Search

The gross value of Australia's agriculture industry in 2001/2002 was A$38.4 billion with 65% allocated to exports. The major exports markets are South East Asia, Japan, USA, and the EU. Products include wool, beef, wheat, cotton, sugar, and wine. For Australia there have been significant changes over time in markets and production arrangements in the international arena. This is also true of the domestic market especially in the area of meat products. Australians, once dominant red meat eaters, have now ‘gone chicken.’ The total yearly consumption of meats averages around 110 kg per person. Beef up until recent years has always been the dominant player. However, in the last 30 years chicken consumption has risen from being a marginal food item to being a product that is expected to eclipse beef consumption in the very near future. This paper explores the trends and examines the changes as they are reflected by the behaviour of consumers and market chain drivers. The paper provides suggestions that could he gainfully employed at the consumer behaviour levels for other meat producers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper aims to identify evidence of any potential costs of preferential liberalisation of trade in goods between the EU and Australia, notably trade diversion; move beyond Australia's exports of commodities to the EU to look for evidence of competitiveness in high-value-added manufactures; and identify evidence of the potential for deep integration that might be promoted by a formal FTA using the Sussex Framework for analysing economic integration and TradeSift software. It concludes that costs of trade Diversion are unlikely to be large; that there is the potential for a mutual recognition agreement to encourage deep integration in areas of high value added manufactures; but that it might require a formal free trade agreement to give the institutional framework to allow mutual recognition to work. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper utilises a bilateral bargaining approach as an explanatory framework for understanding how New Zealand and Australia have conducted their trade policy towards the United States and the European Union. Though alternatives like neo realism and liberal institutionalism have some value for explaining bilateral outcomes between the strong and the weak, the bilateral bargaining approach takes us further by showing how and why the negotiation process can potentially adjust outcomes in favour of weaker states. New Zealand and Australia have sought to exploit such opportunities through the application of three important bilateral strategies: informing tactics; coalition-building; and the execution of formal agreements. Differences in their bilateral bargaining approaches are informed by reference to their commercial history and respective interests, as well as cognitive factors. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Economic relations between Australia and the European Union (EU) have always been strong, but they have not always been easy. They have been difficult for Australia because it associated the EU with the loss of the UK preferential export market on its entry into the then European Economic Community. And because Australia associated the EU with the original Common Agricultural Policy, which combined subsidies for agricultural production and high agricultural tariffs to make Australian agricultural exports not competitive. They have been difficult for the EU also. Australia developed a biosecurity system to protect its agricultural sector: quarantine requirements and food safety standards made the importation of EU plant and animal products too costly. Yet Australia and the EU need each other. The EU, which is Australia’s largest services trade and investment partner, supplies the business services that drive a knowledge economy and provides the credit to finance economic development. Correspondingly, the EU needs Australia both as a commercial base in Asia and as a reliable energy supplier. This article analyses the drivers and difficulties in the economic relationship between Australia and the EU as they start negotiations for a free trade agreement. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Australian Journal of International Affairs is the property of Routledge and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Many scholars have mounted convincing cases that the engagement of Australia and the European Union (EU) has been characterised by skirmishes regarding the Common Agricultural Policy and its distortion of world markets, and lack of Australian access to EU markets. This article illustrates that agricultural and agri-food trade constitutes a relatively small portion of Australia–EU trade flows; that Australia exports more goods to the EU than in the past; and that, in some agri-food sectors, it exports more goods to the EU than the EU does to Australia. Further, it argues that conflict and competition regarding the Common Agricultural Policy need to be understood in the broader context of world trade and in the context of a new and deeper engagement between the two interlocutors. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Disagreements are a natural and inevitable part of any substantial relationship. This is particularly true in the area of international trade, where national interests and the domestic commercial objectives with which they are closely aligned often come into conflict with the interests of trading partners. Because disagreements are inevitable, trade agreements usually provide a framework for resolution of disputes. However, the typical dispute settlement framework established in trade agreements seldom captures the imagination of the business community. Indeed, public international law frameworks for trade dispute settlement tend not to be used for anything other than disputes of the largest magnitude or where there is a deep political issue that is otherwise insoluble. This article argues that such an approach to the crafting of dispute clauses in trade agreements is a missed opportunity. It suggests that, in the context of the relationship between Australia and the European Union, there is potential to develop a range of different approaches to address problems in an effective and accessible manner. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Shared interests between Australia and the European Union (EU) in multilateral trade negotiations are increasing. However, the relationship in the WTO continues to be defined by conflicts over agriculture. This article examines the case for closer Australia-EU co-operation on shared interests in WTO negotiations while continuing to press for more rapid reform of EU agriculture policies. It traces the major changes in the interface between Australia and the EU in the WTO, including the re-structuring of the Australian economy over the past two decades and the more recent efforts by the EU to modify the trade impact of the Common Agriculture Policy (CAP) on world agriculture trade. The article concludes that closer co-operation between Australia and the EU in the WTO on shared interests would enhance Australia's influence in the multilateral trade system. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Disaggregated trade data are used to examine changing trade patterns for five developed economic regions: the USA, the European Union, Australia, Canada and Japan. This study covers the 1980-1997 time period, during which international trade for most goods faced less border protection. Changing trade patterns are found for the USA, Japan, and the EU, while persistent trade patterns are observed for Australia and Canada. Classifying goods into four groups, trade patterns found in manufactured goods were the most dynamic, and trade in bulk agricultural goods the most persistent. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article examines the use of the system of mutual recognition, harmonization and qualified majority voting in the European Union (EU) and Australia as a means to the greater understanding of the impact of globalization in relation to policy convergence. It is argued that the Australian adoption of mutual recognition, based on the EU model, was an example of policy convergence, although the extent of convergence was variable. It is further argued that the convergence was, in part, influenced by globalization. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]