Protection in Agriculture and Manufacturing: Meeting the Objectives of the Uruguay Round

  • Gary P. Sampson
Part of the International Economic Association Series book series (IEA)


Among the objectives of the Bretton Woods system was a freer international exchange of goods, coupled with non-discriminatory trade relations, with national goals being pursued within the constraints of a multilateral framework. Recent actions, however, indicate that governments are moving outside the agreed framework; national priorities increasingly take precedence over multilateral commitments. Concern over these developments culminated in the meeting in September 1986 in Punta del Este, Uruguay, of ministers from the 91 contracting parties of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT). As a result of this meeting, a declaration was made announcing the start of a new round of multilateral trade negotiations. The list of topics to be discussed is long; the negotiations that are about to commence may have important implications for the trading system for the rest of the century and beyond.


Trade Liberalisation Tariff Rate Uruguay Round Manufacture Export Trade Creation 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Brodin, H. and Blades, D. (1986) The OECD Compatible Trade and Production Data Base, Department of Economics and Statistics Working Papers no. 31, March (Paris: OECD).Google Scholar
  2. Cline, W.R. (1978) Trade Negotiations in the Tokyo Round — A Quantitative Assessment (Washington DC: The Brookings Institution).Google Scholar
  3. Commission of the European Communities (1976) Newsletter on the Common Agricultural Policy: Extract from the 1975 Report on the Agricultural Situation in the Community (Brussels and Luxembourg).Google Scholar
  4. Corden, W.M. (1986) ‘Policies towards Market Disturbances’ in Snape, R.H. (ed.) Issues in World Trade Policy: GATT at the Crossroads (London: Macmillan).Google Scholar
  5. Finger, J.M., Hall, H.K. and Nelson, D.R. (1982) ‘The Political Economy of Administered Protection’, American Economic Review vol. 73, no. 3, June.Google Scholar
  6. GATT (1986) Ministerial Declaration on the Uruguay Round (Geneva: GATT) 25 September.Google Scholar
  7. Grey, R. de C. (1986) ‘The Decay of the Trade Relation System’ in Snape, R.H. (ed.) Issues in World Trade Policy: GATT at the Crossroads (London: Macmillan).Google Scholar
  8. International Monetary Fund (1984) Effects of Increased Market Access on Selected Developing Country Export Earnings: An Illustrative Exercise (Washington: IMF) DM/84/54, 24 August.Google Scholar
  9. Laird, S. and Yeats, A.J. (1986) The UNCTAD Trade Policy Simulation Model: a Note of Methodology, Data and Uses’, UNCTAD Discussion Papers no. 19.Google Scholar
  10. OECD (1986) Change and Continuity in OECD Trade in Manufactures with Developing Countries 1979–84 (Paris: OECD) DCD 86.6, 10 March.Google Scholar
  11. Sampson, G.P. (1986) ‘Market Disturbances and the MFA’ in Snape, R.H. (ed.) Issues in World Trade Policy: GATT at the Crossroads (London: Macmillan).Google Scholar
  12. Sampson, G.P. and Snape, R.H. (1980) ‘Effects of the EEC’s Variable Import Levies’, Journal of Political Economy, vol. 88, no. 5.Google Scholar
  13. Sapir, A. and Baldwin, R.E. (1983) ‘India and the Tokyo Round’, World Development vol. 11, no. 7.Google Scholar
  14. Snape, R.H. (1986) Should Australia seek a Trade Agreement with the United States? (Economic Planning Advisory Council) Discussion Paper no. 86/01. June.Google Scholar
  15. Stern, R. (1976) ‘Evaluating Alternative Formulae for Reducing Industrial Tariffs’, Journal of World Trade Law, vol. 10, Jan./Feb. pp. 50–64.Google Scholar
  16. UNCTAD (1982) Protectionism and Structural Adjustment in the World Economy (Geneva: UNCTAD) TD/888/Rev.1. Chapter 2.Google Scholar
  17. UNCTAD Secretariat (1985) Introductory Note on Methodology and the Problems of Definition (Geneva: UNCTAD) TD/B/AC/42/2, 4 September.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© International Economic Association 1989

Authors and Affiliations

  • Gary P. Sampson
    • 1
  1. 1.UNCTADSwitzerland

Personalised recommendations