the co-sponsorship of the FAO, GEF, UNDP, UNEP, UNESCO, the World Bank, and WHO.
- 171.
It may be that we must reconsider now how food has become an international issue. For further development of this argument, see Orford (2015).
- 172.
UNCTAD (2013), p. 11.
- 173.
Wise (2014).
References
Alston P, Tomaševski K (eds) (1984) The right to food. Martinus Nijhoff, The Hague
Anania G (2013) Agricultural export restrictions and the WTO: what options do policy-makers have for promoting food security? report available at http://www.ictsd.org/downloads/2013/11/agricultural-export-restrictions-and-the-wto-what-options-do-policy-makers.pdf
Anderson K (2010) Agricultural policies: past, present, and prospective under Doha. In: Karapinar B, Häberli C (eds) Food crises and the WTO: world trade forum. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 167–186
Aziz S (1975) Hunger, politics and markets: the real issues in the food crisis. New York University Press, New York
Ballenger N, Mabbs-Zeno C (1992) Treating food security and food aid issues at the GATT. Food Policy 17(4):264
Boyd Orr J (1966) As I recall: the 1880s to the 1960s. MacGibbon & Kee, London
Chimni BS (1987) International commodity agreements: a legal study. Croom Helm, London
Clapp J (2015) Food security and international trade: unpacking disputed narratives. FAO Press, Rome
Cohen AJ (2015) The law and political economy of contemporary food: some reflections on the local and the small. Law Contemp Probl 78:101
Corea G (1992) Taming commodity markets: the integrated programme and the common fund in UNCTAD. Manchester University Press, Manchester
Dasgupta R (1993) Subsidies, patents and market access in Dunkel draft. Econ Pol Wk 28(18):855
Davies M, Woodward R (2014) International organizations: a companion. Edward Elgar, Cheltenham
Dean J (1995) The trade policy revolution in developing countries. World Econ 18(1):173
DeRosa D (1992) Concluding the Uruguay round: the Dunkel draft agreement on agriculture. World Econ 15(6):755
Desautels-Stein J (2012) The market as a legal concept. Buff L Rev 60(2):387
De Souza Farias R (2015) Brazil and the origins of the multilateral trading system. Int Hist Rev p 37(2):303
Desta M (2016) Trade in agricultural products: should developing countries give up on the WTO promise for a fair and market-oriented agricultural trading system? a historical and theoretical analysis. Eur Yb Int Econ L 7:67
Diaz-Bonilla E (2010) Globalisation of agriculture and food crises: then and now. In: Karapinar B, Häberli C (eds) Food crises and the WTO: world trade forum. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 49–80
Echols MA (1982) The GATT ministerial and international trade in agricultural products. In: Rubin SJ, Graham TR (eds) Managing trade relations in the 1980s: issues involved in the GATT ministerial meeting of 1982. Totowa, NJ, ASIL, Rowman & Allanheld, pp 109–133
Eslava L, Fakhri M, Nesiah V (eds) (2017) Bandung, global history, and international law: critical pasts and pending futures. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
Ewing-Chow M et al (2015) Rice is life: regional food security, trade rules and the ASEAN plus three emergency rice reserve. In: Nasu H, Rubenstein K (eds) Legal perspectives on security institutions. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 292–307
Fakhri M (2015) Food as a matter of global governance. J Int Law Int Relat 11(2):68
Fakhri M (2014a) Sugar and the making of international trade law. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
Fakhri M (2014b) The institutionalisation of free trade and empire: a study of the 1902 Brussels convention. Lond Rev Int L 2(1):49
Fakhri M (2011) Reconstructing WTO legitimacy debates. Notre Dame J Int Comp L 2(1):64
Featherstone D (2008) Resistance, space and political identities: the making of counter-global networks. Wiley-Blackwell, Chichester
Food and Agriculture Organization (1962) Development through food: a strategy for surplus utilization (FFHC basic study). FAO Press, Washington D.C
Food and Agriculture Organization (1954) Disposal of agricultural surpluses: principles recommended by FAO. FAO Press, Washington D.C
Food and Agriculture Organisation (1946) Proposals for a World Food Board. FAO Press, Washington D.C.
Footer M (2014) Trade-related international food security and the developing world. Trade L Dev 6:288
Friedmann H (2009) Discussion: moving food regimes forward: reflections on symposium essays. Agric Hum Val 26(4):335
Friedmann H (1993) The political economy of food: a global crisis. New Left Rev 197:29
Friedmann H (1982) The political economy of food: the rise and fall of the postwar international food order. Amer J Soc 88:S248
Garavini G (2011) Completing decolonization: the 1973 ‘Oil Shock’ and the struggle for economic rights. Int Hist Rev 33(3):473
Gathii J (2011) Food sovereignty for poor countries in the global trading system 57 Loyola L Rev 57:509
George S (1976) How the other half dies: the real reasons for world hunger. Penguin, Harmondsworth
Gerlach C (2015) Famine reponses in the world food crisis 1972–5 and the World Food Conference of 1974. Eur Rev Hist: Rev Eur d’Hist 22(6):929
Gulati A, Sharma AN (1992) Subsidising agriculture: a cross country view. Econ Pol Wk 27(39):A106
Gunasekara HDBH, Parsons D, Kirby MG (1989) Liberalizing agricultural trade: some perspectives for developing countries. In: Whalley J (ed) Developing countries and the global trading system, vol 1. Macmillan, New York, pp 238–257
Haberler G et al (1958) Trends in international trade: a report by a panel of experts. GATT, Geneva
Häberli C (2016) Agricultural trade: how bad is the WTO for development? Eur Yb Int Econ L 7:103
Häberli C (2014) After Bali: WTO rules applying to public food reserves. SSRN, research paper available from http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2556233
Häberli C (2010) Food security and WTO rules. In Karapinar B, Häberli C (eds), Food crises and the WTO: world trade forum. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 297–322
Hathaway D (1975) The world food crisis—periodic or perpetual? IFPRI, Washington D.C
Headey D, Fan S (2010) Reflections on the global food crisis: how did it happen? How has it hurt? And how can we prevent the next one? IFPRI, Washington D.C
Holt-Gimenez E, Shattuck A (2011) Food crises, food regimes and food movements: rumblings of reform or tides of transformation? J Peas Stud 38(1):109
Hopkins RF (1993) Developing countries in the Uruguay round: bargaining under uncertainty and inequality. In: Avery WP (ed) World agriculture and the GATT. Boulder Co, Lynne Rienner, pp 143–163
Horton S (2009) The 1974 and 2008 food price crises: Déjà vu? In: Clapp J, Cohen M (eds) The global food crisis: governance challenges and opportunities. Wilfrid Laurier University Press, Ottawa, pp 29–41
Howse R (2014) The Bali deal on food security-binding and legally secure (contra Christian Haeberli). World trade law, blogpost available at http://worldtradelaw.typepad.com/ielpblog/2014/06/the-bali-deal-on-food-security-binding-and-legally-secure-contra-christian-haeberli.html
Howse R, Josling T (2012) Agricultural export restrictions and international trade law: a way forward, international food & agricultural trade policy council. Report available at http://www.agritrade.org/Publications/documents/Howse_Josling_Export_Restriction_final.pdf
Ingersent KA, Rayner AJ, Hine RC (1993) Agriculture in the Uruguay round: from the Dunkel draft and Blair House agreement to the final act. CREDIT Research Paper No. 93/11, University of Nottingham, Nottingham
Islam N (1991) External environment for development in third world. Econ Pol Wk 26(36):2107
Jackson J (1969) World trade and the law of GATT. Bobbs-Merrill, Indianapolis
Jarosz L (2009) The political economy of global governance and the world food crisis: the case of the FAO. Rev (Fernand Braudel Center) 2009:37
Johnson DG (1973) World agriculture in disarray. MacMillan, London
Josling T, Tangermann S, Warley K (1996) Agriculture in the GATT. MacMillan, London
Kanth DR (2017) Buenos aires WTO summit: EU seeks india cooperation on food security issue. Livemint, article available at https://www.livemint.com/Politics/8z0xMoclUtROvab7WwXixI/Buenos-Aires-WTO-Summit-EU-seeks-India-cooperation-on-food.html
Kennedy D (1977) On the Cartel Bogie. Fletcher Forum 1:232
Keynes JM (1971) The international control of raw materials 1942. In Moggridge D (ed) The collected writings of John Maynard Keynes, vol 27. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 112–128
Khan R (1982) The law and organisation of international commodity agreements. Martinus Nijhoff, The Hague
Lang A (2014) Governing ‘As If’: global subsidies regulation and the benchmark problem. Curr Leg Probs 67:135
Maizels A (1992) Commodities in crisis: the commodity crisis of the 1980s and the political economy of international commodity prices. Oxford Clarendon Press, Oxford
Margulis M (2017) The forgotten history of food security in multilateral trade negotiations. World Trade Rev 16(1):25
Margulis M (2013) The regime complex for food security: implications of the global hunger challenge. Glob Gov 19(1):53
Margulis M (2012) Global food security governance: the committee on world food security, comprehensive framework for action and the G8/G20. In Rayfuse R, Weisfelt N (eds) (2012) The challenge of food security: international policy and regulatory frameworks. Edward Elgar, Cheltenham, pp 231–254
Matusow A (1967) Farm policies and politics in the Truman years. Harvard university Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts
McKenzie F (2010) The GATT-EEC collision: the challenge of regional trade blocs to the general agreement on tariffs and trade, 1950–1967. Int Hist Rev 32(2):229
McMahon J (2006) The WTO agreement on agriculture: a commentary. Oxford University Press, Oxford
McMichael P (2009) A food regime genealogy. J Peas Stud 26(1):139
McMichael P (2005) Global development and the corporate food regime. In: Buttel F, McMichael P (eds) New directions in the sociology of global development. Emerald Publishers, Bingley, pp 265–299
McMichael P (1993) World food system restructuring under a GATT regime. Pol Geo 12(3):198
Moyer HW (1993) The European Community and the GATT Uruguay round: preserving the common agricultural policy at all costs. In: Avery WP (ed) World agriculture and the GATT. Boulder, Lynne Rienner, pp 95–119
Meunier S (2005) Trading voices: the European union in international commercial negotiations. Princeton University Press, Princeton
Nanjundaswamy MD (1993) Farmers and Dunkel draft. Econ Pol Wk 28(26):1334
Narlikar A, Priyadarshi S (2014) Empowering the poor? the successes and limitations of the Bali package for the LDCs. Third World Q 35(6):1051
O’Connor C (1982) Going against the grain: the regulation of the international wheat trade from 1933 to the 1980 Soviet grain Embargo. Bost Coll Int Comp L Rev 5(1):225
Orford A (2015) Food security, free trade, and the battle for the state. J Int L Int Rel 11(2):1
Paarlberg RL (1989) Why agriculture blocked the Uruguay round: evolving strategies in a two-level game. In: Whalley J (ed) Developing countries and the global trading system, vol 1. Macmillan, New York, pp 39–54
Patel SJ (1992) Statement to the group of ministers on Arthur Dunkel’s Draft of the final act on Uruguay round of GATT negotiations. Soc Sci 20(1/2):99
Paul J (1995) Free trade, regulatory competition and the autonomous market fallacy. Col J Eur L 1(1):29
Polanyi K (1944) The great transformation: the political and economic origins of our time. Beacon Press, Boston
Rao CN (1993) Dunkel Draft: critique of government’s interpretation. Econ Pol Wk 28(35):1791
Rayfuse R, Weisfelt N (eds) (2012) The challenge of food security: international policy and regulatory frameworks. Edward Elgar, Cheltenham
Ricupero R (1998) Integration of developing countries into the multilateral trading system. In: Bhagwati J, Hirsch M (eds) The Uruguay round and beyond: essays in honor of Arthur Dunkel. Springer, Berlin, pp 9–36
Rietkerk AD (2016) ‘The Constructive Use of Abundance’: the UN world food programme and the evolution of the international food-aid system during the post-war decades. Int Hist Rev 38(4):788
Ruggie JG (1982) International regimes, transactions, and change: embedded liberalism in the postwar economic order. Int Org 36(2):379
Sahai S (1993) Burden of proof: danger clause in Dunkel Text. Econ Pol Wk 28(20):958
Sands P (1986) Book review. Brit Yb Int L 57:386
Schmidt J (2015) How we created the WTO: a memoir, the Wilson Quarterly, available at http://wilsonquarterly.com/stories/a-world-of-hopes-and-a-world-of-fears-how-we-created-the-wto/
Schoenbaum T (2011) Fashioning a new regime for agricultural trade: new issues and the global food crisis. J Int Econ L 14(3):593
Sen A (1981) Poverty and famines: an essay on entitlement and deprivation. Oxford University Press, Oxford
Shaw D (2007) World food security: a history since 1945. Palgrave Macmillan, London
Shiva V (1993) Farmers’ rights, biodiversity and international treaties. Econ Pol Wk 28(14):555
Singer H (1962) Report by the expert group to the director-general of fao. In: Food and agriculture organization, development through food: a strategy for surplus utilization (FFHC Basic Study). FAO Press, Washington, D.C., p 69
Smith F (2012) Food security and international agricultural trade regulation: old problems, new perspectives. In: McMahon J, Desta MG (eds) Research handbook on the WTO agriculture agreement. Edward Elgar, Cheltenham, pp 45–69
Smythe E (2014) Food is different: globalization, trade regimes and local food movements. In: Deese D (ed) Handbook of the international political economy of trade. Edward Elgar, Cheltenham, pp 471–497
Staples A (2003) To win the peace: the food and agricultural organization, Sir John Boyd Orr, and the world food board proposals. Peace Change 28(4):495
Stephey MJ (2008) A brief history of Bretton Woods System, TIME, 21 October 2008; article available at http://content.time.com/time/business/article/0,8599,1852254,00.html
Stewart T, Bell S (2015) Global hunger and the world trade organization: how the international trade rules address food security. Penn State J L Int Aff 3(2):113
Tarkunde VM (1994) Final GATT agreement: an assessment. Econ Pol Wk 29(36):2378
Taylor I, Smith K (2007) United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD). Routledge, London
Thomas P et al (1994) Dunkel Text: implications for rural sector. Econ Pol Wk 29(13):A42
Trebilcock M, Pue K (2015) The puzzle of agricultural exceptionalism in international trade policy. J Int Econ L 18(2):233
Trentmann F (2006) Coping with shortage: the problem of food security and global visions of coordination, c. 1890s–1950. In: Trentmann F, Just F (eds) Food and Conflict in Europe in the Age of the Two World Wars. Palgrave MacMillan, New York, pp 13–48
United Nations (1975) Report of the world food conference rome, 5–16 November 1974. UN Press, New York
United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (2013) Trade and environment review 2013: wake up before it is too late. UN Press, New York
United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (2004) Beyond conventional wisdom in development policy: an intellectual history of UNCTAD 1964–2004. UN Press, New York
United States Department of State (1945) Proposals for expansion of world trade and employment. Washington D.C.
van Meerhaeghe M (1971) International economic institutions. Prentice Hall, New York, 2nd edn
Weiss T et al (eds) (2005) UN voices: the struggle for development and social justice. Indiana University Press, Bloomington
Weiss T, Jordan R (1976) The world food conference and global problem solving. Praeger, New York
Wilcox C (1949) A charter for world trade. MacMillan, New York
Wilkinson R et al (2014) The WTO in Bali: what MC9 means for the Doha Development Agenda and why it matters. Third World Q 35(6):1032
Winders W (2009) The politics of food supply: U.S. agricultural policy in the world economy. Yale University Press, New Haven
Wise TA (2014) Feeding the world: the ultimate first-world conceit. Triple Crisis, blogpost available at http://triplecrisis.com/feeding-the-world-the-ultimate-first-world-conceit/
World Trade Organization (2015) Understanding the WTO, 5th edn. WTO, Geneva
Yeutter C (1998) Bringing agriculture into the multilateral trading system. In: Bhagwati J, Hirsch M (eds) The Uruguay Round and beyond: essays in honor of Arthur Dunkel. Springer, Berlin, pp 61–77
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2020 Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Fakhri, M. (2020). A History of Food Security and Agriculture in International Trade Law, 1945–2017. In: Haskell, J., Rasulov, A. (eds) New Voices and New Perspectives in International Economic Law. European Yearbook of International Economic Law(). Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-32512-1_3
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-32512-1_3
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-32511-4
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-32512-1
eBook Packages: Law and CriminologyLaw and Criminology (R0)