Abstract
This paper analyzes whether or not different non-tariff measures (NTM) like a standard or a mandatory label can be considered as protectionist in presence of market imperfections. From a welfare-based approach, protectionism occurs when the instrument maximizing domestic welfare is different from the alternative instrument maximizing international welfare inclusive of foreign profits. A framework taking into account different tools shows the complexity for characterizing protectionism related to different NTM. When the standard impacts variable costs, the mandatory label can be protectionist. When the standard impacts sunk costs, the standard can be protectionist. The framework is also useful for empirically characterizing the impact of NTM related to a specific product. An application to shrimp trade illustrates the feasibility of the welfare measure, for an ex ante evaluation of possible environmental regulations that could be implemented in the future. This application confirms that the tool maximizing domestic welfare does not systematically correspond to the tool maximizing international welfare.
Funding statement: Funding: This paper was funded by the European program, FOODSECURE 7th framework program.
References
Asche, F., and T. Bjørndal. 2001. “Demand Elasticities for Fish and Seafood: A Review.” Unpublished, Centre for Fisheries Economics, Norwegian School of Economics and Business Administration, Norway.Search in Google Scholar
Baldwin, R. E. 1970. Nontariff Distortions of International Trade. Washington, DC: The Brookings Institution.Search in Google Scholar
Beghin, J. C. ed. 2013. Non-Tariff Measures with Market Imperfections: Trade & Welfare Implications. Frontiers of Economics & Globalization series. Emerald Press.10.1108/S1574-8715(2013)12Search in Google Scholar
Beghin, J., A. C. Disdier, S. Marette, and F. van Tongeren. 2012. “Measuring Costs and Benefits of Non-Tariff Measures in Agri-Food Trade.” World Trade Review 11:356–75.10.2139/ssrn.1747107Search in Google Scholar
Bureau, J. C., S. Marette, and A. Schiavina. 1998. “Non-Tariff Trade Barriers and Consumers’ Information: The Case of EU-US Trade Dispute on Beef.” European Review of Agricultural Economics 25 (4):437–62.10.1093/erae/25.4.437Search in Google Scholar
CBI (Centre for the Promotion of Imports from Developing Countries). 2010. The EU Market for Shrimps and Prawns. Den Haag, The Netherlands: Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Netherlands.Search in Google Scholar
Cadot, O., E. Munadi, and L. Y. Ing. 2013. “Streamlining NTMs in ASEAN: The Way Forward.” ERIA Discussion Paper 2013–24, Jakarta, Indonesia.Search in Google Scholar
Czubala, W., B. Shepherd, and J. S. Wilson. 2009. “Help or Hindrance? The Impact of Harmonised Standards on African Exports.” Journal of African Economies 18 (5):711–44.10.1093/jae/ejp003Search in Google Scholar
Debaere, P. 2010. “Small Fish – Big Issues. The Impact of Trade Policy on the Global Shrimp Market.” World Trade Review 9 (2):353–74.10.1017/S147474561000011XSearch in Google Scholar
Dey, M. M., U.-P. Rodriguez, R. M. Briones, C. O. Li, M. S. Haque, L. Li, P. Kumar, S. Koeshendrajana, T. S. Yew, A. Senaratne, et al. 2004. “Disaggregated Projections on Supply, Demand, and Trade for Developing Asia: Preliminary Results from the Asiafish Model.” Paper presented at IIFET Meeting, Tokyo, 21–30 July.Search in Google Scholar
Disdier, A.-C., L. Fontagné, and M. Mimouni. 2008. “The Impact of Regulations on Agricultural Trade: Evidence from SPS and TBT Agreements.” American Journal of Agricultural Economics 90 (2):336–50.10.1111/j.1467-8276.2007.01127.xSearch in Google Scholar
Disdier, A.-C., and S. Marette. 2010. “The Combination of Gravity and Welfare Approaches for Evaluating Non-Tariff Measures.” American Journal of Agricultural Economics 92 (3):713–26.10.1093/ajae/aaq026Search in Google Scholar
Disdier, A.-C., and S. Marette. 2012. “How Do Consumers in Developed Countries Value the Environment and Workers’ Social Rights in Developing Countries?” Food Policy 37 (1):1–11.10.1016/j.foodpol.2011.10.002Search in Google Scholar
Disdier, A.-C., and F. van Tongeren. 2010. “Non-Tariff Measures in Agri-Food Trade: What Do the Data Tell Us? Evidence from a Cluster Analysis on OECD Imports.” Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy 32 (3):436–55.10.1093/aepp/ppq008Search in Google Scholar
Eumofa. 2014. European Market Observatory for Fisheries and Aquaculture. The EU Fish Market, 2014 Edition. Brussels, Belgium: European Commission.Search in Google Scholar
Ferrantino, M. 2006. “Quantifying the Trade and Economic Effects of Non-Tariff Measures.” OECD Trade Policy Working Papers, No. 28, OECD Publishing.Search in Google Scholar
Fisher, R., and P. Serra. 2000. “Standards and Protection.” Journal of International Economics 52:377–400.10.1016/S0022-1996(99)00058-6Search in Google Scholar
Greenpeace. 2007. “How the Palm Oil Industry Is Cooking the Climate.” Amsterdam, The Netherlands. Accessed September 29, 2011. http://www.greenpeace.org/raw/content/international/press/reports/palm-oil-cooking-the-climate.pdf.Search in Google Scholar
Grothe, U., C. Deblitz, and S. Stegmann. 2000. “Total Costs and Environmental Standards for Selected Agricultural Products in Brazil, Germany and Indonesia: The Impact on International Competition.” Quarterly Journal of International Agriculture 19 (3):299–318.Search in Google Scholar
Hervieu, S. 2009. “A Madagascar, la Seule Crevette d’Elevage Bio du Monde,” Le Monde, April 1, p. 4.Search in Google Scholar
Hodal, K., C. Kelly, and F. Lawrence. 2014. “Asian Slave Labour Producing Prawns for Supermarkets in US, UK.” The Guardian, June 10, 2014, Webedition, London, UK.Search in Google Scholar
Josling, T., D. Roberts, and D. Orden. 2004. Food Regulation and Trade: Toward a Safe and Open Global System. Washington, DC: Institute for International Economics.Search in Google Scholar
Kee, H. L., A. Nicita, and M. Olarreaga. 2009. “Estimating Trade Restrictiveness Indices.” The Economic Journal 119:172–99.10.1111/j.1468-0297.2008.02209.xSearch in Google Scholar
Korinek, J., M. Melatos, and M. L. Rau. 2008. “A Review of Methods for Quantifying the Trade Effects of Standards in the Agri-Food Sector.” OECD Trade Policy Working Papers, No. 79, OECD Publishing.Search in Google Scholar
Lusk, J. L., and J. F. Shogren. 2007. Experimental Auctions. Methods and Applications in Economic and Marketing Research. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511611261Search in Google Scholar
Marette, S., and J. C. Beghin. 2010. “Are Standards Always Protectionist?” Review of International Economics 18 (1):179–92.10.1142/9789813144415_0011Search in Google Scholar
Marette, S., J. Roosen, S. Blanchemanche, and P. Verger. 2008. “The Choice of Fish Species: An Experiment Measuring the Impact of Risk and Benefit Information.” Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics 33:1–18.Search in Google Scholar
McAusland, C., and N. Najjar. 2014. “The WTO Consistency and the Carbon Footprint Taxes.” Working Paper, The University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada.10.1007/s10640-013-9749-5Search in Google Scholar
Pica, E., and M. Stoczkiewicz. 2013. “Transatlantic Trade Agreement Threatens Environment and Health in U.S. and Europe.” HuffPost Green, December 24, 2013.Search in Google Scholar
Polinsky, A. M., and W. Rogerson. 1983. “Products Liability and Consumer Misperceptions and Market Power.” The Bell Journal of Economics 14 (2):581–9.10.3386/w0937Search in Google Scholar
Rau, M. L., and F. van Tongeren. 2009. “Heterogeneous Firms and Homogenizing Standards in Agri-Food Trade: The Polish Meat Case.” European Review of Agricultural Economics 36 (4):479–505.10.1093/erae/jbp032Search in Google Scholar
Sykes, K. 2014. “Sealing Animal Welfare into the GATT Exceptions: The International Dimension of Animal Welfare in WTO Disputes.” World Trade Review. Forthcoming and available on CJO2013. doi:10.1017/S1474745613000232.Search in Google Scholar
Tian, H. 2003. “Eco-Labelling Scheme, Environmental Protection, and Protectionism.” Canadian Journal of Economics 36(3):708–25.10.1111/1540-5982.t01-2-00005Search in Google Scholar
United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization. 2009. FishStat Plus – Universal Software for Fishery Statistical Time Series. Rome: United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization.Search in Google Scholar
WTO. 2014a. Environmental Disputes in GATT/WTO. Geneva, Switzerland: World Trade Organization. Accessed May 2014. http://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/envir_e/edis00_e.htm.Search in Google Scholar
WTO. 2014b. “DISPUTE SETTLEMENT: DISPUTE DS400. European Communities – Measures Prohibiting the Importation and Marketing of Seal Products. Geneva, Switzerland: World Trade Organization. Accessed May 2014. http://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/dispu_e/cases_e/ds400_e.htm.Search in Google Scholar
WWF. 2014. Farmed Shrimp. Washington, DC: World WildLife Fund. Accessed May 2014. http://www.worldwildlife.org/industries/farmed-shrimp.Search in Google Scholar
Yue, C., J. C. Beghin, and H. H. Jensen. 2006. “Tariff Equivalent of Technical Barriers to Trade with Imperfect Substitution and Trade Costs.” American Journal of Agricultural Economics 88 (4):947–60.10.1142/9789813144415_0009Search in Google Scholar
van Berkum, S., and P. S. Bindraban. 2008. Towards Sustainable Soy: An Assessment of Opportunities and Risks for Soybean Product Based on a Case Study Brazil. Report 2008–080. The Hague, The Netherlands: Lei-Wageningen.Search in Google Scholar
van Tongeren, F., J. Beghin, and S. Marette. 2009. “A Cost-Benefit Framework for the Assessment of Non-Tariff Measures in Agro-Food Trade.” OECD Food, Agriculture and Fisheries Working Papers, No. 21, OECD Publishing.10.2139/ssrn.1511822Search in Google Scholar
van Tongeren, F., A. C. Disdier, J. Komorowska, S. Marette, and M. von Lampe. 2010. Case Studies of Costs and Benefits of Non-Tariff Measures: Cheese, Shrimps and Flowers. Paris: OECD, Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. OECD Food, Agriculture and Fisheries Working Papers, No. 28, 79 p.Search in Google Scholar
©2016 by De Gruyter
Articles in the same Issue
- Frontmatter
- Non-Tariff Measures When Alternative Regulatory Tools Can Be Chosen
- Mergers and Acquisitions (M&As), Market Structure and Inventive Activity in the Agricultural Biotechnology Industry
- Measuring Bilateral Market Power in International Markets of Vertically Differentiated Agricultural Commodities
- Testing for Oligopsony Power in the US Green Skin Avocado Market
- Innovation in the Seed Market: The Role of IPRs and Commercialization Rules
- Modeling US Farmer Soybean Seed Choice with Path Dependencies: Inevitable Patented Seed Market Dominance?
- Partial Adherence to Voluntary Quality Standards for Experience Goods
- Investigating the Price Transmission Mechanisms of Greek Fresh Potatoes, Tomatoes and Cucumbers Markets
- Channel Concentration and Retail Prices: Evidence from the Traditional Cheese Market of Cyprus
- Price Dependence between Different Beef Cuts and Quality Grades: A Copula Approach at the Retail Level for the U.S. Beef Industry
- Factors Associated with Alcoholic Beverages Consumption in Russia: A Discrete Choice Model
Articles in the same Issue
- Frontmatter
- Non-Tariff Measures When Alternative Regulatory Tools Can Be Chosen
- Mergers and Acquisitions (M&As), Market Structure and Inventive Activity in the Agricultural Biotechnology Industry
- Measuring Bilateral Market Power in International Markets of Vertically Differentiated Agricultural Commodities
- Testing for Oligopsony Power in the US Green Skin Avocado Market
- Innovation in the Seed Market: The Role of IPRs and Commercialization Rules
- Modeling US Farmer Soybean Seed Choice with Path Dependencies: Inevitable Patented Seed Market Dominance?
- Partial Adherence to Voluntary Quality Standards for Experience Goods
- Investigating the Price Transmission Mechanisms of Greek Fresh Potatoes, Tomatoes and Cucumbers Markets
- Channel Concentration and Retail Prices: Evidence from the Traditional Cheese Market of Cyprus
- Price Dependence between Different Beef Cuts and Quality Grades: A Copula Approach at the Retail Level for the U.S. Beef Industry
- Factors Associated with Alcoholic Beverages Consumption in Russia: A Discrete Choice Model