views expressed in this paper need not reflect those of the World Bank. We would like to thank Larry Hinkle and Ataman Aksoy for numerous comments and suggestions. 2 I.

Abstract not found

comments and suggestions from Brian Ames, Ataman Aksoy, Ishac Diwan, Philip English, Simon Evenett, Mike Finger, Jeni Klugman, Will Martin, Brad McDonald, Richard Newfarmer, Jayanta Roy, and John Wilson. Maria Kasilag provided excellent support in the preparation of the manuscript. The views expressed

, statistical analysis and tables used in the study as well as her helpful comments on the Moldovan economy; Martin Reiser and David Cooper of the EBRD for helpful inputs regarding telecommunications issues in Central Asia; Ataman Aksoy and Nina Budina of the World Bank and Marco Pani, Clinton Shiells

to two referees, Ataman Aksoy, Jagdish Bhagwati, Richard Blackhurst, John Cuddy, Uri Dadush, Mike Finger, Carsten Fink, Will Martin, Keith Maskus, Aaditya Mattoo, Anne McGuirk, Patrick Messerlin, Constantine Michalopoulos, Marcelo Olarreaga, Susan Prowse, Richard Newfarmer, Sarath Rajapatirana , T

The findings, interpretations, and conclusions expressed herein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Board of Executive Directors of the World Bank or the governments they represent. The World Bank does not guarantee the accuracy of the data included in this work. The boundaries, colors, denominations, and other information shown on any map in this work do not imply any judgment on the part of the World Bank concerning the legal status of any territory or the endorsement or acceptance of such boundaries. Rights and Permissions The material in this work is copyrighted. Copying and/or transmitting portions or all of this work without permission may be a violation of applicable law. The International Bank for Reconstruction and

Groundnut products are of central economic importance to millions of smallholders in Africa, India and Southern China. The products generate 60 percent of rural cash income and account for about 70 percent of the rural labor force in Senegal and Gambia. Groundnut trade remains, however, heavily distorted, and this has affected the competitive position of various players in world markets. Using a new partial-equilibrium, multi-market, international model, we analyze the trade and welfare impacts of several groundnut trade liberalization scenarios compared with the recent historical baseline. Net welfare is evaluated as the sum of consumers' equivalent variation, quasi-profits in farming, quasi-profits in crushing, and taxpayers' revenues and outlays implied by distortions. We find that trade liberalization in groundnut markets has a strong South-South dimension with policies in India, and to a lesser extent China, heavily depressing the world prices of groundnuts at the expense of smaller developing countries mainly located in Africa. Under free trade, African exporters would gain because they are net sellers of groundnut products. In India, consumers would be better off with lower consumer prices resulting from the removal of prohibitive tariffs and large imports of groundnut products. The cost of adjustment would fall on Indian farmers and crushers. In China, crush margins would improve because of the large terms of trade effects in the oil market relative to the seed market. China's groundnut product exports would expand dramatically. Net buyers of groundnut products in OECD countries would be worse off. We draw implications for the Doha negotiations.

Abstract not found

ffffffffffffffffffffffeeeeeeeeeee eeeeeeeeeeee CCCCCCCCaaaaaaaa ssssssssshhhhhhhhhh eeeeeeeeewwwwwww

Food has been traded for thousands of years. Basic to everyone’s survival, food was also one of the first items that some people were able to produce in surplus, enabling them to sell it on for other goods. There is a compelling logic for trade in food: political borders do not coincide with the land required to support each given national population. Some countries do not produce enough food to meet their needs and depend on imported food to maintain food security. Other countries produce more than they need and look to export because the domestic market is not sufficient to absorb the supply. Countries might also forgo domestic production to import food that is produced more cheaply abroad, or sell abroad rather than in domestic markets because foreigners will pay more for the production. Trading food also makes sense because food production is precarious, dependent on the weather and slow to adjust to changes, whether in growing conditions or prevailing prices. Agricultural output depends on arable land, sufficient freshwater, the right number of frost-free days and sunlight, as well as on demand, price, storage, roads, credit and technical know-how. No matter how rich and savvy,