Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2024 Jan 14;10(2):e24635.
doi: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e24635. eCollection 2024 Jan 30.

Impact of global trade agreements on agricultural producer prices in Asian countries

Agus Dwi Nugroho  1   2 , Muhammad Imam Ma'ruf  1 , Muh Amat Nasir  2 , Maria Fekete-Farkas  3 , Zoltan Lakner  3
Affiliations

Impact of global trade agreements on agricultural producer prices in Asian countries

Agus Dwi Nugroho et al. Heliyon. .

Abstract

Following global trade agreements, Asian countries have been highly aggressive in implementing free trade. These conditions will impact all sectors, including agriculture. This study aims to examine the impact of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT), World Trade Organization membership (WTO), and the Doha Round implementations on agricultural producer prices in Asian countries (PPI). The study was conducted using secondary data from 1991 to 2020. The data for 28 Asian countries were analyzed using the first difference General Method of Moments (GMM). The results show that implementing the GATT raises the PPI, but implementing the WTO has the reverse impact. PPI is unaffected by the Doha Round. Inflation, exchange rate, value-added, human capital, and land area equipped for irrigation are all positive contributors to PPI. Several recommendations are made to increase PPI in Asian countries: increasing commitment to agricultural fair trade, increasing agricultural value-added, improving educational opportunities for agricultural business players, and prioritizing agricultural infrastructure investment.

Keywords: Economic; Free trade; Infrastructure; Producer prices; Social.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Roadmap of the research.
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Impact of import tariffs. Source: created by author based on [36].
Fig. 3
Fig. 3
Asian countries' agricultural producer prices.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Gygli S., Haelg F., Potrafke N., Sturm J.E. The KOF globalisation index – revisited. Rev. Int. Org. 2019;14:543–574. doi: 10.1007/s11558-019-09344-2. - DOI
    1. Wang P. In: The procurement of state trading enterprises under the WTO Agreements: a proposal for a way forward. Arrowsmith S., Anderson R.D., editors. Cambridge University Press; Cambridge, UK: 2011. pp. 197–251. (The WTO Regime on Government Procurement: Challenge and Reform). - DOI
    1. World Trade Organization . World Trade Organization; Geneva: 2014. The World Trade Organization.http://www.wto.org
    1. Athukorala P.C. Agricultural trade policy reform in South Asia: the role of the Uruguay round and policy options for the future WTO agenda. J. Asian Econ. 2000;11:169–193. doi: 10.1016/S1049-0078(00)00049-X. - DOI
    1. Armella S., Conti M. Borders and protectionism: US trade policy and its impact on law, economy and international trade. Glob. Trade Cust. J. 2020;15:97–103. doi: 10.54648/gtcj2020012. - DOI

LinkOut - more resources