Explore

Project work = 40%

The debate arises because **non-reciprocal trade preferences** can create both advantages and limitations for low- and middle-income countries (LMICs):

1. **Pros of Preferences**: - **Improved Access**: These trade preferences give LMICs easier access to EU markets, often with reduced tariffs on certain goods. This can boost exports from LMICs, generating income and creating jobs in specific sectors. - **Economic Support**: The preferences are designed to help LMICs grow by supporting their industries, such as agriculture, textiles, or raw materials, without requiring them to open their own markets in return.

2. **Cons and Dependency Risks**: - **Raw Material Dependency**: Preferences often favor raw materials over processed goods, so LMICs mainly export unprocessed items, like coffee beans or cocoa. This limits local industries from developing value-added processes, reducing potential growth in higher-paying jobs and industrial capacity. - **Limited Competitiveness**: Since LMICs rely on favorable treatment rather than true competitiveness, they may struggle to compete globally without these preferences. The system doesn’t encourage LMICs to diversify or build resilience, leading to reliance on EU markets. - **Reinforcement of Economic Dependency**: By not fostering full reciprocal trade or capacity building, these preferences can create a dependency loop. LMICs focus on specific exports and fail to build robust economies that could diversify beyond the products favored under EU preferences【48†source】【49†source】.

This situation can trap LMICs in an economic role defined by dependency on high-income markets rather than fostering independent growth and competitiveness.

Focus

- **Marginalization of Small Producers**: Small-scale farmers often can’t afford the costs of meeting high standards and tariffs. As a result, only larger exporters with greater resources may thrive, potentially driving out smallholders and consolidating the industry.

### 4. **Potential for Monoculture and Environmental Impact** - **Incentive for Monoculture**: LMICs might prioritize crops like coffee and cacao over diverse, local agriculture to meet demand in high-income markets. This leads to monoculture practices, which can degrade soil health, increase vulnerability to pests, and raise long-term environmental risks. - **Environmental Standards**: Meeting stringent environmental standards for export may also mean adopting specific practices that are costly or unsustainable in the local context, diverting resources from other necessary practices like crop rotation or soil management.

### 5. **Limits on Economic Development and Value Addition** - **Low Retention of Value**: Due to tariffs, LMICs typically export raw or minimally processed products (e.g., raw coffee beans), missing out on value-added processing (like roasting) that could improve profit margins and foster local industry. - **Barriers to Moving Up the Value Chain**: Tariffs and standards can prevent LMICs from advancing into processing or packaging sectors. Without moving up the value chain, they miss out on job creation and economic diversification opportunities.

- **Inequitable Trade Relations**: LMICs are often forced into a dependent role, supplying raw goods at lower profits, while higher-income countries capture greater value through tariffs and processing. This reinforces existing inequalities in the global trade system.

### 1. **Dependency on Exporting Raw Materials** - **Barrier to Processed Goods**: High tariffs on processed goods mean that LMICs primarily export raw materials (like unprocessed coffee beans or cacao) to avoid the financial penalties associated with processed exports. As a result, LMICs struggle to build local processing industries and miss out on value-added economic benefits. - **Limited Local Industry Development**: Due to this focus on raw exports, LMICs lack infrastructure and investment in producing processed or diversified foods. This increases dependence on imports for other food categories, often sourced from developed nations where processing industries are already advanced.

- **Market Concentration and Control**: Large global food corporations, often based in developed countries, control much of the processed food market. LMICs become reliant on these companies, whose products fill the gap left by the lack of local processing. This concentration limits LMIC autonomy and ability to strengthen their own food sovereignty.

### 3. **Impact on Food Sovereignty and Regional Self-Sufficiency** - **Loss of Local Food Systems**: Because LMICs focus on exporting raw goods rather than cultivating local food systems, domestic agricultural resources are diverted from meeting local needs to serving export demands. This undercuts local food security and forces dependency on imports for a balanced diet.

### 4. **Role of Global Value Chains and Spatial Concentration** - **Concentration of Processing in Developed Nations**: High tariffs and standards ensure that most value-added processing takes place in developed countries, resulting in a spatial concentration of the food industry there. This spatial concentration reinforces LMICs’ roles as raw material providers rather than value-added producers, creating a power imbalance in global value chains. - **Dependence on Imported Processed Foods**: Since developed countries control processing and distribution in these concentrated value chains, LMICs depend on these imports to diversify their food options. This dynamic undermines food sovereignty, as LMICs lack control over both production and processing stages in the value chain.

### 5. **Impact on Food Sovereignty and Diet Quality** - **Loss of Autonomy Over Diets**: With high import reliance on processed foods from high-income countries, LMICs often experience a decline in diet quality. Ultra-processed foods are typically cheaper and easier to import, affecting local dietary health and increasing dependence on foreign-controlled food supplies. - **Reduced Incentive for Local Diversification**: Local farmers and companies in LMICs are incentivized to produce export-oriented crops rather than diverse, nutritious foods for the domestic market. This dependency results in a food system that prioritizes export earnings over local nutritional needs and food sovereignty.

For low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) that face high standards and tariffs when exporting agricultural products like coffee and cacao to the EU or other high-income markets, the consequences can be significant and complex. Here’s an analysis of the primary effects:

### 1. **Higher Production Costs** - **Compliance with Standards**: High standards (e.g., sanitary and phytosanitary standards) require LMIC producers to invest in better infrastructure, technology, and quality control, which increases production costs. - **Certification Expenses**: Achieving certifications (like organic, Fairtrade, or Rainforest Alliance) necessary for export to high-income countries is often costly. Small producers may struggle to afford these, creating a barrier to market entry.

### 2. **Reduced Export Competitiveness** - **Tariffs Impact Price Competitiveness**: High tariffs increase the final price of LMIC products in the EU market, making them less competitive compared to domestic or other tariff-free goods. This may reduce market share and limit access to high-income consumers. - **Preference for Domestic Products**: High-income countries may prioritize domestic products when they impose tariffs and strict standards, impacting LMIC export potential and driving preference toward locally-produced or tariff-free imports.

### 3. **Pressure on Small-Scale Farmers** - **Marginalization of Small Producers**: Small-scale farmers often can’t afford the costs of meeting high standards and tariffs. As a result, only larger exporters with greater resources may thrive, potentially driving out smallholders and consolidating the industry. - **Income Instability**: Coffee and cacao farmers in LMICs often face income instability due to fluctuating global prices and the costs of meeting export requirements. Higher costs with less certainty in revenue make these livelihoods precarious.

### 6. **Market Diversification Challenges** - **Reliance on Few Markets**: High tariffs and standards may force LMICs to depend heavily on a small number of compliant markets, making them vulnerable to market fluctuations, policy changes, or economic downturns in these target markets. - **Difficulty Entering Alternative Markets**: For LMICs that meet EU standards, exporting to other countries with lower standards may still pose challenges due to different demand dynamics and price competition in those alternative markets.

### 7. **Social and Economic Inequality** - **Limited Benefits for Local Communities**: Due to the barriers imposed by high tariffs and standards, benefits from export-led growth may be limited to larger, resource-rich producers rather than reaching rural communities or smaller farmers. - **Inequitable Trade Relations**: LMICs are often forced into a dependent role, supplying raw goods at lower profits, while higher-income countries capture greater value through tariffs and processing. This reinforces existing inequalities in the global trade system.

### Summary High standards and tariffs imposed by high-income markets like the EU create a range of challenges for LMICs, from higher production costs and environmental risks to limited economic development and increased inequality. Reducing tariffs, creating more flexible standards, or providing support for compliance could help mitigate these impacts, allowing LMICs to capture greater economic and social benefits from global trade.

High tariffs and stringent standards imposed by the EU and other developed nations contribute significantly to food dependencies in LMICs, fostering an imbalance in trade that impacts **food sovereignty** and intensifies LMIC reliance on food imports from high-income countries. Here’s how these factors connect:

### 2. **Increased Import Reliance on Processed and Packaged Foods** - **High Standards for Exports, Lower Standards for Imports**: Developed countries impose high standards and tariffs on imports from LMICs but often export processed, packaged foods without such restrictions. This creates an imbalance where LMICs rely on imported processed foods from high-income countries, contributing to a cycle of dependency for diverse food supplies. - **Market Concentration and Control**: Large global food corporations, often based in developed countries, control much of the processed food market. LMICs become reliant on these companies, whose products fill the gap left by the lack of local processing. This concentration limits LMIC autonomy and ability to strengthen their own food sovereignty.

### 3. **Impact on Food Sovereignty and Regional Self-Sufficiency** - **Vulnerability to Trade Shocks and Price Fluctuations**: With heavy reliance on imported processed goods due to restricted local industries, LMICs are more vulnerable to global price shocks and trade policy shifts. This dependency weakens their food sovereignty, as they are unable to control essential aspects of their food supply. - **Loss of Local Food Systems**: Because LMICs focus on exporting raw goods rather than cultivating local food systems, domestic agricultural resources are diverted from meeting local needs to serving export demands. This undercuts local food security and forces dependency on imports for a balanced diet.

### Conclusion High tariffs and standards imposed by developed countries reinforce a **global value chain** that perpetuates LMIC dependency on raw exports while increasing reliance on processed food imports. This setup weakens food sovereignty in LMICs, as they become net importers of processed foods and lose the autonomy needed for sustainable, self-sufficient food systems. In this way, **market concentration** and **spatial concentration** of food processing in high-income countries reinforce dependencies that limit LMICs’ capacity to achieve self-sufficient, resilient food systems.

Grading Criterias

Topic: Focus fits the class;

Course content

Course content will focus on

Knowledge about Food Markets

Products / supply and demand / trade

Interdependencies between markets

Pricing systems

Actors / companies

Knowledge about Institutional Framework

WTO as the framework for global food markets

Tariff barriers

Non-tariff barriers

Private Standards

Relevant Organisation

Global Value Chains

Concentration (business level)

Spatial concentration

Analytical Framework

Modelling food markets

Approaches / limits / applications

Welfare Analysis

Measuring Competitiveness

Suggested topics

Needs to be related to agricultural and food markets, e.g.

Role of private versus public standards in international food markets

The impact of multinationals on agricultural and food markets

Food security and trade

Impact of EU Biofuel Policies on global agricultural markets

Institutional setting, developments, and challenges in the world coffee market

Impact of COVID-19 on food markets

…

Analysis provided and correct;

what kind of analysis specifically, qualitative or quantitative?

Scope: Penetration of the topic

like deep scoop, we need to have comprehesive data

! But Selected restrictions of the topic and selected foci are justified in an appropriate way.

It means that when you choose to limit the scope of your topic (i.e., what aspects of the topic you decide not to cover) or focus on specific areas within your presentation, you should explain and provide a valid reason for those choices. The justification should be appropriate and logical, showing that you have considered the broader context and deliberately decided what to concentrate on or exclude.

"Penetration of the topic" refers to how deeply and thoroughly you explore the subject matter. It means going beyond surface-level understanding and demonstrating a comprehensive grasp of the topic's complexities, nuances, and underlying issues.

In relation to "Selected restrictions of the topic and selected foci are justified in an appropriate way," the two are complementary. While "penetration of the topic" expects you to delve deeply into the areas you cover, "selected restrictions" acknowledges that it's not always possible or practical to cover everything. Therefore, it's acceptable to narrow the scope, as long as you justify why you've focused on certain aspects and omitted others.

In short: - You are expected to explore your chosen aspects thoroughly (penetration). - You can limit the scope, but you must explain why those limits or focuses were necessary (justification).

Data presented are correct and useful;

Independent work

→ how we can make it independenet? like do some original research? Or just do not plagiarise?

Abbreviations and technical terms are explained;

The presentation has a story and follows a clear line;

Topic ideas

Role of trade in global food security?

how we can still make food soverignity happen, so there won’t be dependencies on food

and at the same time regional specialization in food production, and then global trade really makes sense

but global trade bad for envrionment, and enables meat production continuation, when local market going vegan/vegetarian

⁠

is there a way that improves diet healthiness, decreases hunger/malnutition, and nutrient insufficiency, decreases food exports and therefore dependencies aka improves local food production and food sovereignity, so there won’t be as much net exporters , but at the same time do not ruins the economy of the country, and envrionment even more, cause there need more land for food production cause of bad yelds or inappropriate climate/conditions for specific food industry?

chatgpt

Your topic "Role of trade in global food security" fits the class focus well. Here's why:

### Alignment with Course Content: 1. **Knowledge about Food Markets**: - Your exploration of regional specialization, global trade, and food sovereignty addresses "Products / supply and demand / trade" and "Interdependencies between markets." - You consider how trade can affect pricing systems and the dependency between regions, aligning with the course's focus on pricing systems and actors in the market.

2. **Knowledge about Institutional Framework**: - By questioning the impact of global trade on food sovereignty and environment, you are indirectly engaging with WTO frameworks, tariff barriers, and private standards, which shape global trade in food markets.

3. **Relevant Organization**: - Your analysis of global trade and its impact on food sovereignty touches on "Global Value Chains" and the issue of market concentration, which could be expanded on with regard to spatial concentration and its role in trade efficiency and food sovereignty.

4. **Analytical Framework**: - You're effectively modeling a scenario that balances local food production, sovereignty, and trade. This fits well with "Modelling food markets" and "Welfare Analysis," particularly when you discuss economic and environmental impacts.

### Alignment with Suggested Topics: - Your focus on food sovereignty and reducing dependencies directly connects to **Food security and trade**. - The environmental impacts and food export issues you raise also have parallels with the suggested topic on **Impact of EU Biofuel Policies** and could easily branch into institutional frameworks like the WTO.

### Conclusion: The focus of your topic aligns well with both the broader course content and specific suggested topics. It allows you to explore global trade while also connecting food sovereignty, environmental sustainability, and economic viability, which are key elements in food market analysis. This will provide plenty of room to demonstrate **penetration of the topic** and justify your **selected restrictions** or foci in a way that matches course objectives.

when meat/animal products substitutes consumption rises in internal market, the production of meat/animal products do not decreases, but the export of it in increases to other countries, for example China

I want to see, how the production can be decreased actually, but i do not know, that seems like not a question of global agricultural and food markets

Maybe we just can see whether this notion is correct and it is really like this how export actually increased from EU or other countries of meat and animal products because there was an internal (within EU, or within Germany) switch to animal products susbtitues

chatgpt

### Assessment of the Topic:

1. **Meat/Animal Products Substitutes & Export Increase**: - **Course Relevance**: This topic can fit into discussions about **food markets**, particularly regarding **supply and demand**, **trade**, and the **pricing systems** of animal products. It explores the market dynamics that occur when local consumption shifts to substitutes but production does not decrease. - **Knowledge about Institutional Framework**: You could link this to trade frameworks (e.g., WTO) and the role of **tariff barriers** or **non-tariff barriers** that may influence whether internal production shifts can reduce global meat production. You may also explore how **private standards** and government policies could affect exports and animal product markets. 2. **Exploring How to Decrease Production**: - You're correct in identifying that this may not directly be a question of **global agricultural and food markets** but rather involves **policy decisions**, **subsidies**, and **market incentives** that shape production volumes. However, you could explore: - **Global Value Chains**: How integrated meat production is into global value chains and what interventions might reduce overall production globally, rather than just shifting supply across borders. - **Welfare Analysis**: This could explore the welfare impacts of reducing meat production, looking at economic and social costs versus benefits (health, environmental outcomes).

3. **Verifying the Notion of Export Increase**: - **Relevance to the Course**: Investigating whether the shift to animal substitutes in places like the EU or Germany **increases exports** would clearly fit within the course's exploration of **trade** and **interdependencies between markets**. - You could examine how **pricing systems** and demand shifts in China or other countries incentivize producers to shift their exports rather than reduce production. This fits the course’s focus on **trade** and **global food markets**. ### Conclusion: This topic can be shaped to fit the class focus well. It intersects with global trade dynamics, **food security**, and **market responses** to changes in consumer preferences. Although it involves policy aspects (e.g., how to actually reduce meat production), it still engages with the institutional frameworks and economic forces shaping the global food market, which makes it a good fit for the course. It can be expanded through market modeling, which ties back to the analytical framework taught in the course.

Role of global trade rise in decline of healthy diets?

UltraProcessed food

⁠

Loading www.foodunfolded.com⁠

⁠

chatgpt

### Assessment of the Topic:

1. **Role of Global Trade Rise in Decline of Healthy Diets (Ultra-Processed Foods)**:

- **Course Relevance**: This topic fits well into the **global food markets** content, particularly within the discussion of **supply and demand**, **trade** interdependencies, and **pricing systems**. Ultra-processed food is heavily influenced by global trade and pricing, which shapes its availability and affordability across borders. - **Knowledge about Institutional Framework**: This can connect to how **global trade frameworks** like the **WTO** enable the distribution of ultra-processed foods, especially under **non-tariff barriers** or **private standards** that might be too lenient in promoting healthier food choices. The role of trade agreements in facilitating this spread could be a focal point.

2. **Impact on Healthy Diets**: - **Relevant Organization**: You could explore how **global value chains** (e.g., corporations that produce and distribute processed foods) shape local food environments. Concentration at the business level (i.e., a few multinational companies dominating the processed food market) would be another key aspect, as this relates to **spatial concentration** of these products globally. - **Analytical Framework**: You could analyze how this rise in global trade of ultra-processed foods impacts **welfare** (diet healthiness, malnutrition) and whether current **competitiveness models** in global trade actually incentivize poor food choices due to their profitability.

3. **Global Trade & Ultra-Processed Food**: - This topic aligns directly with the course's suggested content on **food security and trade**. You could also link it to the **impact of multinationals** on agricultural and food markets, as these large companies are key players in the global ultra-processed food supply chain. - Furthermore, you could examine the **health costs** of global trade facilitating access to low-nutrition, high-calorie processed foods, looking into how local markets become dependent on these products, weakening food sovereignty and healthy diets.

### Conclusion: This topic is highly relevant to the course, especially within the lens of **food security**, **global trade**, and the institutional frameworks that promote the spread of unhealthy food options. It allows you to explore key course concepts like **global value chains**, **market concentration**, and the **welfare impacts** of trade, all while tying it back to current real-world issues around ultra-processed food consumption.

⁠

Presentation with extended notes + Oral presentation + Q&A discussion

Relevance of the topic

Background information

Link it to theory/empirical studies

Provide an evaluation

→ what kind of evaluation?

⁠

Students' Project Work

Prepare a presentation

No seminar paper is required, however ppt presentation with extended notes

Content

Relevance of the topic

Background information

Link it to theory/empirical studies

Provide an evaluation

Presentation of Project Work

Dates (during regular class-time) – January 2025.

25-30 minutes presentation (all group members should present)

15-20 minutes discussion (all members should be ready to answer questions, though the discussion can be led by one person)

⁠

Students’ Project Work – joint/own

Please indicate and agree

Who has taken exclusively or primary responsibility for what parts

Which parts you did jointly.

Provide this information when submitting your project work on the last slide of the file with the notes.

⁠

Students’ Project Work – criteria for grading

Discussion

Stimulation of the discussion: Preparation of questions/statements for the discussion;

Capability to react to the questions of the audience; impression that the topic is understood.

Style and format of the slides

Adequate number and density of slides; design of slides;

Provision of references (short citation on the slides, complete reference list on the last slides);

Language and accuracy (e.g., Orthography);

Own initiatives: Creation of graphics, tables, and/or figures instead of copy and paste (especially if not appropriate).

Style of the presentation

Introduction of presenters and addressing the audience;

Consideration of time (stay within the time limit);

Secure fluent speech (e.g., use of cards as support if this provides additional security).

Content (presentation and extended slides)

Independent work;

Penetration of the topic;

Focus fits the class;

Data presented are correct and useful;

Analysis provided and correct;

Abbreviations and technical terms are explained;

The presentation has a story and follows a clear line;

Selected restrictions of the topic and selected foci are justified in an appropriate way.

TED veideo transcript??

Global trade goal

peace → fosters global world peace (48s-50s) → economic interdependece (→ globalization oursourcing global corporations → GDP 7% ↑ ytg (?) → but uquibed (?)) → GATT

global efficiencey → 70-80s-90s → boost the global economy → a lot of protectionstic tariffs in 70s → 80s low

→ NTBs?

→ on even played field

→ strip away NTB

1995 WTO NAFTA CAFTA (?)

domestic regulations → alligned to global efficiency

as much goods as possible through borderrs vs. local regulations

racial equity

public health

env. protection

Fre trade, globalizations global standards, rules

What rules wwe want

global prosperity?

farmers - people

Supply chains

Resilience

Divers.risks

Buffer more stack piles ↓ ery expensive

? more equipment

competition preassures -

1) sharing risks

insurance keeping extra equipment (resourcce materials machinery) for a fee shared ongoing

2) radical transparency

who shared the same risks → companies used the same inputs → ho compete to same scarce resource

3) automation recommendations

→ AI, ML

passengers - transport companies delayes

Global trade

→ creates jobs

→ aka global efficiency at lowering costs allpwes business to decrease their costs and develop and grow their business

fair trade

→ workers exploraton vs. Trie goal production efficiency

underatand more how to deal the SPS as NTB sm

Want to print your doc?
This is not the way.

Try clicking the ⋯ next to your doc name or using a keyboard shortcut (

CtrlP

) instead.