IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/fpr/ifprid/1140.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Sanitary and phytosanitary standards as bridge to cross:

Author

Listed:
  • Munasib, Abdul
  • Roy, Devesh

Abstract

This research assesses the effects of sanitary and phytosanitary (SPS) standards in international trade by introducing a new concept, bridge to cross (BTC), with product standards. The BTC in this paper is the regulatory gap between the exporting and importing countries with regard to any particular SPS measure. Assuming that each country's standard is binding in its own domestic markets, the standard of the importing country emerges as an effective trade barrier only when it exceeds the standard in the domestic market of the exporting country. Given the need to account for unobserved heterogeneity (multilateral resistance) in empirical trade models, if SPS regulations do not vary significantly over time, the effect of the regulation cannot be identified. However, the effect of BTC can still be identified because it varies by the pair of countries involved in the trade. As an application we apply the method to an SPS regulation relating to aflatoxin contamination in maize. In our empirical analysis we find that the effect of BTC varies by the size of the exporter and that the effect is stronger for poorer countries.

Suggested Citation

  • Munasib, Abdul & Roy, Devesh, 2011. "Sanitary and phytosanitary standards as bridge to cross:," IFPRI discussion papers 1140, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    • Handle: RePEc:fpr:ifprid:1140
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.ifpri.org/sites/default/files/publications/ifpridp01140.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Joseph A Clougherty & Michał Grajek, 2008. "The impact of ISO 9000 diffusion on trade and FDI: A new institutional analysis," Journal of International Business Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Academy of International Business, vol. 39(4), pages 613-633, June.
    2. Romer, Paul, 1994. "New goods, old theory, and the welfare costs of trade restrictions," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 43(1), pages 5-38, February.
    3. Unknown, 2003. "International Trade And Food Safety: Economic Theory And Case Studies," Agricultural Economic Reports 33941, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.
    4. Shepherd, Ben, 2007. "Product standards, harmonization, and trade : evidence from the extensive margin," Policy Research Working Paper Series 4390, The World Bank.
    5. Otsuki, Tsunehiro & Wilson, John S. & Sewadeh, Mirvat, 2001. "Saving two in a billion: : quantifying the trade effect of European food safety standards on African exports," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 26(5), pages 495-514, October.
    6. Sam Laird & Alexander Yeats, 1990. "Quantitative Methods for Trade-Barrier Analysis," Palgrave Macmillan Books, Palgrave Macmillan, number 978-1-349-11141-1.
    7. Maxim, Belenkiy, 2008. "Robustness of the Extensive Margin in the Helpman, Melitz and Rubinstein (HMR) Model," MPRA Paper 17913, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised Feb 2009.
    8. Marc J. Melitz, 2003. "The Impact of Trade on Intra-Industry Reallocations and Aggregate Industry Productivity," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 71(6), pages 1695-1725, November.
    9. Knut Blind, 2002. "Driving forces for standardization at standardization development organizations," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 34(16), pages 1985-1998.
    10. Kathy Baylis & Lia Nogueira & Kathryn Pace, 2010. "Food Import Refusals: Evidence from the European Union," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 93(2), pages 566-572.
    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. Xiong, Bo, 2016. "Food safety and food imports in Europe: the risk of aflatoxins in pistachios," International Food and Agribusiness Management Review, International Food and Agribusiness Management Association, vol. 20(1), September.

    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. Munasib, Abdul B.A. & Roy, Devesh, 2011. "Nontariff Barriers as Bridge to Cross," 2012 Conference, August 18-24, 2012, Foz do Iguacu, Brazil 125025, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    2. Clougherty, Joseph A. & Grajek, Michał, 2014. "International standards and international trade: Empirical evidence from ISO 9000 diffusion," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 36(C), pages 70-82.
    3. Joseph A. Clougherty & Michal Grajek, 2009. "ISO 9000: New form of protectionism or common language in international trade?," ESMT Research Working Papers ESMT-09-006, ESMT European School of Management and Technology.
    4. Ederington,Josh & Ruta,Michele, 2016. "Non-tariff measures and the world trading system," Policy Research Working Paper Series 7661, The World Bank.
    5. Anirudh Shingal & Malte Ehrich, 2019. "Trade effects of standards harmonization in the EU: improved access for non-EU partners," Indian Council for Research on International Economic Relations (ICRIER) Working Paper 372, Indian Council for Research on International Economic Relations (ICRIER), New Delhi, India.
    6. Shingal, Anirudh & Ehrich, Malte, 2024. "The EU’s pesticides MRLs harmonization: effect on trade, prices and quality," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 125(C).
    7. Ni, Shiying & Bai, Xiwen & Li, Lefei, 2022. "Behind the heterogeneous trade effects of standards: Multi-sector evidence from China," Journal of Asian Economics, Elsevier, vol. 82(C).
    8. Kareem, Olayinka Idowu, 2022. "Fruit safety regulations in the transatlantic region: How are Africa’s exports faring with the regulations?," Journal of Policy Modeling, Elsevier, vol. 44(5), pages 886-902.
    9. Eyal RONEN, 2017. "Quantifying the trade effects of NTMs: A review of the empirical literature," Journal of Economics and Political Economy, KSP Journals, vol. 4(3), pages 263-274, September.
    10. Olayinka Idowu Kareem, 2014. "The European Union Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures and Africa’s Exports," RSCAS Working Papers 2014/98, European University Institute.
    11. Rakhi Singh & Seema Sharma & Deepak Tandon, 2018. "Non-Tariff Measures in Indian Context and the European Union," International Journal of Economics and Finance, Canadian Center of Science and Education, vol. 10(9), pages 1-54, September.
    12. Drori, Netanel & Hashai, Niron & Clougherty, Joseph A., 2023. "Fire and ice: The incompatible impact of industry-wide domestic patents and international standards on firm internationalization," International Business Review, Elsevier, vol. 32(5).
    13. 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..
    14. T.Huw Edwards & Carlo Perroni, 2014. "Market Integration, Wage Concentration, and the Cost and Volume of Traded Machines," Discussion Paper Series 2014_08, Department of Economics, Loughborough University, revised Sep 2014.
    15. David Hummels & Peter J. Klenow, 2002. "The Variety and Quality of a Nation's Trade," NBER Working Papers 8712, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    16. Chen, Natalie & Novy, Dennis, 2012. "On the measurement of trade costs: direct vs. indirect approaches to quantifying standards and technical regulations," World Trade Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 11(3), pages 401-414, July.
    17. Ardelean, Adina & Lugovskyy, Volodymyr, 2010. "Domestic productivity and variety gains from trade," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 80(2), pages 280-291, March.
    18. Blind, Knut & Mangelsdorf, Axel & Pohlisch, Jakob, 2018. "The effects of cooperation in accreditation on international trade: Empirical evidence on ISO 9000 certifications," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 198(C), pages 50-59.
    19. Timothy J. Kehoe & Kim J. Ruhl, 2013. "How Important Is the New Goods Margin in International Trade?," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 121(2), pages 358-392.
    20. Benkovskis, Konstantins & Wörz, Julia, 2018. "What drives the market share changes? Price versus non-price factors," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 45(C), pages 9-29.

    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:fpr:ifprid:1140. 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: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ifprius.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.