IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/pugtwp/331210.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Economy-wide Costs for Norway of Food Trade Restrictions

Author

Listed:
  • Gaasland, Ivar

Abstract

Different sectors of the Norwegian food industry have diverging trade interests. Owing to climatic disadvantage, agriculture depends on substantial support to keep up production. Fisheries and fish farming, on the other hand, are profitable industries hampered by trade restrictions in the export markets. A special purpose comparative static AGE model is employed to highlight these diverging interests and to consider economy-wide costs of the food trade restrictions. The study suggests that a 66% drop in subsidies and tariffs may elevate household economic welfare by 2% to 5%. Less budget support to the farmers and lower food prices are the main sources of this gain, as well as higher rents in fisheries and fish farming.

Suggested Citation

  • Gaasland, Ivar, 2004. "Economy-wide Costs for Norway of Food Trade Restrictions," Conference papers 331210, Purdue University, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Global Trade Analysis Project.
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:pugtwp:331210
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/331210/files/1525.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Scott Bradford, 2003. "Paying the Price: Final Goods Protection in OECD Countries," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 85(1), pages 24-37, February.
    2. Howard J. Wall, 1999. "Using the gravity model to estimate the costs of protection," Review, Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis, issue Jan, pages 33-40.
    3. Bernard Hoekman & Francis Ng & Marcelo Olarreaga, 2002. "Eliminating Excessive Tariffs on Exports of Least Developed Countries," The World Bank Economic Review, World Bank, vol. 16(1), pages 1-21, June.
    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. Bouët, Antoine & Fontagné, Lionel & Mimouni, Mondher, 2003. "Direct Measure of Protection: A Rehabilitation," Conference papers 331157, Purdue University, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Global Trade Analysis Project.
    2. Lionel Fontagné & Thierry Mayer & Soledad Zignago, 2005. "Trade in the Triad: how easy is the access to large markets?," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 38(4), pages 1401-1430, November.
    3. repec:hal:spmain:info:hdl:2441/10189 is not listed on IDEAS
    4. Maria Cipollina & Luca Salvatici, 2008. "Measuring Protection: Mission Impossible?," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 22(3), pages 577-616, July.
    5. Peter Egger & Douglas Nelson, 2011. "How Bad Is Antidumping? Evidence from Panel Data," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 93(4), pages 1374-1390, November.
    6. Schaefer Kurt C & Anderson Michael A & Ferrantino Michael J, 2008. "Monte Carlo Appraisals of Gravity Model Specifications," Global Economy Journal, De Gruyter, vol. 8(1), pages 1-26, February.
    7. Kym Anderson, 2005. "On the Virtues of Multilateral Trade Negotiations," The Economic Record, The Economic Society of Australia, vol. 81(255), pages 414-438, December.
    8. Garth Frazer & Johannes Van Biesebroeck, 2010. "Trade Growth under the African Growth and Opportunity Act," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 92(1), pages 128-144, February.
    9. Mohamed Hedi Bchir & Lionel Fontagné & Sébastien Jean, 2005. "From Bound Duties to Actual Protection: Industrial Liberalisation in the Doha Round," Working Papers 2005-12, CEPII research center.
    10. Kym Anderson, 2003. "Trade Liberalization, Agriculture, and Poverty in Low-income Countries," WIDER Working Paper Series DP2003-25, World Institute for Development Economic Research (UNU-WIDER).
    11. Giovanni Facchini & Johannes Van Biesebroeck & Gerald Willmann, 2006. "Protection for sale with imperfect rent capturing," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 39(3), pages 845-873, August.
    12. Nazif Durmaz & John Kagochi, 2018. "Democracy and Inter-Regional Trade Enhancement in Sub-Saharan Africa: Gravity Model," Economies, MDPI, vol. 6(3), pages 1-17, August.
    13. Kiyong Keum, 2010. "Tourism flows and trade theory: a panel data analysis with the gravity model," The Annals of Regional Science, Springer;Western Regional Science Association, vol. 44(3), pages 541-557, June.
    14. Vêlayoudom Marimoutou & Denis Peguin & Anne Peguin-Feissolle, 2009. "The "distance-varying" gravity model in international economics: is the distance an obstacle to trade?," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 29(2), pages 1139-1155.
    15. Gnangnon, Sèna Kimm & Priyadarshi, Shishir, 2016. "Has the multilateral Hong Kong Ministerial decision on duty free quota free market access provided a breakthrough in the Least developed countries' export performance?," WTO Staff Working Papers ERSD-2016-06, World Trade Organization (WTO), Economic Research and Statistics Division.
    16. Aaditya Mattoo & Devesh Roy & Arvind Subramanian, 2003. "The Africa Growth and Opportunity Act and its Rules of Origin: Generosity Undermined?," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 26(6), pages 829-851, June.
    17. Luisa Kinzius & Alexander Sandkamp & Erdal Yalcin, 2019. "Trade protection and the role of non-tariff barriers," Review of World Economics (Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv), Springer;Institut für Weltwirtschaft (Kiel Institute for the World Economy), vol. 155(4), pages 603-643, November.
    18. Sbarai, Nathalia & Miranda, Silvia Helena Galvao de, 2012. "Estimation of Tariff Equivalent for NTM on Brazilian beef exports to the European Union," 2012 Conference, August 18-24, 2012, Foz do Iguacu, Brazil 126496, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    19. Bouet, Antoine, 2008. "The expected benefits of trade liberalization for world income and development: Opening the “black box” of global trade modeling," Food policy reviews 8, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    20. BOUËT Antoine & BUREAU Jean-Christophe & DECREUX Yvan & JEAN Sébastien, 2010. "Is Northern Agricultural Liberalization Beneficial to Developing Countries?," EcoMod2003 330700021, EcoMod.
    21. Firanchuk, Alexander (Фиранчук, Александр), 2017. "Illegal Re-Export and Analysis of the Effectiveness of the Russian Food Embargo in 2014 [Незаконный Реэкспорт И Анализ Эффективности Российского Продовольственного Эмбарго 2014 Года]," Working Papers 041705, Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration.

    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:pugtwp:331210. 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/gtpurus.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.