IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ags/jlaare/210546.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Impact of NAFTA on U.S. and Mexican Sugar Markets

Author

Listed:
  • Schmitz, Troy G.
  • Lewis, Karen E.

Abstract

When NAFTA became fully implemented for sugar in 2008, Mexico became the leading sugar exporter into the United States, accounting for nearly 70% of U.S. imports in 2013. A partial equilibrium trade model was developed to estimate the welfare implications of NAFTA for U.S. and Mexican sugar markets from 2008 to 2013. While the net effect of NAFTA on U.S. welfare and Mexican sugar producers was positive, U.S. sugar producers suffered significant losses. The net Mexican welfare effect of NAFTA was significantly positive in 2011, negative in 2008, and slightly positive in 2009–2010 and 2012–2013.

Suggested Citation

  • Schmitz, Troy G. & Lewis, Karen E., 2015. "Impact of NAFTA on U.S. and Mexican Sugar Markets," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 40(3), pages 1-18, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:jlaare:210546
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.210546
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/210546/files/JARE_September2015__3_Schmitz_pp387-404.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.210546?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Anderson, James E & Neary, J Peter, 1992. "Trade Reform with Quotas, Partial Rent Retention, and Tariffs," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 60(1), pages 57-76, January.
    2. John C. Beghin & Amani Elobeid, 2015. "The Impact of the U.S. Sugar Program Redux," Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 37(1), pages 1-33.
    3. Amani Elobeid & John Beghin, 2006. "Multilateral Trade and Agricultural Policy Reforms in Sugar Markets," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 57(1), pages 23-48, March.
    4. Roy Allen & Claudia Dodge & Andrew Schmitz, 1983. "Voluntary Export Restraints as Protection Policy: The U.S. Beef Case," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 65(2), pages 291-296.
    5. Richard Harris, 1985. "Why Voluntary Export Restraints Are 'Voluntary.'," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 18(4), pages 799-809, November.
    6. Tyers,Rod & Anderson,Kym, 2011. "Disarray in World Food Markets," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521172318, January.
    7. Kennedy, P. Lynn & Schmitz, Andrew, 2009. "Production Response to Increased Imports: The Case of U.S. Sugar," Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Southern Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 41(3), pages 1-13, December.
    8. Lewis, Karen E. & Manfredo, Mark R., 2012. "An Evaluation of the USDA Sugar Production and Consumption Forecasts," Journal of Agribusiness, Agricultural Economics Association of Georgia, vol. 30(2).
    9. John C. Beghin & Barbara El Osta & Jay R. Cherlow & Samarendu Mohanty, 2003. "The Cost Of The U.S. Sugar Program Revisited," Contemporary Economic Policy, Western Economic Association International, vol. 21(1), pages 106-116, January.
    10. David Abler & John C. Beghin & David Blandford & Amani Elobeid, 2008. "Changing the U.S. Sugar Program into a Standard Crop Program: Consequences under the North American Free Trade Agreement and Doha," Review of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 30(1), pages 82-102.
    11. Uri, Noel D & Boyd, Roy, 1994. "Assessing the impact of the sugar programme on the US economy," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 19(5), pages 443-457, October.
    12. Valerie J. Picketts & Andrew Schmitz & Troy G. Schmitz, 1991. "Rent Seeking: The Potash Dispute between Canada and the United States," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 73(2), pages 255-265.
    13. Petrolia, Daniel R. & Kennedy, P. Lynn, 2003. "Increasing the United States Tariff-Rate Sugar Quota for Cuba and Mexico: A Partial-Equilibrium Simulation," Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Southern Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 35(3), pages 1-9, December.
    14. Krishna, Kala, 1989. "Trade restrictions as facilitating practices," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 26(3-4), pages 251-270, May.
    15. Babcock, Bruce A. & Schmitz, Andrew, 1986. "Look for Hidden Costs: Why Direct Subsidy Can Cost Us Less (And Benefit Us More) Than A "No Cost" Trade Barrier," Choices: The Magazine of Food, Farm, and Resource Issues, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 1(4), pages 1-4.
    16. Knutson, Ronald D. & Westhoff, Patrick C. & Sherwell, Pablo, 2010. "Trade Liberalizing Impacts of NAFTA in Sugar: Global Implications," International Food and Agribusiness Management Review, International Food and Agribusiness Management Association, vol. 13(4), pages 1-16.
    17. Skully, David W., 2001. "Economics of Tariff-Rate Quota Administration," Technical Bulletins 184332, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.
    18. Gwo-Jiun M. Leu & Andrew Schmitz & Ronald D. Knutson, 1987. "Gains and Losses of Sugar Program Policy Options," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 69(3), pages 591-602.
    19. Skully, David W., 2001. "Economics Of Tariff-Rate Quota Administration," Technical Bulletins 33576, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.
    20. Gardiner, Walter H. & Roningen, Vernon O. & Liu, Karen, 1989. "Elasticities In The Trade Liberalization Database," Staff Reports 278197, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.
    21. Abler, David & Beghin, John C. & Blandford, David & Elobeid, Amani, 2008. "Changing the U.S. Sugar Program into a Standard Crop Program: Consequences Under NAFTA and Doha," Staff General Research Papers Archive 12764, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Aguilar-Rivera, Noé, 2019. "A framework for the analysis of socioeconomic and geographic sugarcane agro industry sustainability," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 66(C), pages 149-160.
    2. Troy G. Schmitz, 2018. "Impact of the 2014 Suspension Agreement on sugar between the United States and Mexico," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 49(1), pages 55-69, January.
    3. Unar-Munguía, Mishel & Monterubio Flores, Eric & Colchero, M.A., 2019. "Apparent consumption of caloric sweeteners increased after the implementation of NAFTA in Mexico," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 84(C), pages 103-110.
    4. Gračner, Tadeja, 2021. "Bittersweet: How prices of sugar-rich foods contribute to the diet-related disease epidemic in Mexico," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 80(C).
    5. Carlos J. O. Trejo-Pech & Karen L. DeLong & Dayton M. Lambert & Vasileios Siokos, 2020. "The impact of US sugar prices on the financial performance of US sugar-using firms," Agricultural and Food Economics, Springer;Italian Society of Agricultural Economics (SIDEA), vol. 8(1), pages 1-17, December.
    6. Lewis, Karen E. & Grebitus, Carola & Nayga, Rodolfo M., 2016. "U.S. consumers’ preferences for imported and genetically modified sugar: Examining policy consequentiality in a choice experiment," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 65(C), pages 1-8.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Troy G. Schmitz, 2018. "Impact of the 2014 Suspension Agreement on sugar between the United States and Mexico," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 49(1), pages 55-69, January.
    2. Whistance, Jarrett & Payen, Andrick & Thompson, Wyatt, 2015. "Suspension Agreements and Antidumping/Countervailing Duties: US-Mexico Sugar Markets and the Effects of Alternative Trade Policies," 2015 AAEA & WAEA Joint Annual Meeting, July 26-28, San Francisco, California 205550, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    3. John C. Beghin & Amani Elobeid, 2015. "The Impact of the U.S. Sugar Program Redux," Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 37(1), pages 1-33.
    4. Carlos J. O. Trejo-Pech & Karen L. DeLong & Dayton M. Lambert & Vasileios Siokos, 2020. "The impact of US sugar prices on the financial performance of US sugar-using firms," Agricultural and Food Economics, Springer;Italian Society of Agricultural Economics (SIDEA), vol. 8(1), pages 1-17, December.
    5. Michael J. Ferrantino, 2006. "Quantifying the Trade and Economic Effects of Non-Tariff Measures," OECD Trade Policy Papers 28, OECD Publishing.
    6. Bown, Chad & Crowley, Meredith A., 2016. "The Empirical Landscape of Trade Policy," CEPR Discussion Papers 11216, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    7. Liefert, William M. & Persuad, Suresh, 2009. "The Transmission of Exchange Rate Changes to Agricultural Prices," Economic Research Report 55942, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.
    8. Vittoria Idrisova, 2011. "Application of non-tariff barriers," Research Paper Series, Gaidar Institute for Economic Policy, issue 150P.
    9. Sheldon, Ian M., 1991. "Imperfect Competition and International Trade: The Use of Simulation Techniques," Occasional Papers 233066, Regional Research Project NC-194: Organization and Performance of World Food Systems.
    10. Beghin, John C. & Jensen, Helen H., 2008. "Farm policies and added sugars in US diets," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(6), pages 480-488, December.
    11. James Lake & Maia Linask, 2015. "Costly distribution and the non-equivalence of tariffs and quotas," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 165(3), pages 211-238, December.
    12. Blonigen, Bruce A. & Liebman, Benjamin H. & Pierce, Justin R. & Wilson, Wesley W., 2013. "Are all trade protection policies created equal? Empirical evidence for nonequivalent market power effects of tariffs and quotas," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 89(2), pages 369-378.
    13. Listorti, Giulia & Kempen, Markus & Girardin, Jean & Kranzlein, Tim, 2011. "Do Price Uncertainties Affect the Use of Policy Flexibilities? The Selection of Sensitive Products in WTO Agricultural Negotiations," 2011 International Congress, August 30-September 2, 2011, Zurich, Switzerland 114381, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    14. Grant, Jason & Xie, Chaoping & Boys, Kathryn, 2022. "Firms, Agricultural Imports, and Tariff-Rate Quotas: An Assessment of China’s Wheat, Corn, and Rice Imports Using Firm-Level Data," Commissioned Papers 321889, International Agricultural Trade Research Consortium.
    15. Kala Krishna, 1990. "Export Restraints With Imperfect Competition: A Selective Survey," NBER Working Papers 3244, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    16. Martin, Will, 2021. "Tools for measuring the full impacts of agricultural interventions," IFPRI-MCC technical papers 2, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    17. Chen, Hung-Yi & Chang, Yang-Ming & Chiou, Jiunn-Rong, 2011. "A welfare analysis of tariffs and equivalent quotas under demand uncertainty: Implications for tariffication," International Review of Economics & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 20(4), pages 549-561, October.
    18. Meade, Birgit Gisela Saager & Grant, Jason H. & Regmi, Anita, 2010. "Trade and Welfare Impacts of Partial Liberalization of U.S. Sugar TRQs: The Application of a PE/GE Modeling Approach," 2010 Annual Meeting, July 25-27, 2010, Denver, Colorado 61657, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    19. Roberto A. De Santis, 2003. "Why exporting countries agree to voluntary export restraints: the oligopolistic power of the foreign supplier," Scottish Journal of Political Economy, Scottish Economic Society, vol. 50(3), pages 247-263, August.
    20. Luca Lambertini & Arsen Palestini, 2018. "Voluntary Export Restraints in a Trade Model with Sticky Price: Linear and Nonlinear Feedback Solutions," Dynamic Games and Applications, Springer, vol. 8(3), pages 507-518, September.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    International Relations/Trade; Marketing;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ags:jlaare:210546. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: AgEcon Search (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/waeaaea.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.