IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/war/wpaper/2013-12.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Welfare Analysis of a Prohibitive NTM in a Society with a Proportion of Concerned Consumers

Author

Listed:
  • M. Mahdi Ghodsi

    (Faculty of Economic Sciences, University of Warsaw; Department of Economic Sciences of Catholic University of Milan)

Abstract

The aim of this contribution is to provide a cost-benefit analysis in a partial equilibrium framework to investigate the welfare consequences of a non-tariff measure (NTM). The important issue of the analysis is having two groups of indifferent and concerned consumers. The ultimate aim of the paper is to investigate whether or not the paternalistic behavior of government is in line with the willingness of the consumers for demand. The existence of information about the origin of goods is the leading issue of the analysis that provides two different scenarios. The model is calibrated with data on consumption of shrimps. The findings suggest that in the existence of such information, NTM policy has the lowest international losses and highest domestic gains. The policy implication of these results suggests that governments should try to increase the information in the market when they are following good faith for imposition of NTM.

Suggested Citation

  • M. Mahdi Ghodsi, 2013. "Welfare Analysis of a Prohibitive NTM in a Society with a Proportion of Concerned Consumers," Working Papers 2013-12, Faculty of Economic Sciences, University of Warsaw.
    • Handle: RePEc:war:wpaper:2013-12
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.wne.uw.edu.pl/inf/wyd/WP/WNE_WP97.pdf
    File Function: First version, 2013
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. 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.
    2. Mohammad Mahdi Ghodsi, 2012. "Corruption and the Level of Trade Protectionism," Ekonomia journal, Faculty of Economic Sciences, University of Warsaw, vol. 30.
    3. Grossman, Gene M & Helpman, Elhanan, 1994. "Protection for Sale," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 84(4), pages 833-850, September.
    4. Frank van Tongeren & John Beghin & Stéphane Marette, 2009. "A Cost-Benefit Framework for the Assessment of Non-Tariff Measures in Agro-Food Trade," OECD Food, Agriculture and Fisheries Papers 21, OECD Publishing.
    5. Emma Aisbett & Lee M. Pearson, 2012. "Environmental and Health Protections, or New Protectionism? Determinants of SPS Notifications by WTO Members," Crawford School Research Papers 1213, Crawford School of Public Policy, The Australian National University.
    6. John Beghin & Anne-Célia Disdier & Stéphan Marette & Frank Van Tongeren, 2017. "Welfare costs and benefits of non-tariff measures in trade: a conceptual framework and application," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: John Christopher Beghin (ed.), Nontariff Measures and International Trade, chapter 7, pages 119-138, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    7. repec:hal:pseose:halshs-00754587 is not listed on IDEAS
    8. Dawn D. Thilmany & Christopher B. Barrett, 1997. "Regulatory Barriers in an Integrating World Food Market," Review of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 19(1), pages 91-107.
    9. Philip L. Paarlberg & John G. Lee, 1998. "Import Restrictions in the Presence of a Health Risk: An Illustration Using FMD," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 80(1), pages 175-183.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Mahdi Ghodsi, 2015. "Distinguishing Between Genuine and Non-Genuine Reasons for Imposing Technical Barriers to Trade: A Proposal Based on Cost-Benefit Analysis," wiiw Working Papers 117, The Vienna Institute for International Economic Studies, wiiw.
    2. Mahdi Ghodsi, 2023. "Salmonella Program in the European Union and the Trade Dispute with Brazil at the World Trade Organisation: a Partial Equilibrium Framework," Rivista Internazionale di Scienze Sociali, Vita e Pensiero, Pubblicazioni dell'Universita' Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, vol. 131(1), pages 167-212.
    3. Lili Yan ING & Olivier CADOT, 2017. "Remaking Ad valorem equivalents of non-tariff measures in ASEAN," Working Papers DP-2017-09, Economic Research Institute for ASEAN and East Asia (ERIA).
    4. Olivier CADOT & Lili Yan ING, 2017. "Ad-valorem equivalents of NTMs in ASEAN," Working Papers P203, FERDI.
    5. 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.
    6. M. Mahdi Ghodsi, 2018. "Determinants of specific trade concerns raised on technical barriers to trade EU versus non-EU," Empirica, Springer;Austrian Institute for Economic Research;Austrian Economic Association, vol. 45(1), pages 83-128, February.
    7. Eyal Ronen, 2017. "Tariffs and non-tariff measures: substitutes or complements. A cross-country analysis," Bank i Kredyt, Narodowy Bank Polski, vol. 48(1), pages 45-72.
    8. Gordhan K. Saini, 2009. "Non-Tariff Measures and Indian Textiles and Clothing Exports," Trade Working Papers 22407, East Asian Bureau of Economic Research.
    9. Olson, Lars J. & Roy, Santanu, 2010. "Dynamic sanitary and phytosanitary trade policy," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 60(1), pages 21-30, July.
    10. Giovanni Facchini & Johannes Van Biesebroeck & Gerald Willmann, 2006. "Protection for sale with imperfect rent capturing," Canadian Journal of Economics/Revue canadienne d'économique, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 39(3), pages 845-873, August.
    11. Marette Stéphan, 2018. "Illegitimate or Legitimate Non-Tariff Measures," Journal of Agricultural & Food Industrial Organization, De Gruyter, vol. 16(2), pages 1-18, November.
    12. Nardella, Michele & Boccaletti, Stefano, 2005. "The NAFTA Agreement and Market Integration Among Canada, US and Mexico: The Role of Non-Tariff Measures," 2005 Annual meeting, July 24-27, Providence, RI 19347, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    13. Maria Cipollina & Federica Demaria, 2020. "The Trade Effect of the EU’s Preference Margins and Non-Tariff Barriers," JRFM, MDPI, vol. 13(9), pages 1-20, September.
    14. Gordhan K. Saini, 2009. "Non-tariff measures and Indian textiles and clothing exports," Indira Gandhi Institute of Development Research, Mumbai Working Papers 2009-002, Indira Gandhi Institute of Development Research, Mumbai, India.
    15. repec:lic:licosd:38617 is not listed on IDEAS
    16. Richard Baldwin, 2008. "Big-Think Regionalism: A Critical Survey," NBER Working Papers 14056, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    17. Marco Fugazza, 2013. "The Economics Behind Non-Tariff Measures: Theoretical Insights And Empirical Evidence," UNCTAD Blue Series Papers 57, United Nations Conference on Trade and Development.
    18. Cosimo Beverelli & Mauro Boffa & Alexander Keck, 2019. "Trade policy substitution: theory and evidence," Review of World Economics (Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv), Springer;Institut für Weltwirtschaft (Kiel Institute for the World Economy), vol. 155(4), pages 755-783, November.
    19. Ana Sanjuan Lopez & Marie-Luise Rau & Geert Woltjer, 2019. "Exploring alternative approaches to estimate the impact of non-tariff measures and further implementation in simulation models," JRC Research Reports JRC113883, Joint Research Centre.
    20. Olson, Lars J., 2006. "The Economics of Terrestrial Invasive Species: A Review of the Literature," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Northeastern Agricultural and Resource Economics Association, vol. 35(1), pages 1-17, April.
    21. Annalisa Zezza & Federica Demaria & Maria Rosaria Pupo d'Andrea & Jo Swinnen & Giulia Meloni & Senne Vandevelde & Alessandro Olper & Daniele Curzi & Valentina Raimondi & Sophie Drogue, 2018. "Research for AGRI Committee - Agricultural trade: assessing reciprocity of standards," Working Papers hal-02787948, HAL.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    welfare; trade policy; non-tariff measures; technical barriers to trade;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • D61 - Microeconomics - - Welfare Economics - - - Allocative Efficiency; Cost-Benefit Analysis
    • F13 - International Economics - - Trade - - - Trade Policy; International Trade Organizations

    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:war:wpaper:2013-12. 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: Marcin Bąba (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/fesuwpl.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.