Agricultural Bias in Focus
Summary
The document defines anti-agricultural bias as a condition where policies and market failures disadvantage farmers relative to other economic sectors. It details four primary economic indicators for measuring this bias: the Nominal Rate of Protection, the Nominal Rate of Assistance, the Relative Rate of Assistance, and the Effective Rate of Protection. The report argues that while historical bias was driven by explicit taxes on agriculture and subsidies for industry, contemporary bias in non-transformed economies often stems from market failures, such as poor infrastructure and unbalanced market power. Through case studies of 12 countries, the report demonstrates that bias is often heterogeneous across different crops; for example, rice often benefits from protection via regional tariffs, while cash crops like tea or cashew nuts are frequently taxed. Specific country analyses reveal that in nations like Ethiopia and Zambia, high anti-agricultural bias is driven by low output prices and export bans, despite the presence of agricultural import tariffs.
Key insights
- Anti-agricultural bias is quantified using four main indicators: the Nominal Rate of Protection (comparing farm gate prices to reference prices), the Nominal Rate of Assistance (including subsidies and taxes), the Relative Rate of Assistance (comparing agriculture to the rest of the economy), and the Effective Rate of Protection (tracking net effects on farm value added).
- The drivers of agricultural bias have shifted over time; historically, developing economies taxed agriculture while advanced economies subsidized it, but current bias in non-transformed sectors is primarily caused by market failures and a lack of efficient market regulations.
- Agricultural bias is often inconsistent across different products within a single country; rice frequently benefits from positive protection due to regional Common External Tariffs, whereas cash crops like tea, groundnuts, and cashew nuts are often taxed.
- In Ethiopia, a strong anti-agricultural bias is driven by very low output prices for teff and maize, where farm gate prices are on average 70% lower than world prices, exacerbated by intermittent export bans on maize.
- India exhibits a moderate anti-agricultural bias where domestic prices for commodities like rice, groundnuts, and cotton are kept below export parity prices through export restrictions to protect domestic consumers.
- In Zambia, high anti-agricultural bias is largely attributed to maize prices being 68% below world prices, driven by the monopsonistic nature of markets and an overvalued exchange rate.
- Rwanda and Tanzania are identified as having no current anti-agricultural bias, with agriculture in both countries being more protected than other sectors via tariffs.
Cite the original document
- APA
- Baliño, S., Laborde, D., Murphy, S., Parent, M., Smaller, C., & Traoré, F. (2019). Agricultural Bias in Focus. International Institute for Sustainable Development. https://www.iisd.org/system/files/publications/agricultural-bias-in-focus.pdf
- Chicago
- Baliño, Sofia, David Laborde, Sophia Murphy, Marie Parent, Carin Smaller, and Fousseini Traoré. Agricultural Bias in Focus. International Institute for Sustainable Development, 2019. https://www.iisd.org/system/files/publications/agricultural-bias-in-focus.pdf.
- Wikipedia
- {{cite report |last1=Baliño |first1=Sofia |last2=Laborde |first2=David |last3=Murphy |first3=Sophia |last4=Parent |first4=Marie |last5=Smaller |first5=Carin |last6=Traoré |first6=Fousseini |title=Agricultural Bias in Focus |publisher=International Institute for Sustainable Development |date=September 2019 |url=https://www.iisd.org/system/files/publications/agricultural-bias-in-focus.pdf |access-date=23 October 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}
- BibTeX
- @techreport{balio2019agricultural, author = {Baliño, Sofia and Laborde, David and Murphy, Sophia and Parent, Marie and Smaller, Carin and Traoré, Fousseini}, title = {{Agricultural Bias in Focus}}, institution = {International Institute for Sustainable Development}, year = {2019}, month = sep, url = {https://www.iisd.org/system/files/publications/agricultural-bias-in-focus.pdf}, urldate = {2026-10-23}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }
Full text
Collected · Record updated