Global and EU agricultural trade reform: what is in it for Tanzania, Uganda and Sub-Saharan Africa?

This discussion paper focuses on the effects of total agricultural trade liberalisation (TAL) in Uganda and Tanzania using the Agricultural Trade Policy Simulation Model (ATPSM) which estimates the effects of total agricultural liberalisation (TAL) on:prices and terms of trade on changes in supplydemand and trade flowson welfare effects for producers and consumers.Estimates reveal several conclusions:EU trade liberalisation should focus on tariff reduction rather than on reforming domestic support in order to benefit SSA countries the mosttotal welfare impacts on Tanzania and Uganda of EU TAL are small because both countries have only modest net exports of agricultural products, so the welfare gains for producers of higher world prices are offset more or less equally by the welfare losses to consumers. Erosion of the value of preferential access to the EU further diminishes producer surplus gainsmiddle-income developing country trade liberalisation, especially China and India, is almost as important for producers in SSA as agricultural trade liberalisation in all developed countries put togetherdeveloped or middle-income developing country trade liberalisation hurts consumers, but benefits producers in SSASSA country or regional trade liberalisation hurts producers and benefits consumersthe welfare effects of SSA country liberalisation on Tanzania and Uganda offset and outweigh the opposite effects of developed and middle-income country agricultural trade liberalisation.Overall:global and EU agriculture reform only offers modest opportunities to Tanzania and Uganda and cannot be expected to have a significant impact immediate impact on povertyother SSA countries do not stand to gain hugely while some are exposed to significant potential losses due to quota-based preference erosion no SSA countries show significant positive total welfare effects, and most show negative total welfare effects.