|
Professional Interests
- Implications of NAFTA and Uruguay Round Agreement of GATT on U.S. and Michigan agriculture
- Analysis of U.S. commodity programs
- Law, economics, and the analysis of changes in legal/economic institutions
- Political economy of agricultural and trade policy decision making processes
- Legal issues in commodity checkoff programs
- Labeling of GMO food products
Selected Publications
David B. Schweikhardt and Monika Tothova. “Major Issues for Future Commercial Integration: Harmonization of Agricultural and Trade Policies.” In Agricultural Trade Under CUSTA, edited by Won W. Koo and William W. Wilson. Hauppage, NY: 2002, pp. 211-32.
David Schweikhardt, Kelly Cormier, Eric Knepper and Juan Valle-Estrada. “Collision Course: The Looming Contradictions of U.S. Sugar Policy.” Choices, 3rd Quarter 2001, pp. 26-29.
David B. Schweikhardt and William P. Browne. “Politics by Other Means: The Emergence of a New Politics of Food in the United States.” Review of Agricultural Economics. 23:2 (2001) 302-18.
James T. Bonnen, William P. Browne, Jan E. Mabie, and David B. Schweikhardt. “Fits of Analysis: Good Ones and Bad Ones in Agriculture’s Public Sector.” Agricultural History. Vol. 74, No, 2, Spring 2000, 181-97.
David B. Schweikhardt. “Agricultural Issues in the U.S.-Canadian Free Trade Agreement.” In The U.S.-Canadian Free Trade Agreement: The Record After Ten Years, edited by Mordechai E. Kreinin. East Lansing: Michigan State University Press, 2000.
David B. Schweikhardt and Bert Greenwalt. “Market Coordination in the U.S. Rice Industry: Firm Responses to Changing Demands for Product Quality.” In Vertical Relationships and Coordination in the Food System, edited by Giovanni Galizzi and Luciano Venturini. New York: Physica-Verlag, 1999, pp. 629-41.
James T. Bonnen and David B. Schweikhardt. “Getting From Economic Analysis to Policy Advice.” Review of Agricultural Economics. 20 (1998): 582-601.
James T. Bonnen and David B. Schweikhardt. “The Future of U.S. Agricultural Policy: Reflections on the Disappearance of the ‘Farm Problem.’” Review of Agricultural Economics. 20: (1998): 2-35.
|