【作者】 陈阵；

【导师】 赵放；

【作者基本信息】 吉林大学 ， 世界经济， 2009， 博士

【摘要】 在美国农产品贸易政策70余年的演变过程中,政府始终坚持实施农业补贴和贸易保护政策,使美国农产品贸易政策具有浓厚的贸易保护特征。美国农产品贸易保护政策源于其权力分散的政治结构体系,是具有强大政治能量的农业利益集团游说国会与行政部门的结果。在美国农产品贸易政策措施中,农产品市场准入和出口竞争政策维护了国内支持政策的有效性,美国农业补贴政策是农产品贸易保护政策的集中表现。在WTO农产品贸易谈判中,美国坚持削减自身的补贴要以谈判方扩大市场准入为前提,农产品贸易争端也为美国农产品贸易政策改革增加了压力,多边贸易谈判进展缓慢使美国逐步转向积极进行区域与双边贸易协定谈判。美国农产品贸易保护政策存在诸多负面影响,因而需要进行改革,但改革仍是长期的过程。中国“入世”之后,农产品市场进一步开放,政府逐渐转向实施农业支持和补贴政策。面对美国农业补贴政策的负面影响,中国政府应采取措施,弥补国内农业生产者的利益损失。借鉴美国农产品贸易政策的经验,中国在应农产品贸易政策制定过程中,强化农业立法的作用,充分考虑各农业利益集团的利益诉求;在农业支持政策中,应增加“绿箱”政策支出而审慎使用“黄箱”政策;在补贴农业的同时,注重农业结构调整,避免农业对补贴政策形成依赖;积极参与多边、区域与双边农产品贸易谈判,为农产品出口降低壁垒的同时,注重保护国内农产品市场。更多还原

【Abstract】 70-year history of the Farm Bills and 20-year agricultural trade negotiations has revealed the development and change of U.S. agricultural trade policy. In the 1930s, Great Depression and trade protectionism brought about Roosevelt’s "New Deal" plan to initiate the intervention policy in U.S. agriculture. In the 1950s, the U.S. government implemented food aid policy in order to promote exports of surplus agricultural products. In the 1970s, agricultural export growth decreased the U.S. government intervention in agriculture, while the 1980’s world market depression plunged American agriculture into crisis once again, the Government resumed control the supply of agricultural products and provided huge subsidies for farmers. In 1994, under the achievement of the GATT Uruguay Round Agreement on Agriculture, the U.S. government committed to expanding market access, phasing out of export subsidies, reducing trade-distorting agricultural domestic support policies, U.S. agricultural trade policy has been taken under the multilateral trade policy constraints. In the 1990s, under the trends of world agricultural trade liberalization reform and the U.S. budget constraints, the 1996 Farm Bill carried out market-oriented agricultural trade policy reform. However, in 1998-2001, the United States agriculture in trouble prompted the government to increase agricultural subsidies, reversing the 1996 trend of liberal reform. 2002 and 2008 Farm Bill continued the trend of increasing agricultural subsidies, the protection degree of U.S. agricultural trade policy further strengthened.By reviewing the 70 years of U.S. agricultural trade policy evolution, first of all, the long-term overproduction of agricultural products is the problem that perplexing U.S. policy-makers. Second, U.S. agriculture is heavily dependent on export market, agricultural trade policy is also closely link with export markets. Third, the U.S. agricultural protection policies has undergone changes in different periods of time, the government has several times tried to reform, but the basic direction of agricultural protection has not been changed. Fourth, the agricultural intervention policy has always been market-distortion, market price can not reflect the real agricultural production costs. At the same time, while domestic agricultural prices are above the world price level, agricultural trade protection policy is needed in order to achieve the goals of domestic policies.In the face of U.S. agricultural trade policy-making process, the U.S. political system and the decentralized distribution of power provide the institutional arrangements mechanism with interest group lobbying. Agricultural interest groups play an important role by virtue of its strong political influence in the United States agricultural trade policy-making process. During The Farm Bill enacting, the U.S. agricultural interest groups through lobbying have a major impact on policy outcomes. U.S. agricultural trade policy is the results of the game and compromise among domestic agricultural interest groups, interest groups lobbying make the U.S. agricultural trade policy wavering between maintaining the protection policy and the market-oriented reforms, but in general the main feature is still a trade protection policy.U.S. agricultural trade policy measures reflect the varying degrees of protection and the protection level, while the level of protection for different agricultural products are also different. Lack of competitiveness for sugar and dairy products, the U.S. government implemented tariff quota management of the import protection; while domestic subsidies lead to overproduction of agricultural policy, the government adopted the policy of export subsidies at prices below domestic and export to world markets. As a program of agricultural exports, food aid not only to a certain extent, eased the hunger in poor countries, but also expanded the U.S. political influence in these countries, yet the promotion of agricultural exports, safeguard the interests of American agriculture.Domestic support policies are the core content of U.S. agricultural trade policy, market access and export subsidies are ways to maintain the effectiveness of the established domestic support policies. Thus, the focus of U.S. agricultural trade policy adjustment and reform is domestic support policies. U.S. agricultural subsidy policy is the policy action of U.S. government transfer resources to agricultural sector. Agricultural subsidies, the income transfer from consumers and taxpayers in the hands of farmers and land owners to safeguard the interests of agricultural producers, so that consumers (high agricultural commodity prices) and taxpayers (tax shift) interests are jeopardized. Agricultural subsidies lead agricultural production lack of efficiency, price support policy of the price of grain and other major crops at a higher level to induce producers to use too many resources to produce food, leading to overproduction of domestic food, the Government had to use export subsidies to address the surplus problem. For the rest of the world, the U.S. agricultural domestic and export subsidies reduce the world agricultural prices, damage the interests of agricultural producers in the rest of the world.U.S. agricultural trade policy is also included in the multilateral, regional and bilateral free trade agreements in the agricultural trade negotiations. The U.S. government has implemented a "fair trade" strategy while the multilateral, regional and bilateral trade negotiations are taking on. Under the WTO multilateral trade negotiations, the United States insisted on the implementation of agricultural subsidies is necessary for other member cuts subsidies and greater market access as a condition of negotiations, this rigid attitude has stalled WTO agricultural trade negotiations. In the WTO dispute settlement mechanism, the U.S. agricultural subsidies policy has been the criticism focus of other negotiators from the other members and groups, Brazil’s challenge U.S. farm subsidies has exert pressure adjustments on U.S. agricultural trade policy. Impasse in the WTO negotiations on agricultural trade, the United States is actively pursuing regional and bilateral trade negotiations, aiming to expand negotiating parties’market access for agricultural products so that expandingU.S. agricultural export markets. Agricultural issues in the FTA negotiations, the United States Government has clear the issues of domestic subsidies of agricultural products is not within the scope of bilateral negotiations, aiming to expand U.S. agricultural export market ,its most concern is agricultural market access issues. U.S. agricultural trade policy has many negative effects and need market-oriented reforms. U.S. farm subsidy policy not only has brought a heavy financial burden for the United States, and is not conducive to the sustainable development of U.S. agriculture and the improvement of U.S. agricultural international competitiveness, but also damage the interests of agricultural producers other countries in the world, is not conducive to WTO agricultural products the progress of trade negotiations and lead to agricultural trade disputes occur frequently.U.S. agricultural trade policy has an important influence and enlightenment on China. Since reform and opening, the Chinese government intervention in agricultural markets has decreased, and the marketization for agricultural products increased gradually. With China’s further opening up of markets for agricultural products after WTO accession, agricultural tariff cuts, a decreased proportion of state-owned enterprise and expanded agricultural tariff quotas, the protection level decline in agricultural policy. Since China’s WTO accession, the government’s longstanding negative agricultural protection policy has gradually converted into agricultural support and subsidy policies. As the multinational agricultural trade negotiations have been stalled, China is actively participating in regional and bilateral trade negotiations. Agricultural trade has been created for the external market environment, but may also be due to the expansion of market access to foreign agricultural products affected by domestic agricultural production. As U.S. soybean subsidy policies have been injurious to Chinese farmer’s interest, Chinese government should balance the interest among soybean producers, processors and consumers and take action to compensate for the loss of producers. The enlightenment of U.S. agricultural trade policies on China is that, China should strengthen agricultural legislation during agricultural policy-making process, give full consideration to the various agricultural interest groups; China’s agricultural subsidies should increase expenditure on Green Box policy while prudently use Amber Box policy; pay attention to agricultural structure adjustment when subsidy agriculture, avoiding agriculture sector’s excessive dependence on government’s policy; actively participate in multilateral, regional and bilateral agricultural trade negotiations to reduce barriers to agricultural exports and pay attention to protect domestic agricultural market.更多还原