IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/aaea13/149668.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Strategic Trade Policies in the U.S. Orange Juice Market: Competition between Florida and São Paulo

Author

Listed:
  • Luckstead, Jeff
  • Devadoss, Stephen
  • Mittelhammer, Ron C.

Abstract

The U.S. frozen concentrated orange juice (FCOJ) market is dominated by a small number of processors in Florida and São Paulo (Brazil), while the European FCOJ market is dominated by São Paulo FCOJ processors. Both the U.S. and European governments impose a tariff on FCOJ imports. We develop a strategic trade model to analyze the oligopolistic competition between Florida and São Paulo processors in the U.S. FCOJ market and São Paulo processors in the European FCOJ market. We analyze the effect of a change in the U.S. and European tariff on FCOJ sales and welfare. The analytical results show that a reduction in the U.S. tariff increases São Paulo's exports to the United States while decreasing their exports to Europe, which causes a decrease in Florida's sales in the United States. The results of a reduction in the European tariff indicate that São Paulo diverts its exports from the United Sates to Europe, which augments Florida's sales in the United States. Based on the strategic trade model, the structural empirical model is derived and the New Empirical Industrial Organization literature is implemented to estimate the econometric model and compute the market power of Florida and São Paulo producers. The Lerner Index calculation suggests that both Florida and São Paulo processors exert market power, but São Paulo have a higher markup over their marginal costs because of lower input costs. The parameterized model is used to simulate a 25% reduction in both the U.S. and European tariffs. A 25% reduction in the U.S. tariff results in an 8% decrease in Florida's market share and a 27% increase in São Paulo's market share in the U.S. FCOJ market. While a 25% reduction in the European tariff causes Florida's U.S. market share to increase by 2% and São Paulo's U.S. market share to reduce by 6%. The simulation results are consistent with the analytical results.

Suggested Citation

  • Luckstead, Jeff & Devadoss, Stephen & Mittelhammer, Ron C., 2013. "Strategic Trade Policies in the U.S. Orange Juice Market: Competition between Florida and São Paulo," 2013 Annual Meeting, August 4-6, 2013, Washington, D.C. 149668, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:aaea13:149668
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.149668
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/149668/files/Draft_5_AgEconSearchAAEA.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.149668?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. Spreen, Thomas H. & Brewster, Charlene & Brown, Mark G., 2003. "The Free Trade Area of the Americas and the Market for Processed Orange Products," Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 35(1), pages 107-126, April.
    2. Brander, James A. & Spencer, Barbara J., 1985. "Export subsidies and international market share rivalry," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 18(1-2), pages 83-100, February.
    3. Brown, Mark G., 2010. "European Demand for Orange Juice," Research papers 104349, Florida Department of Citrus.
    4. Davis, Andrew & Gunderson, Michael A. & Brown, Mark G. & House, Lisa, 2008. "The Effect Demographics Have On The Demand For Orange Juice," 2008 Annual Meeting, February 2-6, 2008, Dallas, Texas 6794, Southern Agricultural Economics Association.
    5. Bresnahan, Timothy F., 1989. "Empirical studies of industries with market power," Handbook of Industrial Organization, in: R. Schmalensee & R. Willig (ed.), Handbook of Industrial Organization, edition 1, volume 2, chapter 17, pages 1011-1057, Elsevier.
    6. Wang, Honglin & Xiang, Qing & Reardon, Thomas, 2006. "Market Power and Supply Shocks: Evidence from the Orange Juice Market," Staff Paper Series 11508, Michigan State University, Department of Agricultural, Food, and Resource Economics.
    7. Nathalie Lavoie, 2005. "Price Discrimination in the Context of Vertical Differentiation: An Application to Canadian Wheat Exports," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 87(4), pages 835-854.
    8. Brown, Mark G. & Spreen, Thomas H. & Lee, Jonq-Ying, 2004. "Impacts On U.S. Prices Of Reducing Orange Juice Tariffs In Major World Markets," Journal of Food Distribution Research, Food Distribution Research Society, vol. 35(2), pages 1-8, July.
    9. Robert H. Porter, 1983. "A Study of Cartel Stability: The Joint Executive Committee, 1880-1886," Bell Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 14(2), pages 301-314, Autumn.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Luckstead, Jeff & Devadoss, Stephen & Mittelhammer, Ron, 2015. "Imperfect Competition between Florida and Sao Paulo (Brazil) Orange Juice Producers in the U.S. and European Markets," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 40(01), pages 1-15.
    2. Dhamodharan, Mahalingam & Devadoss, Stephen & Luckstead, Jeff, 2016. "Imperfect Competition, Trade Policies, and Technological Changes in the Orange Juice Market," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 41(2), May.
    3. Perloff, Jeffrey M, 1991. "Econometric analysis of imperfect competition and implications for trade research," Department of Agricultural & Resource Economics, UC Berkeley, Working Paper Series qt46w1j22d, Department of Agricultural & Resource Economics, UC Berkeley.
    4. Jonathon Siegle & Gregory Astill & Zoë Plakias & Daniel Tregeagle, 2024. "Estimating perennial crop supply response: A methodology literature review," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 55(2), pages 159-180, March.
    5. Kaplow, Louis & Shapiro, Carl, 2007. "Antitrust," Handbook of Law and Economics, in: A. Mitchell Polinsky & Steven Shavell (ed.), Handbook of Law and Economics, edition 1, volume 2, chapter 15, pages 1073-1225, Elsevier.
    6. Kutlu, Levent & Sickles, Robin & Tsionas, Mike G., 2019. "Heterogeneous Decision-Making and Market Power," Working Papers 19-008, Rice University, Department of Economics.
    7. Sigal Ribon & Oved Yosha, 1999. "Financial Liberalization and Competition in Banking: An Empirical Investigation," Bank of Israel Working Papers 1999.05, Bank of Israel.
    8. Germán Coloma, 2002. "The Effect of the Repsol-YPF Merger on the Argentine Gasoline Market," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 21(4), pages 399-418, December.
    9. Boone, Jan & Müller, Wieland, 2012. "The distribution of harm in price-fixing cases," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 30(2), pages 265-276.
    10. Bagwell, Kyle & Wolinsky, Asher, 2002. "Game theory and industrial organization," Handbook of Game Theory with Economic Applications, in: R.J. Aumann & S. Hart (ed.), Handbook of Game Theory with Economic Applications, edition 1, volume 3, chapter 49, pages 1851-1895, Elsevier.
    11. Damien J. Neven & Lars-Hendrik Röller & Zhentang Zhang, 1997. "Union Power and Product Market Competition: Evidence from the Airline Industry," CIG Working Papers FS IV 97-38, Wissenschaftszentrum Berlin (WZB), Research Unit: Competition and Innovation (CIG).
    12. Richard Schmalensee, 2012. "“On a Level with Dentists?” Reflections on the Evolution of Industrial Organization," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 41(3), pages 157-179, November.
    13. Mikael Juselius & Moshe Kim & Staffan Ringbom, 2015. "Do markup dynamics reflect fundamentals or changes in conduct?," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 48(3), pages 1119-1147, May.
    14. Luis Orea & Jevgenijs Steinbuks, 2018. "Estimating Market Power In Homogenous Product Markets Using A Composed Error Model: Application To The California Electricity Market," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 56(2), pages 1296-1321, April.
    15. Dae‐Wook Kim & Christopher R. Knittel, 2006. "Biases In Static Oligopoly Models? Evidence From The California Electricity Market," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 54(4), pages 451-470, December.
    16. Durevall, Dick, 2007. "Competition in the Swedish coffee market, 1978-2002," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 25(4), pages 721-739, August.
    17. Sabien Dobbelaere & Jacques Mairesse, 2013. "Panel data estimates of the production function and product and labor market imperfections," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 28(1), pages 1-46, January.
    18. Pedro Dal Bó, 2005. "Cooperation under the Shadow of the Future: Experimental Evidence from Infinitely Repeated Games," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 95(5), pages 1591-1604, December.
    19. Salvo, Alberto, 2004. "Inferring conduct under the threat of entry: the case of the Brazilian cement industry," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 6728, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    20. J. Levin & L. Einav, 2012. "Empirical Industrial Organization: A Progress Report," Voprosy Ekonomiki, NP Voprosy Ekonomiki, issue 1.

    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:aaea13:149668. 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/aaeaaea.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.