IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/nbr/nberwo/2504.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

The Political Economy of Controls: American Sugar

Author

Listed:
  • Anne O. Krueger

Abstract

This paper outlines the salient characteristics of competing models of economic regulation and controls. It then examines the evolution of the American sugar program from 1934 to 1987 in the light of these models. While lobbying and other features of traditional models were clearly important, other elements also played a key role. In particular, a technocracy developed, and complexity of regulation served as an important factor perpetuating the sugar program. Similarly, lobbying and the role of vested interests was clearly important in the evolution of the program once it began but there was an element of ?accident? in the programs initiation. Once it existed, it became an instrument to be captured and used by politicians, technocrats, and economic interests alike.

Suggested Citation

  • Anne O. Krueger, 1988. "The Political Economy of Controls: American Sugar," NBER Working Papers 2504, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    • Handle: RePEc:nbr:nberwo:2504
    Note: ITI IFM
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.nber.org/papers/w2504.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Gerber, David J, 1976. "The United States Sugar Quota Program: A Study in the Direct Congressional Control of Imports," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 19(1), pages 103-147, April.
    2. Sturgiss, Robert & Wong, Gordon & Borrell, Brent, 1987. "Policy Intervention, Price Variability and the International Sugar Agreement: An Econometric Model of the World Sugar Market," Australian Bureau of Agricultural and Resource Economics and Sciences (ABARES) Archive 316157, Australian Government, Australian Bureau of Agricultural and Resource Economics and Sciences.
    3. Gary S. Becker, 1983. "A Theory of Competition Among Pressure Groups for Political Influence," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 98(3), pages 371-400.
    4. Bhagwati, Jagdish N & Srinivasan, T N, 1980. "Revenue Seeking: A Generalization of the Theory of Tariffs," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 88(6), pages 1069-1087, December.
    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. Douglass C. North, 1990. "A Transaction Cost Theory of Politics," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 2(4), pages 355-367, October.
    2. Coggins, Jay S., 1989. "On the Welfare Consequences of Political Activity," Bulletins 7463, University of Minnesota, Economic Development Center.
    3. Valentin L. Krustev & T. Clifton Morgan, 2011. "Ending Economic Coercion: Domestic Politics and International Bargaining," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 28(4), pages 351-376, September.
    4. Christian, Thomas & Rashad, Inas, 2009. "Trends in U.S. food prices, 1950-2007," Economics & Human Biology, Elsevier, vol. 7(1), pages 113-120, March.
    5. Bedi, Arjun S., 1999. "The Role of Information and Communication Technologies in Economic Development: A Partial Survey," Discussion Papers 279848, University of Bonn, Center for Development Research (ZEF).
    6. Mustapha Nabli, 1990. "The political economy of trade liberalization in developing countries," Open Economies Review, Springer, vol. 1(2), pages 111-145, June.
    7. Sturgiss, Robert & Field, Heather & Young, Linda, 1990. "1990 and US Sugar Policy Reform," Australian Bureau of Agricultural and Resource Economics and Sciences (ABARES) Archive 316167, Australian Government, Australian Bureau of Agricultural and Resource Economics and Sciences.

    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. Ernesto Dal Bó & Pedro Dal Bó, 2011. "Workers, Warriors, And Criminals: Social Conflict In General Equilibrium," Journal of the European Economic Association, European Economic Association, vol. 9(4), pages 646-677, August.
    2. Cassing, James H. & Long, Ngo Van, 2021. "Trade in trash: A political economy approach," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 67(C).
    3. Jonathan Brooks, 1996. "Agricultural Policies In Oecd Countries: What Can We Learn From Political Economy Models?," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 47(1‐4), pages 366-389, January.
    4. Vahabi,Mehrdad, 2019. "The Political Economy of Predation," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9781107591370, October.
    5. Bradford, Scott, 2003. "Protection and jobs: explaining the structure of trade barriers across industries," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 61(1), pages 19-39, October.
    6. Serrao, Amilcar, 2002. "Influence of Political Campaign Contributions by American Agribusiness Firms on U.S. Farm Policy," 2002 International Congress, August 28-31, 2002, Zaragoza, Spain 24855, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    7. Kinsey, Jean D. & Ndayisenga, Fidele, 1999. "The Impact Of Political Contributions By Food Manufacturing Firms On U.S. Farm Policy," Journal of Agribusiness, Agricultural Economics Association of Georgia, vol. 17(1), pages 1-15.
    8. Arye Hillman & Dov Samet, 1987. "Dissipation of contestable rents by small numbers of contenders," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 54(1), pages 63-82, January.
    9. Roe, Terry L. & Yeldan, A. Erinc, 1988. "An Open Economy Model of Political Influence and Competition Among Rent Seeking Groups," Bulletins 7499, University of Minnesota, Economic Development Center.
    10. Kamath Shyam J., 1994. "Privatization: A Market Prospect Perspective," Journal des Economistes et des Etudes Humaines, De Gruyter, vol. 5(1), pages 53-104, March.
    11. K.P. Kannan & N. Vijayamohanan Pillai, 2001. "The political economy of public utilities: A study of the power sector," Centre for Development Studies, Trivendrum Working Papers 316, Centre for Development Studies, Trivendrum, India.
    12. Roe, Terry L. & Graham-Tomasi, Theodore, 1990. "Competition Among Rent Seeking Groups in General Equilibrium," Bulletins 7483, University of Minnesota, Economic Development Center.
    13. Yasar, Mahmut, 2013. "Political Influence of Exporting and Import-Competing Firms: Evidence from Eastern European and Central Asian Countries," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 154-168.
    14. Persson, Torsten & Tabellini, Guido, 2002. "Political economics and public finance," Handbook of Public Economics, in: A. J. Auerbach & M. Feldstein (ed.), Handbook of Public Economics, edition 1, volume 3, chapter 24, pages 1549-1659, Elsevier.
    15. Rodrigo M. S. Moita & Claudio Paiva, 2013. "Political Price Cycles in Regulated Industries: Theory and Evidence," American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, American Economic Association, vol. 5(1), pages 94-121, February.
    16. Anders Gustafsson, 2019. "Busy doing nothing: why politicians implement inefficient policies," Constitutional Political Economy, Springer, vol. 30(3), pages 282-299, September.
    17. Bryan Caplan & Edward Stringham, 2005. "Mises, bastiat, public opinion, and public choice," Review of Political Economy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 17(1), pages 79-105.
    18. Tin Cheuk Leung & Kwok Ping Ping & Kevin K. Tsui, 2019. "What can deregulators deregulate? The case of electricity," Journal of Regulatory Economics, Springer, vol. 56(1), pages 1-32, August.
    19. Weck-Hannemann, Hannelore, 1989. "Protectionism in direct democracy," Discussion Papers, Series II 79, University of Konstanz, Collaborative Research Centre (SFB) 178 "Internationalization of the Economy".
    20. Hahn Robert, 2010. "Designing Smarter Regulation with Improved Benefit-Cost Analysis," Journal of Benefit-Cost Analysis, De Gruyter, vol. 1(1), pages 1-19, July.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:nbr:nberwo:2504. 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/nberrus.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.