IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/glecrv/v45y2016i2p170-188.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Market Power of Domestic Marketers and its Influence on the Consequences of the Korea--US and Korea--Australia FTAs on the Beef Market

Author

Listed:
  • Byeong-Il Ahn
  • Rodolfo M. Nayga

Abstract

Domestic, US and Australian beef, which are differentiated by country of origin, are sold in Korea. In this differentiated product market, tariff reductions through Free Trade Agreements (FTAs) are expected to strengthen the competitiveness of imported beef and, therefore, to mitigate the effects arising from the market power of domestic marketers. The present study develops a simulation model that evaluates this mitigating effect by explicitly reflecting the market structure that domestic beef marketers constitute. The simulation results indicate that the farm-retail marketing margin would decrease by 10.59% or 6.79% due to the Korea--US and Korea--Australia FTAs, respectively, if domestic beef marketers formed a cartel or an oligopoly market (i.e. the degree of market power is 0.5), while the marketing margin under a competitive market scenario is simulated to have no change. The value of beef production would decrease by 1009 million dollars if the marketers form a cartel and hence exercise monopoly power. The FTAs are simulated to reduce the value of beef production by 564 million dollars under the competitive market scenario.

Suggested Citation

  • Byeong-Il Ahn & Rodolfo M. Nayga, 2016. "Market Power of Domestic Marketers and its Influence on the Consequences of the Korea--US and Korea--Australia FTAs on the Beef Market," Global Economic Review, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 45(2), pages 170-188, June.
  • Handle: RePEc:taf:glecrv:v:45:y:2016:i:2:p:170-188
    DOI: 10.1080/1226508X.2016.1152561
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/1226508X.2016.1152561
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/1226508X.2016.1152561?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    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:taf:glecrv:v:45:y:2016:i:2:p:170-188. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/RGER20 .

    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.