IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/aaea10/61657.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Trade and Welfare Impacts of Partial Liberalization of U.S. Sugar TRQs: The Application of a PE/GE Modeling Approach

Author

Listed:
  • Meade, Birgit Gisela Saager
  • Grant, Jason H.
  • Regmi, Anita

Abstract

The sugar sector is one of the most heavily protected commodities in agriculture using a system of tariff rate quotas (TRQs) with a complex set of administration procedures. General equilibrium models are not suitable to analyze trade liberalization scenarios that involve numerous tariff-rate quotas across narrowly defined product lines. We use the Rutherford/Grant/Hertel modeling approach by embedding a detailed, partial equilibrium (PE) model into a standard, global general equilibrium (GE) framework. We use this PE/GE model to compare trade and welfare outcomes of two liberalization scenarios: Increasing quota levels by 25% and cutting over tariffs by 50%, versus increasing quota levels by 50% and cutting over-quota tariffs by 25%. We find that lowering over-quota tariffs relatively more has more positive welfare effects than increasing quota levels relatively more.

Suggested Citation

  • Meade, Birgit Gisela Saager & Grant, Jason H. & Regmi, Anita, 2010. "Trade and Welfare Impacts of Partial Liberalization of U.S. Sugar TRQs: The Application of a PE/GE Modeling Approach," 2010 Annual Meeting, July 25-27, 2010, Denver, Colorado 61657, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:aaea10:61657
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.61657
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/61657/files/AAEA%20paper%2011849%20-May%203%202010.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.61657?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. David Abler & John C. Beghin & David Blandford & Amani Elobeid, 2008. "Changing the U.S. Sugar Program into a Standard Crop Program: Consequences under the North American Free Trade Agreement and Doha," Review of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 30(1), pages 82-102.
    2. Ingco,Merlinda D. & Winters,L. Alan (ed.), 2004. "Agriculture and the New Trade Agenda," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521826853.
    3. Giovanni Anania & Mary E.. Bohman & Colin A. Carter & Alex F. McCalla (ed.), 2004. "Agricultural Policy Reform and the WTO," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 3471.
    4. Abler, David & Beghin, John C. & Blandford, David & Elobeid, Amani, 2008. "Changing the U.S. Sugar Program into a Standard Crop Program: Consequences Under NAFTA and Doha," Staff General Research Papers Archive 12764, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
    5. Antoine Bouët & Yvan Decreux & Lionel Fontagné & Sébastien Jean & David Laborde, 2004. "A Consistent, Ad-Valorem Equivalent Measure of Applied Protection Across the World: The MAcMap-HS6 Database," Working Papers 2004-22, CEPII research center.
    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. Chiedza L. Muchopa, 2021. "Economic Impact of Tariff Rate Quotas and Underfilling: The Case of Canned Fruit Exports from South Africa to the EU," Economies, MDPI, vol. 9(4), pages 1-17, October.

    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. Will Martin & Kym Anderson, 2006. "Agricultural Trade Reform and the Doha Development Agenda," World Bank Publications - Books, The World Bank Group, number 6889, December.
    2. Hewitt, Joanna, 2008. "Impact evaluation of research by the International Food Policy Research Institute on agricultural trade liberalization, developing countries, and WTO's Doha negotiations:," Impact assessments 28, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    3. John C. Beghin & Amani Elobeid, 2015. "The Impact of the U.S. Sugar Program Redux," Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 37(1), pages 1-33.
    4. Poczta-Wajda, Agnieszka, 2014. "Assistance To Agriculture In Countries Of A Different Development Level And Trends In World Trade With Agricultural Products," Roczniki (Annals), Polish Association of Agricultural Economists and Agribusiness - Stowarzyszenie Ekonomistow Rolnictwa e Agrobiznesu (SERiA), vol. 2014(6).
    5. Carlos J. O. Trejo-Pech & Karen L. DeLong & Dayton M. Lambert & Vasileios Siokos, 2020. "The impact of US sugar prices on the financial performance of US sugar-using firms," Agricultural and Food Economics, Springer;Italian Society of Agricultural Economics (SIDEA), vol. 8(1), pages 1-17, December.
    6. Schmitz, Troy G. & Lewis, Karen E., 2015. "Impact of NAFTA on U.S. and Mexican Sugar Markets," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 40(3), pages 1-18, September.
    7. Whistance, Jarrett & Payen, Andrick & Thompson, Wyatt, 2015. "Suspension Agreements and Antidumping/Countervailing Duties: US-Mexico Sugar Markets and the Effects of Alternative Trade Policies," 2015 AAEA & WAEA Joint Annual Meeting, July 26-28, San Francisco, California 205550, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    8. Troy G. Schmitz, 2018. "Impact of the 2014 Suspension Agreement on sugar between the United States and Mexico," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 49(1), pages 55-69, January.
    9. Sébastien Jean & David Laborde & Will Martin, 2008. "Choosing Sensitive Agricultural Products in Trade Negotiations," Working Papers 2008-18, CEPII research center.
    10. Thomas L. Vollrath & Mark J. Gehlhar & Charles B. Hallahan, 2009. "Bilateral Import Protection, Free Trade Agreements, and Other Factors Influencing Trade Flows in Agriculture and Clothing," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 60(2), pages 298-317, June.
    11. Arne Melchior, 2006. "The Most and the Least Favoured Nations: Norway's Trade Policy in Perspective," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 29(10), pages 1329-1346, October.
    12. Francois, Joseph & Nelson, Douglas & Pelkmans-Balaoing, Annette, 2008. "Endogenous Protection in General Equilibrium: Estimating Political Weights in the EU," CEPR Discussion Papers 6979, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    13. Beghin, John C. & Jensen, Helen H., 2008. "Farm policies and added sugars in US diets," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(6), pages 480-488, December.
    14. Luisa Menapace & GianCarlo Moschini, 2012. "Quality certification by geographical indications, trademarks and firm reputation," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 39(4), pages 539-566, September.
    15. Cornelius Hirsch & Harald Oberhofer, 2017. "Bilateral Trade Agreements and Trade Distortions in Agricultural Markets," FIW Working Paper series 176, FIW.
    16. Mohamed Hedi Bchir & Sébastien Jean & David Laborde, 2006. "Binding Overhang and Tariff-Cutting Formulas," Review of World Economics (Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv), Springer;Institut für Weltwirtschaft (Kiel Institute for the World Economy), vol. 142(2), pages 207-232, July.
    17. Qenani-Petrela, Eivis & Noel, Jay E. & Mastin, Thomas, 2007. "A Benefit Transfer Approach to the Estimation of Agro-Ecosystems Services Benefits: A Case Study of Kern County, California," Research Project Reports 121605, California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo, California Institute for the Study of Specialty Crops.
    18. Anania, Giovanni, 2007. "Multilateral Negotiations, Preferential Trade Agreements and the CAP. What's Ahead?," Working Papers 7283, TRADEAG - Agricultural Trade Agreements.
    19. Jensen, Hans G. & Yu, Wusheng, 2006. "Reforming Agricultural Domestic Support of the EU in the Doha Round: Measurement, Feasibility, and Consequences," Conference papers 331491, Purdue University, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Global Trade Analysis Project.
    20. Oleg Yerokhin & GianCarlo Moschini, 2008. "Intellectual Property Rights and Crop-Improving R&D under Adaptive Destruction," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 40(1), pages 53-72, May.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    International Relations/Trade;

    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:ags:aaea10:61657. 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/aaeaaea.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.