IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bpj/bejeap/vcontributions.5y2006i1n27.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Administrative Delays as Barriers to Trade

Author

Listed:
  • Regibeau Pierre M

    (University of Essex and CEPR, pregib@essex.ac.uk)

  • Rockett Katharine E

    (University of Essex, University of Tromso and CEPR, kerock@essex.ac.uk)

Abstract

We study a two-country model where two firms, one domestic and the other foreign, must decide when to introduce their new product into a market. The home government may apply an import tariff, an administrative delay, or both to the product of the foreign firm. An administrative delay imposes a waiting period between the time when the quality of the foreign product is determined and the time when the product can actually be sold. Our main interest is the differential effect of the tariff and the administrative delay on the timing of new product introductions and the resulting change in home, foreign and world welfare. We show that administrative delays are less efficient instruments for maximizing home welfare than tariffs. With a tariff, the home government can affect the timing of entry to ensure that the domestic firm moves first at the socially optimal date. Although an optimally chosen delay can achieve the same pattern of introduction, it does not yield any tariff revenues. As a result, if the tariff may be set optimally, administrative delays are not used in a discriminatory manner. If trade liberalization constrains the import tariff to be below its domestically optimal level, discriminatory administrative delays may become part of the optimal policy of the home country. As the optimal delay policy leads to lower levels of world welfare than the optimal tariff, trade liberalization can be welfare decreasing.

Suggested Citation

  • Regibeau Pierre M & Rockett Katharine E, 2006. "Administrative Delays as Barriers to Trade," The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 5(1), pages 1-47, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:bpj:bejeap:v:contributions.5:y:2006:i:1:n:27
    DOI: 10.1515/1538-0645.1504
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1515/1538-0645.1504
    Download Restriction: For access to full text, subscription to the journal or payment for the individual article is required.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1515/1538-0645.1504?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version below or search for a different version of it.

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Dutta, Prajit K & Rustichini, Aldo, 1993. "A Theory of Stopping Time Games with Applications to Product Innovations and Asset Sales," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 3(4), pages 743-763, October.
    2. Miyagiwa, Kaz & Ohno, Yuka, 1995. "Closing the Technology Gap under Protection," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 85(4), pages 755-770, September.
    3. Barbara J. Spencer & James A. Brander, 1983. "International R & D Rivalry and Industrial Strategy," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 50(4), pages 707-722.
    4. Dale H. Gieringer, 1985. "The Safety and Efficacy of New Drug Approval," Cato Journal, Cato Journal, Cato Institute, vol. 5(1), pages 177-201, Spring/Su.
    5. Prokop, Jacek & Regibeau, Pierre & Rockett, Katharine, 2010. "Minimum quality standards and novelty requirements in a one-short development race," Economics - The Open-Access, Open-Assessment E-Journal (2007-2020), Kiel Institute for the World Economy (IfW Kiel), vol. 4, pages 1-49.
    6. Regibeau, Pierre & Rockett, Katherine E., 1996. "The timing of product introduction and the credibility of compatibility decisions," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 14(6), pages 801-823, October.
    7. David Dranove & David Meltzer, 1994. "Do Important Drugs Reach the Market Sooner?," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 25(3), pages 402-423, Autumn.
    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. Estevadeordal, Antoni & Shearer, Matthew & Suominen, Kati, 2009. "Market Access Provisions in Regional Trade Agreement," IDB Publications (Working Papers) 2524, Inter-American Development Bank.
    2. Fabian Bergès & Sylvette Monier-Dilhan, 2013. "Trade Policy Reform : How to Win Wide-ranging Support ?," Recherches économiques de Louvain, De Boeck Université, vol. 79(2), pages 27-43.
    3. Zaki, Chahir, 2009. "Towards an Explicit Modeling of Trade Facilitation in CGE Models: Evidence from Egypt," Conference papers 331897, Purdue University, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Global Trade Analysis Project.
    4. Bagai, Shweta & Wilson, John S., 2006. "The data chase : what's out there on trade costs and nontariff barriers ?," Policy Research Working Paper Series 3899, The World Bank.
    5. María Del Carmen García‐Alonso & Paul Levine, 2005. "Arms Export Controls, Subsidies And The Wto Exemption," Scottish Journal of Political Economy, Scottish Economic Society, vol. 52(2), pages 305-322, May.
    6. Elizabeth Webster & Paul H. Jensen & Alfons Palangkaraya, 2014. "Patent examination outcomes and the national treatment principle," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 45(2), pages 449-469, June.
    7. Antoni Estevadeordal & Matthew Shearer & Kati Suominen, 2009. "Market Access Provisions in Regional Trade Agreement," IDB Publications (Working Papers) 9311, Inter-American Development Bank.

    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. Regibeau, Pierre & Rockett, Katherine E., 1996. "The timing of product introduction and the credibility of compatibility decisions," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 14(6), pages 801-823, October.
    2. Kresimir Zigic, 2011. "Strategic Interactions in Markets with Innovative Activity: The Cases of Strategic Trade Policy and Market Leadership," CERGE-EI Books, The Center for Economic Research and Graduate Education - Economics Institute, Prague, edition 1, number b06, May.
    3. Fei Yu & Yanrui Wu & Jin Chen & Arie Y. Lewin, 2023. "Technological leapfrogging and country strategic patent policy," Journal of International Business Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Academy of International Business, vol. 54(5), pages 887-909, July.
    4. Boakye, Derrick & Sarpong, David & Mordi, Chima, 2022. "Regulatory review of new product innovation: Conceptual clarity and future research directions," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 175(C).
    5. Raymond J. March, 2021. "The FDA and the COVID‐19: A political economy perspective," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 87(4), pages 1210-1228, April.
    6. Shin, Inyong & Kim, Hyunho, 2010. "The effect of subsidy policies on the product quality improvement," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 27(3), pages 687-696, May.
    7. Chen, Fang-Yueh, 2023. "Trade warfare and sanctions in vertically related markets," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 121(C).
    8. Muniagurria, Maria E & Singh, Nirvikar, 1997. "Foreign Technology, Spillovers, and R&D Policy," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 38(2), pages 405-430, May.
    9. Helen Weeds, 2002. "Strategic Delay in a Real Options Model of R&D Competition," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 69(3), pages 729-747.
    10. E. Young Song, 2005. "Temporary Protection and Technology Choice under the Learning Curve," Review of International Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 13(2), pages 391-396, May.
    11. Barbara J. Spencer & Ronald W. Jones, 1991. "Vertical Foreclosure and International Trade Policy," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 58(1), pages 153-170.
    12. Dewit, Gerda & Leahy, Dermot, 2004. "Rivalry in uncertain export markets: commitment versus flexibility," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 64(1), pages 195-209, October.
    13. Christian Dahl Winther, 2007. "Optimal research effort and product differentiation in network industries," Economics Working Papers 2007-19, Department of Economics and Business Economics, Aarhus University.
    14. Ufuk Akcigit & Sina T. Ates & Giammario Impullitti, 2018. "Innovation and Trade Policy in a Globalized World," NBER Working Papers 24543, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    15. Haruyama, Tetsugen & Zhao, Laixun, 2017. "Trade and firm heterogeneity in a Schumpeterian model of growth," Research in Economics, Elsevier, vol. 71(3), pages 540-563.
    16. Yasunori Ishii, 2000. "International cournol duopoly and R&D subsidies under demand uncertainly," Journal of Economics, Springer, vol. 72(2), pages 203-222, June.
    17. Tsung-Chen Lee & Hsiao-Chi Chen & Shi-Miin Liu, 2013. "Optimal strategic regulations in international emissions trading under imperfect competition," Environmental Economics and Policy Studies, Springer;Society for Environmental Economics and Policy Studies - SEEPS, vol. 15(1), pages 39-57, January.
    18. Neary, J.P., 1999. "R&D in Developing Countries: What Should Governments Do?," Papers 99/27, College Dublin, Department of Political Economy-.
    19. Alireza Naghavi & Yingyi Tsai, 2015. "Cross-Border Intellectual Property Rights: Contract Enforcement and Absorptive Capacity," Scottish Journal of Political Economy, Scottish Economic Society, vol. 62(2), pages 211-226, May.
    20. MANTOVANI Andrea & VANCAUTEREN Mark, 2010. "The Harmonization of Technical Barriers to Trade, Innovation and Export Behavior: Theory with an Application to EU Environmental Regulations," EcoMod2003 330700094, EcoMod.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    non-tariff barriers to trade; tariffs; standards; trade protection;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • F13 - International Economics - - Trade - - - Trade Policy; International Trade Organizations
    • H25 - Public Economics - - Taxation, Subsidies, and Revenue - - - Business Taxes and Subsidies

    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:bpj:bejeap:v:contributions.5:y:2006:i:1:n:27. 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: Peter Golla (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.degruyter.com .

    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.