Joe Glauber is a Senior Research Fellow at the International Food Policy Research Institute in Washington, DC where his areas of interest are price volatility, global grain reserves, crop insurance and trade. Prior to joining IFPRI, Glauber spent over 30 years at the U.S. Department of Agriculture including as Chief Economist from 2008 to 2014. As Chief Economist, he was responsible for the Department’s agricultural forecasts and projections, oversaw climate, energy and regulatory issues, and served as Chairman of the Board of Directors of the Federal Crop Insurance Corporation.
From 2007-2009, Glauber was the Special Doha Agricultural Envoy at the office of the U.S. Trade Representative where he served as chief agricultural negotiator in the Doha talks. He served as economic adviser at the so-called Blair House agreements leading to the completion of the Uruguay Round negotiations. He is the author of numerous studies on crop insurance, disaster policy and U.S. farm policy.
Dr. Glauber received his Ph.D. in agricultural economics from the University of Wisconsin in 1984 and holds an AB in anthropology from the University of Chicago. In 2012, he was elected Fellow of the Agricultural and Applied Economics Association
Standards in the TTIP Negotiations
This paper will examine the economic effects of standards in the context of the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (T-TIP). Trade in dairy products between the US and EU is valued at $1.6 billion in 2015. Analysis suggests that if all tariffs and non-tariff barriers were removed in the dairy sector, dairy trade could expand as much as 40-50 percent. However, resolving differences over non-tariff measures will pose large challenges. EU producers have expressed concerns over the Grade A Pasteurized Milk Ordinance (PMO) and certain features of the Food Safety Modernization Act. US producers complain about multiple regulatory burdens, such as those connected to somatic cell count requirements, and certificate demands unrelated to sanitary and phytosanitary obligations such as restrictions on use of rBGH. And any agreement will likely have to address the issue of Geographical Indications in a way that is satisfactory to both sides.