the contingency of national farm sectors is revealed, notably in the restructuring
of family farm systems on the Pacific Rim.
I wish to thank Chul-Kyoo Kim, Research Assistant, Cornell University, for his assistance
in the preparation of this paper, as well as Larry Burmeister and Harriet Friedmann who
commented constructively on the draft. I also acknowledge the financial assistance of Hatch
Grant #6404 undertaken at the Cornell University Agricultural Experiment Station.
Rivalry is relative, as countries like Brazil, Argentina, Thailand, and even China
constitute alternative supply zones for certain agricultural commodities. However, none
match the sheer volume of exports of the United States, and its ability to influence world
market prices and to protect its farm sector (c.f., Charvet, 1990: 179).
The Economist has suggested that the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade
(GATT) "has a fundamentally mercantilist character. It embodies the idea that domestic
producers have a prior claim to domestic markets, that exports are "good" and imports
"bad," and that unilateral protection creates national economic advantage. . . . In the 1990s
[if America pursues the route of "fair trade" on its own terms--that is, exercising its muscle
with super-301, threatening higher U.S. trade barriers] the interests of exporters will no
longer be aligned with the true national interest--which is to lower barriers to imports.
Instead, they will be aligned with demands for higher barriers, as a way of putting pressure
on foreigners" ( December 15, 1990: 16).
It is worth noting that a precondition of this goal, as a serious goal, would be a
restructuring of U.S. agriculture away from low-value bulk foods and raw materials, toward
high-value products, which have become the locus of growth (and more stable markets)
in world agricultural trade since 1980, accounting for the first time for more than 50 percent
of the total value of world agricultural trade ( Hillman &
Rothenberg, 1988: 63).
Japanese rice producer prices exceed world prices by eight to ten times, and consumer
prices are only slightly lower because of an expensive subsidy ( Hathaway 1987: 29).
However, Chikara Higashi and G. Peter Lauter have written: "the impact of
agricultural exports on the bilateral trade imbalances is minimal. In 1986, for instance,
a study of the congressional research service of the Library of Congress concluded that
the elimination of all Japanese agricultural import restraints could increase American sales
by approximately $1 billion, but this would decrease the overall bilateral trade deficit by
only 2 percent" ( 1987: 126).
In 1967, Western Wheat Associates arrived in Korea to spearhead an eat-wheat
campaign, supported by agribusiness companies, encouraging a dietary shift to lunch-rolls
and sandwiches. In 1972, the first automatic biscuit and cracker equipment was installed
in three plants, and by 1979, more than 21,000 housewives in more than 100 cities attended
special sandwich-making classes. In 1975, over 7,000 bakeries had appeared, and in 1978, Korea joined the "billion dollar club" of purchasers of imported farm goods from the United
States ( Wessel, 1983: 173).
The report said: " Japan is now by far our largest single customer; its imports of
more than $1.2 billion in 1970 were two-and-one-half times those of a decade earlier. On
the other hand, our market growth in Europe was less favourable. . . . The Commission
recommends that the United States should immediately and vigorously assert its agricultural
interests in bilateral discussion at the highest political level. . . . As Japanese products
Questia, a part of Gale, Cengage Learning. www.questia.com
Book title: Pacific-Asia and the Future of the World-System.
Contributors: Ravi Arvind Palat - Editor.
Publisher: Greenwood Press.
Place of publication: Westport, CT.
Publication year: 1993.
Page number: 115.
This material is protected by copyright and, with the exception of fair use, may
not be further copied, distributed or transmitted in any form or by any means.