IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/uerssr/278631.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Modeling Preferential .Trading Arrangements for the Agricultural Sector: A U.S.-Mexico Example

Author

Listed:
  • Liapis, Peter S.
  • Krissoff, Barry
  • Neff, Liana

Abstract

The United States is interested in establishing preferential trading arrangements (PTAs). Economic motivation for establishing PTAs includes moving toward freer trade, increasing economies of scale, improving patterns of consumption, and increasing investments from third countries. However, economic theory does not show unambiguously that countries or specific sectors of countries will be better off by establishing a PTA. The unique factors of each case must be examined to determine the effect of a PTA on the distribution of gains and losses. This report presents a modeling framework that evaluates the effect of a PTA on the agricultural sectors of participating countries. A database that can be used with the model to examine the agricultural implications of a PTA between Mexico and the United States is also presented.

Suggested Citation

  • Liapis, Peter S. & Krissoff, Barry & Neff, Liana, 1992. "Modeling Preferential .Trading Arrangements for the Agricultural Sector: A U.S.-Mexico Example," Staff Reports 278631, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:uerssr:278631
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.278631
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/278631/files/ers-report-563.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.278631?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. V. Eldon Ball, 1988. "Modeling Supply Response in a Multiproduct Framework," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 70(4), pages 813-825.
    2. Julian M. Alston & Colin A. Carter & Richard Green & Daniel Pick, 1990. "Whither Armington Trade Models?," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 72(2), pages 455-467.
    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. Hansen, James Mark, 2000. "Agricultural and trade policy reform in Mexico: PROCAMPO, NAFTA, and pre-GATT," ISU General Staff Papers 2000010108000014902, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
    2. Claassen, Roger & Gardner, Bruce L., 1994. "Implications for U.S. Farm Labor and Land Markets of the Free Trade Agreement with Mexico," Working Papers 197798, University of Maryland, Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics.
    3. Krissoff, Barry & Sharples, Jerry A., 1993. "Preferential Trading Arrangements In Western Hemisphere Countries," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Northeastern Agricultural and Resource Economics Association, vol. 22(1), pages 1-11, 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. Hansen, James Mark, 2000. "Agricultural and trade policy reform in Mexico: PROCAMPO, NAFTA, and pre-GATT," ISU General Staff Papers 2000010108000014902, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
    2. Hertel, Thomas W., 1991. "Applied General Equilibrium Analysis of Agricultural Policies," Staff Papers 200396, Purdue University, Department of Agricultural Economics.
    3. Shumway, C. Richard & Davis, George C., 2001. "Does consistent aggregation really matter?," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 45(2), pages 1-34.
    4. Peters, Glen, 2008. "Reassessing Carbon Leakage," Conference papers 331753, Purdue University, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Global Trade Analysis Project.
    5. Colby, Hunter & Diao, Xinshen & Somwaru, Agapi, 1999. "Sources Of Growth And Supply Response: A Cross-Commodity Analysis Of China'S Grain Sector," Bulletins 12985, University of Minnesota, Economic Development Center.
    6. Janda, Karel & Rausser, Gordon C. & McCluskey, Jill, 1998. "Food import demand in the Czech Republic," Department of Agricultural & Resource Economics, UC Berkeley, Working Paper Series qt14j5p75j, Department of Agricultural & Resource Economics, UC Berkeley.
    7. Lewis, Jeffrey D. & Robinson, Sherman & Wang, Zhi, 1995. "Beyond the Uruguay Round: The implications of an Asian free trade area," China Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 6(1), pages 35-90.
    8. Shui, Shangnan & Wohlgenant, Michael K. & Beghin, John C., 1993. "Policy Implications of Textile Trade Management and the U.S. Cotton Industry," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 22(1), pages 37-47, April.
    9. Alexandre Gohin, 2019. "General Equilibrium Modelling of the Insurance Industry: U.S. Crop Insurance," Journal of Global Economic Analysis, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Department of Agricultural Economics, Purdue University, vol. 4(2), pages 108-145, December.
    10. Shumway, C. Richard, 1995. "Recent Duality Contributions In Production Economics," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 20(1), pages 1-17, July.
    11. Marilyne Huchet‐Bourdon & Esmaeil Pishbahar, 2009. "Armington Elasticities and Tariff Regime: An Application to European Union Rice Imports," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 60(3), pages 586-603, September.
    12. Berck, Peter & Dabalen, Andrew, 1995. "A CGE model for California tax policy analysis: a review of literature," Department of Agricultural & Resource Economics, UC Berkeley, Working Paper Series qt7zv6b61x, Department of Agricultural & Resource Economics, UC Berkeley.
    13. Satyanarayana, Vidyashankara & Wilson, William W. & Johnson, D. Demcey, 1997. "Import Demand For Malt: A Times Series And Econometric Analysis," Agricultural Economics Reports 23343, North Dakota State University, Department of Agribusiness and Applied Economics.
    14. Sckokai, Paolo, 2001. "The Common Agricultural Policy In Econometric Models," Working Papers 14800, National Institute of Agricultural Economics, Italy - INEA, Osservatorio Sulle Politiche Agricole dell'UE.
    15. Haley, Stephen L., 1995. "Product Differentiation in Wheat Trade Modeling," Technical Bulletins 156766, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.
    16. J. M. Gil & B. Dhehibi & M. Ben Kaabia & A. M. Angulo, 2004. "Non-stationarity and the import demand for virgin olive oil in the European Union," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 36(16), pages 1859-1869.
    17. Robert G. Chambers & Erik Lichtenberg, 1994. "Simple Econometrics of Pesticide Productivity," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 76(3), pages 407-417.
    18. Miljkovic, Dragan & Ripplinger, David & Shaik, Saleem, 2016. "Impact of biofuel policies on the use of land and energy in U.S. agriculture," Journal of Policy Modeling, Elsevier, vol. 38(6), pages 1089-1098.
    19. Fofana, Ismaël, 2011. "Simulating the Impact of Climate Change and Adaptation Strategies on Farm Productivity and Income: A Bio-economic Modeling Analysis," Conference papers 332110, Purdue University, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Global Trade Analysis Project.
    20. Mohanty, Samarendu & Peterson, E. Wesley F., 1999. "Estimation of Demand for Wheat by Classes for the United States and the European Union," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 28(2), pages 158-168, October.

    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:uerssr:278631. 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/ersgvus.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.