Skip to main content
    • Aa
    • Aa
  • Get access
    Check if you have access via personal or institutional login
  • Cited by 24
  • Cited by
    This article has been cited by the following publications. This list is generated based on data provided by CrossRef.

    Crump, Larry and Druckman, Daniel 2016. Turning Points and International Environments: Multilateral Negotiations in the GATT and the WTO. International Negotiation, Vol. 21, Issue. 1, p. 1.

    Ishiguro, Kaoru 2016. TPP negotiations and political economy reforms in Japan’s executive policy making: a two-level game analysis. International Relations of the Asia-Pacific, p. lcw010.

    Kiryluk-Dryjska, Ewa 2016. Negotiation analysis using the theory of moves—Theoretical background and a case study. Journal of Policy Modeling, Vol. 38, Issue. 1, p. 44.

    Thies, Cameron G. 2015. The declining exceptionalism of agriculture: identifying the domestic politics and foreign policy of agricultural trade protectionism. Review of International Political Economy, Vol. 22, Issue. 2, p. 339.

    Müller, Patrick Kudrna, Zdenek and Falkner, Gerda 2014. EU–global interactions: policy export, import, promotion and protection. Journal of European Public Policy, Vol. 21, Issue. 8, p. 1102.

    Panke, Diana 2014. The European Union in the United Nations: an effective external actor?. Journal of European Public Policy, Vol. 21, Issue. 7, p. 1050.

    Poletti, Arlo and De Biévre, Dirk 2014. The political science of European trade policy: A literature review with a research outlook. Comparative European Politics, Vol. 12, Issue. 1, p. 101.

    da Conceição-Heldt, Eugénia 2013. Two-level games and trade cooperation: What do we now know?. International Politics, Vol. 50, Issue. 4, p. 579.

    MILNE, DAVID 2011. The 1968 Paris peace negotiations: a two level game?. Review of International Studies, Vol. 37, Issue. 02, p. 577.

    Urpelainen, Johannes 2011. Early birds: Special interests and the strategic logic of international cooperation. The Review of International Organizations, Vol. 6, Issue. 2, p. 113.

    Josling, T. Anderson, K. Schmitz, A. and Tangermann, S. 2010. Understanding International Trade in Agricultural Products: One Hundred Years of Contributions by Agricultural Economists. American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Vol. 92, Issue. 2, p. 424.

    Campbell, Hugh R. and Coombes, Brad L. 2009. Green Protectionism and Organic Food Exporting from New Zealand: Crisis Experiments in the Breakdown of Fordist Trade and Agricultural Policies. Rural Sociology, Vol. 64, Issue. 2, p. 302.

    KAY, ADRIAN and ACKRILL, ROBERT 2009. Institutional Change in the International Governance of Agriculture: A Revised Account. Governance, Vol. 22, Issue. 3, p. 483.

    Lynggaard, Kennet and Nedergaard, Peter 2009. The Logic of Policy Development: Lessons Learned from Reform and Routine within the CAP 1980–2003. Journal of European Integration, Vol. 31, Issue. 3, p. 291.

    Nedergaard, Peter 2008. The reform of the 2003 Common Agricultural Policy: an advocacy coalition explanation1. Policy Studies, Vol. 29, Issue. 2, p. 179.

    Conceição-Heldt, Eugénia 2006. Verhandlungssituationen in der EU: Eine theoriegeleitete Analyse der Gemeinsamen Fischereipolitik. Swiss Political Science Review, Vol. 12, Issue. 1, p. 73.

    Nedergaard, Peter 2006. The 2003 Reform of the Common Agricultural Policy: Against all Odds or Rational Explanations?. Journal of European Integration, Vol. 28, Issue. 3, p. 203.

    Swinbank, Alan and Daugbjerg, Carsten 2006. The 2003 CAP Reform: Accommodating WTO Pressures. Comparative European Politics, Vol. 4, Issue. 1, p. 47.

    Redmond, Willie J 2003. A quantification of policy reform: an application to the Uruguay Round Negotiations on Agriculture. Journal of Policy Modeling, Vol. 25, Issue. 9, p. 893.

    De Gorter, Harry and Swinnen, Johan 2002. Agricultural and Food Policy.


Agricultural Policy Reform and the Uruguay Round: Synergistic Linkage in a Two-Level Game?


Domestic agricultural subsidy policies in the United States and in the European Union (EU) underwent substantial liberal reforms between 1990 and 1996. In the United States in 1990, Congress reduced acreage on which farmers could receive income-support payments (deficiency payments) by 15 percent under a budget reconciliation act. In the EU in 1991–92, the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) was dramatically modified under a set of reforms (the MacSharry reforms) that reduced internal cereal price guarantees by 29 percent over three years and obliged larger EU farmers to leave 15 percent of their arable land idle as a further check on excess production. Then in 1995–96, the U.S. Congress passed the Federal Agricultural Improvement and Reform (FAIR) Act, a sweeping measure that eliminated for at least seven years all deficiency payments to farmers as well as all annual land-idling programs. U.S. Senator Richard Lugar, chair of the Senate Agriculture Committee, asserted that this new law would “change agricultural policy [in the United States] more fundamentally than any law in sixty years.”

Recommend this journal

Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this journal to your organisation's collection.

International Organization
  • ISSN: 0020-8183
  • EISSN: 1531-5088
  • URL: /core/journals/international-organization
Please enter your name
Please enter a valid email address
Who would you like to send this to? *