IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/aare99/171901.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Cost-benefit analysis and the SPS Agreement

Author

Listed:
  • Sinner, Jim

Abstract

The WTO Agreement on the Application of Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures requires member governments to base trade measures on scientific risk assessment. Relevant assessment factors include the costs of entry and establishment of pests, including costs of controlling such pests, but the benefits of importing risk goods appear to be excluded from consideration. This exclusion may be desirable in order to promote consistency and to reduce the chances of measures being used for protectionist purposes. However excluding benefits goes against economic logic, which suggests that both benefits and costs should be considered when choosing the appropriate level of protection from risk. The paper reviews recent economic literature on the use of cost-benefit analysis, the relevant clauses of the SPS Agreement, and recent rulings in disputes over SPS measures. Tensions between economics and the SPS Agreement are identified and a possible resolution is suggested.

Suggested Citation

  • Sinner, Jim, 1999. "Cost-benefit analysis and the SPS Agreement," 1999 Conference (43th), January 20-22, 1999, Christchurch, New Zealand 171901, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society.
  • Handle: RePEc:ags:aare99:171901
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.171901
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/171901/files/Sinner.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.171901?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. James, Sallie & Anderson, Kym, 1998. "On the need for more economic assessment of quarantine/SPS policies," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 42(4), pages 1-20.
    2. Julie A. Caswell & Jaana K. Kleinschmit v. L., 1997. "Using Benefit-Cost Criteria for Settling Federalism Disputes: An Application to Food Safety Regulation," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 79(1), pages 24-38.
    3. Caswell, Julie A., 1998. "Valuing the benefits and costs of improved food safety and nutrition," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 42(4), pages 1-16.
    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., 2000. "An Economic Evaluation of the Benefits from Import Clearance Activities in Western Australia," 2000 Conference (44th), January 23-25, 2000, Sydney, Australia 123628, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society.
    2. Monika Binder, 2002. "The role of risk and cost-benefit analysis in determining quarantine measures," International Trade 0203002, University Library of Munich, Germany.

    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. Dr Ray Trewin, 2009. "Poultry Sector Support and Protection, Structural Change and Disease Risk," International and Development Economics Working Papers idec09-01, International and Development Economics.
    2. Alejandro Acosta & Carlos Barrantes & Rico Ihle, 2020. "Animal disease outbreaks and food market price dynamics: Evidence from regime‐dependent modelling and connected scatterplots," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 64(3), pages 960-976, July.
    3. Banterle, Alessandro & Stranieri, Stefanella, 2008. "The consequences of voluntary traceability system for supply chain relationships. An application of transaction cost economics," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(6), pages 560-569, December.
    4. Julie A. Caswell, 2000. "An evaluation of risk analysis as applied to agricultural biotechnology (with a case study of gmo labeling)," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 16(1), pages 115-123.
    5. David Adamson & David Cook, 2007. "Re-examining economic options for import risk assessments," Murray-Darling Program Working Papers WP3M07, Risk and Sustainable Management Group, University of Queensland.
    6. Calvin, Linda & Krissoff, Barry, 1998. "Technical Barriers To Trade: A Case Study Of Phytosanitary Barriers And U.S. - Japanese Apple Trade," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 23(2), pages 1-16, December.
    7. Javelosa, Josyline C. & Schmitz, Andrew, 2006. "Costs and Benefits of a WTO Dispute: Philippine Bananas and the Australian Market," Estey Centre Journal of International Law and Trade Policy, Estey Centre for Law and Economics in International Trade, vol. 7(01), pages 1-26.
    8. Yuying Yang & Yubin Wang, 2024. "The Impact of Government Subsidies and Quality Certification on Farmers’ Adoption of Green Pest Control Technologies," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 15(1), pages 1-15, December.
    9. Cook, David C., 2003. "Devising A Method of ‘Expected Damage’ Estimation for a Polyphagous Invertebrate Pest Exotic to Western Australia," 2003 Conference (47th), February 12-14, 2003, Fremantle, Australia 57851, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society.
    10. Maskus, Keith E. & Wilson, John S. & Tsunehiro Otsuki, 2000. "Quantifying the impact of technical barriers to trade : a framework for analysis," Policy Research Working Paper Series 2512, The World Bank.
    11. 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.
    12. Kramb, M.C., 2001. "Eine ökonomische Analyse von sanitären und phytosanitären Außenhandelsmaßnahmen am Beispiel des „Hormonstreites“ zwischen der EU und den USA," Proceedings “Schriften der Gesellschaft für Wirtschafts- und Sozialwissenschaften des Landbaues e.V.”, German Association of Agricultural Economists (GEWISOLA), vol. 37.
    13. Steiner, Bodo, 2006. "Governance Reform of German food safety regulation: Cosmetic or real?," MPRA Paper 26252, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    14. Roberts, Donna, 1998. "Implementation Of The Wto Agreement On The Application Of Sanitary And Phytosanitary Measures: The First Two Years," Working Papers 14588, International Agricultural Trade Research Consortium.
    15. Omoke, Philip C., 2006. "Trade Policy Reforms and Rural Poverty in Nigeria," Conference papers 331445, Purdue University, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Global Trade Analysis Project.
    16. John Quiggin, 2005. "Pharmaceuticals and Intellectual Property: The US-Australia FTA," Agenda - A Journal of Policy Analysis and Reform, Australian National University, College of Business and Economics, School of Economics, vol. 12(2), pages 145-158.
    17. Ray Trewin, 2007. "Resource-based Industry and Development of the AANZFTA," International and Development Economics Working Papers idec07-03, International and Development Economics.
    18. Kym Anderson & Peter Lloyd & Donald Maclaren, 2007. "Distortions to Agricultural Incentives in Australia Since World War II," The Economic Record, The Economic Society of Australia, vol. 83(263), pages 461-482, December.
    19. Tom Kompas & Tuong Nhu Che & Pham Van Ha, 2006. "An Optimal Surveillance Measure Against Foot and Mouth Disease in the United States," Development Economics Working Papers 21813, East Asian Bureau of Economic Research.
    20. Bernard Hoekman & Kym Anderson, 2000. "Developing-Country Agriculture and the New Trade Agenda," Economic Development and Cultural Change, University of Chicago Press, vol. 49(1), pages 171-180.

    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:aare99:171901. 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.