IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/ndapsr/23069.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Impacts Of The U.S.-Central America Free Trade Agreement On The U.S. Sugar Industry

Author

Listed:
  • Koo, Won W.
  • Taylor, Richard D.
  • Mattson, Jeremy W.

Abstract

- The U.S.- Central American Free Trade Agreement (CAFTA) is a free trade agreement with five Central American Countries: Costa Rica, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, and Nicaragua. - Because of differences in resource endowments, size, and income between the United States and the Central American countries, trade between the two regions has generally been complementary, inter-industry trade. The United States exports wheat, corn, soybeans, and rice, and imports coffee, bananas, and fruits and vegetables. CAFTA will enhance the U.S. trade volume with Central America through trade creation and diversion effects. - One of the largest exports by the Central American countries is sugar. The region exports about 1.5 million tons of sugar annually, and currently exports less than 10% of its sugar exports to the United States. - If the United States imports more than 500 thousand tons of additional sugar, a limited number of sugar producing regions in the United States would be able to remain viable. Wholesale price of sugar would be about 20 cents in the United States with an additional import of 500 thousand tons, and would decrease further as additional imports increase. For a sugar price less than 20 cents/pound, U.S. domestic sugar supply would become much more elastic. This implies that the U.S. domestic sugar supply would decrease much faster if the price of sugar was lower than 20 cents/pound: domestic supply would decrease 25% for sugar beets and 15% for sugar cane for every 10% decrease in price. Sugar beet processors could lose their economies of scale as a result of reduced supply of sugar beets and would be less competitive. However, this may not be a major problem for cane sugar refiners since the United States imports raw cane sugar for domestic processing. - The current U.S. proposal on sugar under CAFTA could permit the Central American countries to export more than one million tons of sugar to the United States within a few years. Even if the second tier tariff is not included in the final agreement, incremental access, as requested by the CAFTA countries, could be in the range of 300,000 tons per year. In addition, with expected additional imports of sugar under various FTAs, such as NAFTA and FTAA, total additional U.S. imports of sugar could exceed one million tons, which would hurt the U.S. sugar industry significantly. - If the United States imports more than 2 million tons of additional sugar from the CAFTA countries, the world price of sugar would increase from 8 cents/pound to 10 cents/pound and the U.S. domestic wholesale price would decrease to 13 cents/pound. At this price level, the United States would import more than 80% of its domestic consumption. - CAFTA may be good for both the United States and the Central American countries. However, the U.S. sugar industry may become a victim of the agreement. U.S. sugar imports from the Central American countries should be limited to protect sugar beet and cane growers in the United States until worldwide, multilateral free trade for sugar is established.

Suggested Citation

  • Koo, Won W. & Taylor, Richard D. & Mattson, Jeremy W., 2003. "Impacts Of The U.S.-Central America Free Trade Agreement On The U.S. Sugar Industry," Special Reports 23069, North Dakota State University, Center for Agricultural Policy and Trade Studies.
  • Handle: RePEc:ags:ndapsr:23069
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.23069
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/23069/files/sr030003.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.23069?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. Benirschka, Martin & Koo, Won W. & Lou, Jianqiang, 1996. "World Sugar Policy Simulation Model: Description And Computer Program Documentation," Agricultural Economics Reports 23432, North Dakota State University, Department of Agribusiness and Applied Economics.
    2. Salassi, Michael E. & Kennedy, P. Lynn & Breaux, Janis B., 2003. "Impact of Potential Bilateral Free Trade Agreements on Projected Raw Sugar Prices and the Economic Viability of the Louisiana Sugar Industry," Miscellaneous Publications 316674, Louisiana State University, Department of Agricultural Economics and Agribusiness.
    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. Lee, Dae-Seob & Kennedy, P. Lynn, 2005. "Demand behavior of U.S. high fructose corn syrup (HFCS) and its implication for the U.S. sweetener market: a cointegration analysis," 2005 Annual meeting, July 24-27, Providence, RI 19564, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    2. Taylor, Richard D., 2016. "2016 Outlook of the U.S. and World Sugar Markets, 2016-2025," Agribusiness & Applied Economics Report 242089, North Dakota State University, Department of Agribusiness and Applied Economics.
    3. Surabhi Mittal & Jeffrey J. Reimer, 2008. "Would Indian farmers benefit from liberalization of world cotton and sugar markets?," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 38(3), pages 301-312, May.
    4. Surabhi Mittal, 2007. "OECD Agricultural Trade Reforms Impact on India's Prices and Producers Welfare," Indian Council for Research on International Economic Relations, New Delhi Working Papers 195, Indian Council for Research on International Economic Relations, New Delhi, India.
    5. Mattson, Jeremy W. & Koo, Won W., 2005. "U.S. Agricultural Trade with the Andean Countries and the Potential Effects of a Free Trade Agreement," Agricultural Policy Briefs 228966, North Dakota State University, Center for Agricultural Policy and Trade Studies.
    6. Surabhi MITTAL, 2009. "Will OECD Agricultural Trade Reforms Impact India's Crop Prices and Farmers Welfare?," EcoMod2009 21500067, EcoMod.
    7. Surabhi Mittal, 2007. "Oecd Agricultural Trade Reforms Impact On India’s Prices And Producers Welfare," Trade Working Papers 22225, East Asian Bureau of Economic Research.

    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. Zhuang, Renan & Koo, Won W., 2006. "Impacts of Sugar Free Trade Agreements on the U.S. Sugar Industry," 2006 Annual meeting, July 23-26, Long Beach, CA 21486, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    2. Koo, Won W. & Taylor, Richard D. & Swenson, Andrew L. & Duncan, Marvin R., 1999. "1999 North Dakota Agricultural Outlook: Representative Farms 1999-2008," Agricultural Economics Reports 23334, North Dakota State University, Department of Agribusiness and Applied Economics.
    3. Won W. Koo, 2002. "Alternative U.S. and EU Sugar Trade Liberalization Policies and their Implications," Review of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 24(2), pages 336-352.
    4. Mykel R. Taylor & Gary W. Brester, 2005. "Noncash Income Transfers and Agricultural Land Values," Review of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 27(4), pages 526-541.
    5. Taylor, Richard D. & Koo, Won W. & Swenson, Andrew L., 2010. "2010 North Dakota Agricultural Outlook: Representative Farms, 2010-2019," Agribusiness & Applied Economics Report 92979, North Dakota State University, Department of Agribusiness and Applied Economics.
    6. Quagrainie, Kwamena K. & Unterschultz, James R. & Jeffrey, Scott R., 2000. "The Impact Of Post-Farmgate Value-Adding On Western Canadian Agriculture," 2000 Annual Meeting, June 29-July 1, 2000, Vancouver, British Columbia 36379, Western Agricultural Economics Association.
    7. Koo, Won W. & Taylor, Richard D., 1999. "Outlook Of The World Rice Industry Under Alternative Trade Liberalization Policies In Japan And Korea," Agricultural Economics Reports 23402, North Dakota State University, Department of Agribusiness and Applied Economics.
    8. Koo, Won W., 2000. "The Impacts Of China'S Accession Into The Wto On The U.S. Wheat Industry," Agricultural Economics Reports 23320, North Dakota State University, Department of Agribusiness and Applied Economics.
    9. Taylor, Richard D. & Koo, Won W. & Swenson, Andrew L., 2013. "013 North Dakota Agricultural Outlook: Representative Farms, 2013-202," Agribusiness & Applied Economics Report 162952, North Dakota State University, Department of Agribusiness and Applied Economics.
    10. Taylor, Richard D. & Koo, Won W., 2014. "2014 North Dakota Agricultural Outlook: Representative Farms, 2014-2023," Agribusiness & Applied Economics Report 187190, North Dakota State University, Department of Agribusiness and Applied Economics.
    11. Taylor, Richard D. & Koo, Won W. & Swenson, Andrew L., 2011. "2011 North Dakota Agricultural Outlook: Representative Farms, 2011-2020," Agribusiness & Applied Economics Report 115629, North Dakota State University, Department of Agribusiness and Applied Economics.
    12. Unterschultz, James R. & Jeffrey, Scott R. & Quagrainie, Kwamena K., 2000. "Value-Adding 20 Billion By 2005: Impact At The Alberta Farm Gate," Project Report Series 24049, University of Alberta, Department of Resource Economics and Environmental Sociology.
    13. Koo, Won W., 2000. "The U.S. Cane And Beet Sugar Industry Under Alternative Trade Liberalization Policy Options," Agricultural Economics Reports 23404, North Dakota State University, Department of Agribusiness and Applied Economics.
    14. Koo, Won W., 1998. "Impacts of Agricultural and Trade Policies on Northern Plains Agriculture: A Representative Farm Approach," Conference Papers 258715, Montana State University, Department of Agricultural Economics and Economics, Trade Research Center.
    15. Koo, Won W. & Taylor, Richard D., 2008. "2008 Outlook of the U.S. and World Sugar Markets, 2007-2017," Agribusiness & Applied Economics Report 37276, North Dakota State University, Department of Agribusiness and Applied Economics.
    16. Taylor, Richard D. & Koo, Won W. & Swenson, Andrew L., 2012. "2012 North Dakota Agricultural Outlook: Representative Farms, 2012-2021," Agribusiness & Applied Economics Report 133395, North Dakota State University, Department of Agribusiness and Applied Economics.
    17. Taylor, Richard D., 2016. "2016 North Dakota Agricultural Outlook: Representative Farms, 2016-2025," Agribusiness & Applied Economics Report 245859, North Dakota State University, Department of Agribusiness and Applied Economics.
    18. Taylor, Richard D. & Koo, Won W., 2015. "2015 North Dakota Agricultural Outlook: Representative Farms, 2015-2024," Agribusiness & Applied Economics Report 208854, North Dakota State University, Department of Agribusiness and Applied Economics.
    19. Taylor, Richard D., 2016. "2016 Outlook of the U.S. and World Sugar Markets, 2016-2025," Agribusiness & Applied Economics Report 242089, North Dakota State University, Department of Agribusiness and Applied Economics.
    20. Chisanga, Brian, 2012. "Efficiency and integration in the Zambian sugar market: analysing price transmission, price formation and policy," Research Theses 134483, Collaborative Masters Program in Agricultural and Applied Economics.

    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:ndapsr:23069. 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/candsus.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.