Agricultural Support in OECD-Reported Countries from 2000 to 2019

Rogério Edivaldo Freitas

doi:doi:10.11648/j.ijae.20210605.13

| Peer-Reviewed

Agricultural Support in OECD-Reported Countries from 2000 to 2019

Rogério Edivaldo Freitas

Published in International Journal of Agricultural Economics (Volume 6, Issue 5)

Received: 11 September 2021 Accepted: 14 October 2021 Published: 28 October 2021

Views: Downloads:

Download PDF

Share This Article

Twitter
Linked In
Facebook

Abstract

Agricultural support is one of the main tools used by governments to achieve their domestic goals, especially since the food shortages during and immediately after World War II. However, specific agricultural support programs can affect agricultural production in various ways, and support programs can alter the allocation of natural resources domestically and abroad. In this study, we measured agricultural support in OECD-reported countries during the period 2000-2019 using Spearman´s correlation coefficient, time trend analysis and clustering procedures. Data from Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) from 2000 to 2019 were employed, specifically the Producer Support Estimate (PSE) and Consumer Support Estimate (CSE). We compared the results of two agglomerative clustering methods and identified groups of similar countries on the basis of their consumer support and producer support estimates behavior during the period studied. Some countries, such as Switzerland, South Korea, Turkey and Canada, displayed specific support behavior, while other groups of countries shared similarities such as China, Indonesia and the Philippines; the European Union, Japan and Norway; and Brazil, South Africa and Chile. Policies implications are discussed and further research is recommended, including analyses of top-down geographical unities, crop-specific programs, and the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on agricultural support worldwide, as more data becomes available.

Published in	International Journal of Agricultural Economics (Volume 6, Issue 5)
DOI	10.11648/j.ijae.20210605.13
Page(s)	218-226
Creative Commons	This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, provided the original work is properly cited.
Copyright	Copyright © The Author(s), 2021. Published by Science Publishing Group

Keywords

Agricultural Support, OECD-Reported Countries, Spearman´s Correlation Coefficient, Clustering

References

[1]	Shi, J., Wu, J., Olen, B., (2019). Assessing effects of federal crop insurance supply on acreage and yield of specialty crops. Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics, 68 (1): 65–82. https://doi.org/10.1111/cjag.12211.
[2]	Yu, J., Sumner, D. A., (2018). Effects of subsidized crop insurance on crop choices. Agricultural Economics, 49 (4): 533–545. https://doi.org/10.1111/agec.12434.
[3]	Wise, T. A., (2004). The Paradox of Agricultural Subsidies: Measurement Issues, Agricultural Dumping, and Policy Reform. Global Development and Environment Institute. Working Paper 04-02. Available at: https://sites.tufts.edu/gdae/files/2020/03/04-02AgSubsidies.pdf
[4]	Kirwan, B. E., (2009). The incidence of U.S. agricultural subsidies on farmland rental rates. Journal of Political Economy, 117 (1): 138–164. https://doi.org/10.1086/598688.
[5]	Hopewell, K., (2019). US–China conflict in global trade governance: the new politics of agricultural subsidies at the WTO. Review of International Political Economy, 26 (2): 207–231. https://doi.org/10.1080/09692290.2018.1560352.
[6]	Hailu, G., Poon, K., (2017). Do farm support programs reward production inefficiency? Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics, 65 (4): 567–589. https://doi.org/10.1111/cjag.12150.
[7]	Esposti, R., (2017). The empirics of decoupling: Alternative estimation approaches of the farm-level production response. European Review of Agricultural Economics, 44 (3): 499–537. https://doi.org/10.1093/erae/jbw021.
[8]	Graubner, M., (2018). Lost in space? The effect of direct payments on land rental prices. European Review of Agricultural Economics, 45 (2): 143–171. https://doi.org/10.1093/erae/jbx027.
[9]	Takayama, T., Hashizume, N., Nakatani, T., (2020). Impact of direct payments on agricultural land use in less-favoured areas: Evidence from Japan. European Review of Agricultural Economics, 47 (1): 157–177. https://doi.org/10.1093/erae/jbz008.
[10]	Hirsch, C., Oberhofer, H., (2020). Bilateral trade agreements and price distortions in agricultural markets. European Review of Agricultural Economics, 47 (3): 1009–1044. https://doi.org/10.1093/erae/jbz004.
[11]	Ferguson, S. M., Gars, J., (2020). Measuring the impact of agricultural production shocks on international trade flows. European Review of Agricultural Economics, 47 (3): 1094–1132. https://doi.org/10.1093/erae/jbz013.
[12]	Bareille, F., Zavalloni, M., (2020). Decentralization of agri-environmental policy design. European Review of Agricultural Economics, 47 (4): 1502–1530. https://doi.org/10.1093/erae/jbz049.
[13]	Surry, Y., Rude, J., (2019). Agriculture trade restrictiveness in Canada: How important are the cross effects? Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics, 67 (4): 433–448. https://doi.org/10.1111/cjag.12204.
[14]	Erjavec, E., Lovec, M., (2017). Research of European Union's Common Agricultural Policy: disciplinary boundaries and beyond. European Review of Agricultural Economics, 44 (4): 732–754. https://doi.org/10.1093/erae/jbx008.
[15]	Louhichi, K., Ciaian, P., Espinosa, M., Perni, A., Paloma, S. G., (2018). Economic impacts of CAP greening: application of an EU-wide individual farm model for CAP analysis (IFM-CAP). European Review of Agricultural Economics, 45 (2): 205–238. https://doi.org/10.1093/erae/jbx029.
[16]	Rizov, M., Davidova, S., Bailey, A., (2018). Employment effects of CAP payments in the UK non-farm economy. European Review of Agricultural Economics, 45 (5): 723–748. https://doi.org/10.1093/erae/jby008.
[17]	Garrone, M., Emmers, D., Lee, H., Olper, A., Swinnen, J., (2019). Subsidies and agricultural productivity in the EU. Agricultural Economics, 50 (6): 803–817. https://doi.org/10.1111/agec.12526.
[18]	Neuenfeldt, S., Gocht, A., Heckelei, T., Ciaian, P., (2019). Explaining farm structural change in the European agriculture: a novel analytical framework. European Review of Agricultural Economics, 46 (5): 713–768. https://doi.org/10.1093/erae/jby037.
[19]	Boussemart, J. P., Henri-Bertrand, L., Leleu, H., Parvulescu, R., (2019). Technical catching-up and decoupled payments in a selection of French farms. European Review of Agricultural Economics, 46 (2): 215–235. https://doi.org/10.1093/erae/jby023.
[20]	Fields, S., (2004). The fat of the land: Do agricultural subsidies foster poor health? Environmental Health Perspectives, 112 (14): A821-A823. https://doi.org/10.1289/ehp.112-a820.
[21]	Wu, S., Goodwin, B. K., Coble, K., (2020). Moral hazard and subsidized crop insurance. Agricultural Economics, 51 (1): 132–142. https://doi.org/10.1111/agec.12545.
[22]	Chen, Y., Yu, X., (2019). Do subsidies cause a less competitive milk market in China? Agricultural Economics, 50 (3): 303–314. https://doi.org/10.1111/agec.12485.
[23]	Kerr, W. A., (2020). The COVID-19 pandemic and agriculture: Short- and long-run implications for international trade relations. Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics, 68: 225–229. https://doi.org/10.1111/cjag.12230.
[24]	Barichello, R., (2020). The COVID-19 pandemic: Anticipating its effects on Canada’s agricultural trade. Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics, 68: 219–224. https://doi.org/10.1111/cjag.12244.
[25]	Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), (2016). OECD’S Producer Support Estimate and Related Indicators of Agricultural Support - Concepts, Calculations, Interpretation and Use (The PSE Manual). Paris: OECD.
[26]	Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), (2020). Agricultural policy monitoring and evaluation. Paris: OECD. Access: sept. 2020. Available at: http://www.oecd.org/agriculture/topics/agricultural-policy-monitoring-and-evaluation/.
[27]	Conover, W. J., (1999). Practical Nonparametric Statistics, second edition. New York: Wiley.
[28]	Morettin, P. A., Toloi, C. M. C., (2006). Time Series Analysis. (Análise de Séries Temporais), second edition. São Paulo: Edgard Blücher.
[29]	Barreto, H., Howland, F. M., (2006). Introductory Econometrics: Using Monte Carlo Simulation with Microsoft Excel. New York: Cambridge University Press.
[30]	Driver, H. E., Kroeber, A. L., (1932). Quantitative expression of cultural relationships. University of California Publications in American Archeology and Ethnology, 31 (4): 211-256.
[31]	Zubin, J. A., (1938a). Technique for measuring mindedness. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 33 (4): 508–516.
[32]	Zubin, J. A., (1938b). Socio-biological types and methods for their isolation. Psychiatry: Journal for the Study of Interpersonal Processes, 2: 237–297.
[33]	Sokal, R. R., Sneath, P. H. A., (1963). Principles of Numeric Taxonomy. San Francisco: W. H. Freeman and Company.
[34]	Johnson, R. A., Wichern, D. W., (2007). Applied Multivariate Statistical Analysis, sixth edition. NJ: Pearson Education, Upper Saddle River.
[35]	Fávero, L. P., Belfiore, P., (2020). Data Analysis Handbook (Manual de Análise de Dados). Rio de Janeiro: LTC.
[36]	Greene, W. G., (2017). Econometric Analysis. Yorkshire: Pearson.
[37]	Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), (2021). Tax Policy and Climate Change – IMF/OECD Report for the G20 Finance Ministers and Central Bank Governors. Italy: OECD.
[38]	World Trade Organization (WTO), (2020). World Trade Statistical Review 2020. Available at: https://www.wto.org/english/res_e/statis_e/wts2020_e/wts20_toc_e.htm. Accessed: 28 Oct. 2020.
[39]	Stata – Statistics/Data Analysis, (2015). Hierarchical Cluster Analysis and Kmeans and Kmedians Cluster Analysis. College Station, TX: Stata.
[40]	Fukase, E., Martin, W., (2016). Who will feed China in the 21st century? Income growth and food demand and supply in China. Journal of Agricultural Economics, 67 (1): 3–23. https://doi.org/10.1111/1477-9552.12117.

Cite This Article

Plain Text BibTeX RIS

APA Style

Rogério Edivaldo Freitas. (2021). Agricultural Support in OECD-Reported Countries from 2000 to 2019. International Journal of Agricultural Economics, 6(5), 218-226. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijae.20210605.13

Copy | Download

ACS Style

Rogério Edivaldo Freitas. Agricultural Support in OECD-Reported Countries from 2000 to 2019. Int. J. Agric. Econ. 2021, 6(5), 218-226. doi: 10.11648/j.ijae.20210605.13

Copy | Download

AMA Style

Rogério Edivaldo Freitas. Agricultural Support in OECD-Reported Countries from 2000 to 2019. Int J Agric Econ. 2021;6(5):218-226. doi: 10.11648/j.ijae.20210605.13

Copy | Download

@article{10.11648/j.ijae.20210605.13,
  author = {Rogério Edivaldo Freitas},
  title = {Agricultural Support in OECD-Reported Countries from 2000 to 2019},
  journal = {International Journal of Agricultural Economics},
  volume = {6},
  number = {5},
  pages = {218-226},
  doi = {10.11648/j.ijae.20210605.13},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijae.20210605.13},
  eprint = {https://article.sciencepublishinggroup.com/pdf/10.11648.j.ijae.20210605.13},
  abstract = {Agricultural support is one of the main tools used by governments to achieve their domestic goals, especially since the food shortages during and immediately after World War II. However, specific agricultural support programs can affect agricultural production in various ways, and support programs can alter the allocation of natural resources domestically and abroad. In this study, we measured agricultural support in OECD-reported countries during the period 2000-2019 using Spearman´s correlation coefficient, time trend analysis and clustering procedures. Data from Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) from 2000 to 2019 were employed, specifically the Producer Support Estimate (PSE) and Consumer Support Estimate (CSE). We compared the results of two agglomerative clustering methods and identified groups of similar countries on the basis of their consumer support and producer support estimates behavior during the period studied. Some countries, such as Switzerland, South Korea, Turkey and Canada, displayed specific support behavior, while other groups of countries shared similarities such as China, Indonesia and the Philippines; the European Union, Japan and Norway; and Brazil, South Africa and Chile. Policies implications are discussed and further research is recommended, including analyses of top-down geographical unities, crop-specific programs, and the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on agricultural support worldwide, as more data becomes available.},
 year = {2021}
}

Copy | Download

TY  - JOUR
T1  - Agricultural Support in OECD-Reported Countries from 2000 to 2019
AU  - Rogério Edivaldo Freitas
Y1  - 2021/10/28
PY  - 2021
N1  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijae.20210605.13
DO  - 10.11648/j.ijae.20210605.13
T2  - International Journal of Agricultural Economics
JF  - International Journal of Agricultural Economics
JO  - International Journal of Agricultural Economics
SP  - 218
EP  - 226
PB  - Science Publishing Group
SN  - 2575-3843
UR  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijae.20210605.13
AB  - Agricultural support is one of the main tools used by governments to achieve their domestic goals, especially since the food shortages during and immediately after World War II. However, specific agricultural support programs can affect agricultural production in various ways, and support programs can alter the allocation of natural resources domestically and abroad. In this study, we measured agricultural support in OECD-reported countries during the period 2000-2019 using Spearman´s correlation coefficient, time trend analysis and clustering procedures. Data from Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) from 2000 to 2019 were employed, specifically the Producer Support Estimate (PSE) and Consumer Support Estimate (CSE). We compared the results of two agglomerative clustering methods and identified groups of similar countries on the basis of their consumer support and producer support estimates behavior during the period studied. Some countries, such as Switzerland, South Korea, Turkey and Canada, displayed specific support behavior, while other groups of countries shared similarities such as China, Indonesia and the Philippines; the European Union, Japan and Norway; and Brazil, South Africa and Chile. Policies implications are discussed and further research is recommended, including analyses of top-down geographical unities, crop-specific programs, and the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on agricultural support worldwide, as more data becomes available.
VL  - 6
IS  - 5
ER  -

Copy | Download

Author Information

Rogério Edivaldo Freitas

Department of Regional Studies, Institute of Applied Economic Research, Brasília, Brazil

Download PDF

Sections

Plain Text BibTeX RIS

APA Style

Rogério Edivaldo Freitas. (2021). Agricultural Support in OECD-Reported Countries from 2000 to 2019. International Journal of Agricultural Economics, 6(5), 218-226. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijae.20210605.13

Copy | Download

ACS Style

Rogério Edivaldo Freitas. Agricultural Support in OECD-Reported Countries from 2000 to 2019. Int. J. Agric. Econ. 2021, 6(5), 218-226. doi: 10.11648/j.ijae.20210605.13

Copy | Download

AMA Style

Rogério Edivaldo Freitas. Agricultural Support in OECD-Reported Countries from 2000 to 2019. Int J Agric Econ. 2021;6(5):218-226. doi: 10.11648/j.ijae.20210605.13

Copy | Download

@article{10.11648/j.ijae.20210605.13,
  author = {Rogério Edivaldo Freitas},
  title = {Agricultural Support in OECD-Reported Countries from 2000 to 2019},
  journal = {International Journal of Agricultural Economics},
  volume = {6},
  number = {5},
  pages = {218-226},
  doi = {10.11648/j.ijae.20210605.13},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijae.20210605.13},
  eprint = {https://article.sciencepublishinggroup.com/pdf/10.11648.j.ijae.20210605.13},
  abstract = {Agricultural support is one of the main tools used by governments to achieve their domestic goals, especially since the food shortages during and immediately after World War II. However, specific agricultural support programs can affect agricultural production in various ways, and support programs can alter the allocation of natural resources domestically and abroad. In this study, we measured agricultural support in OECD-reported countries during the period 2000-2019 using Spearman´s correlation coefficient, time trend analysis and clustering procedures. Data from Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) from 2000 to 2019 were employed, specifically the Producer Support Estimate (PSE) and Consumer Support Estimate (CSE). We compared the results of two agglomerative clustering methods and identified groups of similar countries on the basis of their consumer support and producer support estimates behavior during the period studied. Some countries, such as Switzerland, South Korea, Turkey and Canada, displayed specific support behavior, while other groups of countries shared similarities such as China, Indonesia and the Philippines; the European Union, Japan and Norway; and Brazil, South Africa and Chile. Policies implications are discussed and further research is recommended, including analyses of top-down geographical unities, crop-specific programs, and the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on agricultural support worldwide, as more data becomes available.},
 year = {2021}
}

Copy | Download

TY  - JOUR
T1  - Agricultural Support in OECD-Reported Countries from 2000 to 2019
AU  - Rogério Edivaldo Freitas
Y1  - 2021/10/28
PY  - 2021
N1  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijae.20210605.13
DO  - 10.11648/j.ijae.20210605.13
T2  - International Journal of Agricultural Economics
JF  - International Journal of Agricultural Economics
JO  - International Journal of Agricultural Economics
SP  - 218
EP  - 226
PB  - Science Publishing Group
SN  - 2575-3843
UR  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijae.20210605.13
AB  - Agricultural support is one of the main tools used by governments to achieve their domestic goals, especially since the food shortages during and immediately after World War II. However, specific agricultural support programs can affect agricultural production in various ways, and support programs can alter the allocation of natural resources domestically and abroad. In this study, we measured agricultural support in OECD-reported countries during the period 2000-2019 using Spearman´s correlation coefficient, time trend analysis and clustering procedures. Data from Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) from 2000 to 2019 were employed, specifically the Producer Support Estimate (PSE) and Consumer Support Estimate (CSE). We compared the results of two agglomerative clustering methods and identified groups of similar countries on the basis of their consumer support and producer support estimates behavior during the period studied. Some countries, such as Switzerland, South Korea, Turkey and Canada, displayed specific support behavior, while other groups of countries shared similarities such as China, Indonesia and the Philippines; the European Union, Japan and Norway; and Brazil, South Africa and Chile. Policies implications are discussed and further research is recommended, including analyses of top-down geographical unities, crop-specific programs, and the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on agricultural support worldwide, as more data becomes available.
VL  - 6
IS  - 5
ER  -

Copy | Download