Study Groups Versus Commodity Agreements: An Appraisal

W. Keith Buck

Natural Resources Forum, 1987, vol. 11, issue 4, 363-368

Abstract: Since World War II there have been several attempts to establish intergovernmental mineral commodity arrangements involving both the producing and consuming countries. Two different forms have been used, the consultative forum and the commodity agreement (with binding economic provisions). The two different approaches are compared using as examples the six post‐World War II International Tin Agreements and the International Lead and Zinc Study Group. The study group or consultative forum appears to work better.

Date: 1987
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (1)

Downloads: (external link)
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1477-8947.1987.tb00006.x

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:wly:natres:v:11:y:1987:i:4:p:363-368

Access Statistics for this article

More articles in Natural Resources Forum from Blackwell Publishing
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Wiley Content Delivery ().