US turns up heat on allies to open farm markets – 조선일보

Analysis of US Agricultural Trade Policy and its Implications for Sustainable Development

Executive Summary

A recent shift in United States trade policy indicates increased pressure on key Asian allies, notably South Korea and Japan, to expand their agricultural markets. This strategic pivot, driven by diminishing access to markets in China and Latin America, has significant implications for several Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). The focus on specific commodities, such as beef and rice, highlights a tension between national economic interests and the global commitment to sustainable and equitable development. This report analyzes the trade dynamics and evaluates their impact through the lens of the SDGs, particularly those concerning food security, economic growth, inequality, and global partnerships.

Shifting Trade Dynamics and Market Access

Washington is actively seeking replacement markets for its agricultural exports, targeting prosperous partners in East Asia. This policy is supported by quantitative analyses from U.S. government bodies projecting economic gains from expanded market access.

1. Decline in Exports to China: U.S. beef exports to China have experienced a severe downturn, falling 91 percent year-over-year in May. This collapse is attributed to escalating trade tensions and the imposition of prohibitive tariffs and regulatory barriers by Beijing.
2. Increased Focus on South Korea: In contrast, South Korea has emerged as a critical market. U.S. beef exports to the country rose by 39 percent in May, reaching their highest monthly volume since March 2023. The U.S. Meat Export Federation has identified South Korea as a strategic priority to offset losses elsewhere.
3. Pressure on Japan: Japan is facing renewed demands to liberalize its protected rice market. The U.S. administration has publicly criticized Tokyo’s policies, while the U.S. International Trade Commission (ITC) has published reports detailing the potential benefits for American farmers from increased Japanese import quotas.

Impact on Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)

The U.S. trade strategy directly engages with, and in some cases challenges, the principles of the UN Sustainable Development Goals.

• SDG 2: Zero Hunger: The policy aims to secure food systems by ensuring the economic viability of U.S. farmers. However, it simultaneously risks undermining the food security and sovereignty of importing nations by potentially displacing local agricultural production, particularly in sensitive sectors like rice farming, which is crucial for domestic food supply in Japan and South Korea.
• SDG 8: Decent Work and Economic Growth: The strategy is explicitly designed to boost income and support livelihoods for American farmers, aligning with SDG 8 targets in the U.S. Projections estimate potential revenue gains of over $100 million annually from beef sales to South Korea and nearly $60 million from rice sales to Japan. Conversely, this approach may threaten the economic stability and livelihoods of farmers in the importing countries.
• SDG 10: Reduced Inequalities: While the trade dispute involves developed nations, the pressure tactics could exacerbate economic imbalances. The push for market liberalization may benefit large-scale U.S. agricultural exporters at the expense of smaller-scale, domestic farmers in Japan and South Korea, potentially increasing inequality within their agricultural sectors.
• SDG 17: Partnerships for the Goals: The policy leverages long-standing security alliances for unilateral economic objectives. This raises questions about the nature of these partnerships, moving from mutual cooperation towards transactional relationships. An official from South Korea described the targeted ITC modeling as “highly unusual,” suggesting that the approach could strain the trust required for effective global partnerships aimed at achieving sustainable development.

Country-Specific Case Studies

South Korea: Beef and Rice Market Liberalization

1. Beef Imports: The market has already seen a significant increase in U.S. beef imports. Further pressure is being applied to remove remaining non-tariff barriers, such as the age restriction on cattle, which could unlock an estimated $110 million to $175 million in additional annual revenue for U.S. exporters.
2. Rice Market Pressure: With Japan under scrutiny, analysts predict that South Korea, which maintains a tariff-rate quota system for rice imports, will be the next target for U.S. demands for greater market openness.

Japan: Rice Market Liberalization

1. Political Pressure: The U.S. President has directly criticized Japan’s rice import policies as overly protectionist, signaling a high-level political commitment to this issue.
2. Economic Projections: An ITC analysis projects that a 50 percent increase in Japan’s tariff-free rice quota would boost U.S. rice exports by 7.1 percent (97,000 tons) and increase U.S. farmer income by $59.5 million.

Conclusion and Outlook

• The intensified U.S. push for agricultural market access in South Korea and Japan is a clearly defined policy objective, not merely a negotiating tactic.
• This strategy creates a direct conflict between the exporting nation’s economic goals and the importing nations’ objectives related to sustainable domestic agriculture and food security (SDG 2, SDG 8).
• The approach challenges the collaborative spirit of international alliances (SDG 17) and may lead to greater economic friction and inequality (SDG 10).
• Affected nations will face increasing pressure to balance their commitments to global trade with their national sustainable development priorities.

1. Which SDGs are addressed or connected to the issues highlighted in the article?

The article discusses international trade policies, agricultural exports, and economic impacts, which directly connect to the following Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs):

• SDG 2: Zero Hunger

  This goal is relevant because the article focuses on the trade of essential food commodities like beef and rice. Specifically, it addresses the systems and policies governing the global food trade, which is a key aspect of ensuring food security and sustainable agriculture.

• SDG 8: Decent Work and Economic Growth

  The article connects to this goal by highlighting how changes in international trade policies and market access can directly impact the economic well-being and income of agricultural producers. The potential financial gains for American farmers from increased exports are a central theme.

• SDG 17: Partnerships for the Goals

  This goal is addressed through the article’s core subject: international trade negotiations and partnerships. It examines the dynamics of bilateral trade relationships (U.S.-South Korea, U.S.-Japan) and the push for a more open and rules-based global trading system for agricultural products.

2. What specific targets under those SDGs can be identified based on the article’s content?

Based on the issues discussed, the following specific targets can be identified:

1. Target 2.b: Correct and prevent trade restrictions and distortions in world agricultural markets.

   The article directly relates to this target by detailing the U.S. efforts to dismantle trade barriers. This includes challenging Japan’s “protectionist stance” on rice, pushing South Korea to lift its “age restriction on beef imports,” and addressing Japan’s “tariff-free rice quota.” The mention of China imposing “punitive tariffs of up to 147 percent on American beef” further underscores the focus on correcting trade restrictions.

2. Target 8.1: Sustain per capita economic growth in accordance with national circumstances.

   This target is relevant as the article quantifies the potential economic benefits of expanded market access. The analysis estimates that lifting beef restrictions in South Korea could generate an “additional $110 million to $175 million in annual revenue” for U.S. exporters. Similarly, increasing Japan’s rice quota could “raise income for American rice farmers by $59.5 million.” These figures represent direct contributions to economic growth within the U.S. agricultural sector.

3. Target 17.10: Promote a universal, rules-based, open, non-discriminatory and equitable multilateral trading system.

   The U.S. pressure on Japan and South Korea to “open their agricultural markets” is a clear attempt to promote a more open trading system for its products. The criticism of Japan’s “protectionist stance” and the strategic push for “rice market liberalization” as a “policy objective” reflect efforts to alter existing trade rules and create more favorable conditions for international commerce, aligning with the principles of this target.

3. Are there any indicators mentioned or implied in the article that can be used to measure progress towards the identified targets?

Yes, the article provides several quantitative and qualitative indicators that can be used to measure progress:

• Indicators for Target 2.b (Correcting Trade Restrictions):

  • Tariff Rates: The article explicitly mentions “punitive tariffs of up to 147 percent” on U.S. beef by China and a “preferential 5 percent tariff” on rice in South Korea. Changes in these rates would be a direct indicator of progress.
  • Non-Tariff Barriers: The “age restriction on beef imports” in South Korea is a specific non-tariff barrier. Its removal would be a measurable outcome.
  • Import Quotas: The article specifies Japan’s “tariff-free rice quota” of “682,000 tons annually” and South Korea’s limit of “408,700 tons annually.” An increase in these quotas, such as the proposed “50 percent increase in Japan’s” quota, serves as a clear indicator.

• Indicators for Target 8.1 (Economic Growth):

  • Change in Producer Income/Revenue: The article provides specific financial projections that can be used as indicators. These include the potential “$110 million to $175 million in annual revenue” for beef exporters and a “$59.5 million” income increase for rice farmers.

• Indicators for Target 17.10 (Open Trading System):

  • Volume of Exports: The article uses export volume to measure market access. It reports that beef exports to South Korea reached “25,228 metric tons” (a 39% increase), while exports to China fell to “1,398 tons” (a 91% decrease). The projected “97,000 tons” increase in rice exports to Japan is another key performance indicator.
  • Percentage Change in Exports: The year-over-year percentage changes provided, such as the “39 percent” increase in beef exports to South Korea and the “91 percent” plummet in exports to China, are direct indicators of shifting trade patterns and market access.

4. Create a table with three columns titled ‘SDGs, Targets and Indicators” to present the findings from analyzing the article.

Source: news.nate.com