IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/aare00/123674.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

An economic analysis of food safety issues following the SPS Agreement: Lessons from the Hormones dispute

Author

Listed:
  • James, Sallie

Abstract

The long-running feud between the US and the EU was the first to be disputed formally at the WTO. It provides a classic example of how cultural differences with respect to food attributes have the potential to hamper trade and to challenge WTO agreements designed to limit the disruptions, especially when scientific evidence is limited or spurious. After outlining the legal arguments used by the parties to the Hormones dispute, simple economic models are used to represent the EU beef market and effects of the hormonetreated beef ban and its removal under certain conditions. The implications for the practical implementation of the SPS Agreement are then explored.

Suggested Citation

  • James, Sallie, 1999. "An economic analysis of food safety issues following the SPS Agreement: Lessons from the Hormones dispute," 2000 Conference (44th), January 23-25, 2000, Sydney, Australia 123674, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society.
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:aare00:123674
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.123674
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/123674/files/JamesSallie.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.123674?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. Jean-Christophe Bureau & Jean-Pierre Doussin, 1999. "Sanitary and Technical Regulations: Issues for Trade Liberalization in the Dairy Sector," Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue canadienne d'agroeconomie, Canadian Agricultural Economics Society/Societe canadienne d'agroeconomie, vol. 47(5), pages 149-156, December.
    2. Roberts, Donna, 1998. "Preliminary Assessment of the Effects of the WTO Agreement on Sanitary and Phytosanitary Trade Regulations," Journal of International Economic Law, Oxford University Press, vol. 1(3), pages 377-405, September.
    3. William A. Kerr, 1999. "International Trade in Transgenic Food Products: A New Focus for Agricultural Trade Disputes," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 22(2), pages 245-259, March.
    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. Cook, David C. & Fraser, Rob W., 2001. "Exploring the Regional and Size-Related Implications of Interstate Quarantine Policies for WA Fruit and Vegetable Growers," 2001 Conference (45th), January 23-25, 2001, Adelaide, Australia 125560, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society.
    2. Cook, D. C. & Fraser, R. W., 2002. "Exploring the regional implications of interstate quarantine policies in Western Australia," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 27(2), pages 143-157, April.

    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. Kerr, William A., 2004. "Sanitary Barriers And International Trade Governance Issues For The Nafta Beef Market," Proceedings of the 8th Agricultural and Food Policy Systems Information Workshop, 2002: Keeping the Borders Open 16918, Farm Foundation, Agricultural and Food Policy Systems Information Workshops.
    2. Perdikis, Nicholas, 2000. "A Conflict of Legitimate Concerns or Pandering to Vested Interests? Conflicting Attitudes Towards the Regulation of Trade in Genetically Modified Goods - The EU and the US," Estey Centre Journal of International Law and Trade Policy, Estey Centre for Law and Economics in International Trade, vol. 1(1), pages 1-15.
    3. Unnevehr, Laurian J., 2000. "Food safety issues and fresh food product exports from LDCs," Agricultural Economics, Blackwell, vol. 23(3), pages 231-240, September.
    4. Dixit, Praveen M. & Josling, Timothy E. & Blandford, David, 2001. "The Current Wto Agricultural Negotiations: Options For Progress; Synthesis," Commissioned Papers 14623, International Agricultural Trade Research Consortium.
    5. Bo Xiong & John Beghin, 2017. "Disentangling Demand-Enhancing And Trade-Cost Effects Of Maximum Residue Regulations," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: John Christopher Beghin (ed.), Nontariff Measures and International Trade, chapter 6, pages 105-108, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    6. MacLaren, Donald, 2003. "Consumers’ Preferences, Credence Goods And The Wto Sps Agreement," 2003 Conference (47th), February 12-14, 2003, Fremantle, Australia 57915, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society.
    7. Spencer Henson & Rupert Loader, 1999. "Impact of sanitary and phytosanitary standards on developing countries and the role of the SPS Agreement," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 15(3), pages 355-369.
    8. Nielsen, Chantal Pohl & Robinson, Sherman & Thierfelder, Karen, 2002. "Trade in genetically modified food: A survey of empirical studies," TMD discussion papers 106, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    9. Tangermann, Stefan, 2001. "Has The Uruguay Round Agreement On Agriculture Worked Well?," Working Papers 14586, International Agricultural Trade Research Consortium.
    10. Inaba, Masaru & Nutahara, Kengo, 2009. "The role of investment wedges in the Carlstrom-Fuerst economy and business cycle accounting," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 105(3), pages 200-203, December.
    11. Lynch, Lori, 2001. "Migration Of Exotic Pests: Phytosanitary Regulations And Cooperative Policies To Protect U.S. Ecosystems And Agricultural Interests," Working Papers 28548, University of Maryland, Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics.
    12. Unknown, 2004. "U.S. Agriculture And The Free Trade Area Of The Americas," Agricultural Economic Reports 33995, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.
    13. Thornsbury, Suzanne, 1999. "Political Economy Determinants Of Technical Barriers To U.S. Agricultural Exports," 1999 Annual meeting, August 8-11, Nashville, TN 21499, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    14. Larach, María Angélica, 2001. "Trade in transgenic products: a review of the international debate," Revista CEPAL, Naciones Unidas Comisión Económica para América Latina y el Caribe (CEPAL), December.
    15. Kerr, William A., 2000. "Is It Time to Re-think the WTO? A Return to the Basics," Estey Centre Journal of International Law and Trade Policy, Estey Centre for Law and Economics in International Trade, vol. 1(2), pages 1-9.
    16. Krzyżanowski, Julian, 2016. "Prospects and threats for EU agriculture and consumers resulting from the potential TTIP agreement," Problems of Agricultural Economics / Zagadnienia Ekonomiki Rolnej 253698, Institute of Agricultural and Food Economics - National Research Institute (IAFE-NRI).
    17. Lichtenberg, Erik & Lynch, Lori, 2006. "Exotic Pests and Trade: When Is Pest-Free Status Certification Worthwhile?," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 35(1), pages 52-62, April.
    18. Donna Roberts, 1999. "Analyzing technical trade barriers in agricultural markets: Challenges and priorities," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 15(3), pages 335-354.
    19. JINJI Naoto, 2009. "An Economic Theory of the SPS Agreement," Discussion papers 09033, Research Institute of Economy, Trade and Industry (RIETI).
    20. Xiong, Bo, 2012. "Three essays on non-tariff measures and the gravity equation approach to trade," ISU General Staff Papers 201201010800003536, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.

    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:aare00:123674. 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/aaresea.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.