EconPapers    
Economics at your fingertips  
 

Agriculture versus fish – Norway in WTO

Ivar Gaasland ()
Additional contact information
Ivar Gaasland: INSTITUTE FOR RESEARCH IN ECONOMICS AND BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION, Postal: Breiviksveien 40, N-5045 Bergen

No 13/08, Working Papers in Economics from University of Bergen, Department of Economics

Abstract: The Norwegian agriculture is highly protected and subsidised. The opposite is the case for fisheries and fish farming which suffer from foreign market restrictions. Using a computational general equilibrium model, the gain for Norway of a complete elimination of food subsidies and tariffs is estimated to be in the range of 1.2 - 2.7 per cent of GDP. Most of this gain stems from domestic farm sector iberalisation. The gain from free market access for seafood is estimated to 4.4 per cent of the seafood export value. Consequently, Norway has much to gain from offering other countries market access for agricultural products. In return, Norway should demand free access for their fish products.

Keywords: general equilibrium model; cost of agricultural policy; trade liberalisation; food industry; fisheries. (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: C68 Q18 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Pages: 20 pages
Date: 2008-08-23
References: View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
http://ekstern.filer.uib.no/svf/2008/wp13-08.pdf Full text (application/pdf)

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:hhs:bergec:2008_013

Access Statistics for this paper

More papers in Working Papers in Economics from University of Bergen, Department of Economics Institutt for økonomi, Universitetet i Bergen, Postboks 7802, 5020 Bergen, Norway. Contact information at EDIRC.
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Kjell Erik Lommerud ().

 
Page updated 2025-06-03
Handle: RePEc:hhs:bergec:2008_013