IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/rsc/rsceui/2018-60.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Externalities and Agricultural Import Bans: Evaluating Regionalization Measures in Light of the Russia – Pigs Dispute

Author

Listed:
  • Emily Blanchard
  • Mark Wu

Abstract

Article 6 of the SPS Agreement presents a series of interlinked obligations for importing and exporting countries of diseased agricultural products. The Russia – Pigs dispute raises the question of when an importing country is justified in imposing a ban on products from exporting countries unaffected by the disease, on the basis of the fact that the country is part of the same customs union as another country inflicted with the disease. This Article contends that four distinct classes of cross-border and cross-product externalities ought to play in an important role when assessing this question in the future. It discusses the possible roles to be played by bilateral, sequential, pass-through, and supply chain externalities in propagating the transmission of agricultural disease across borders through trade.

Suggested Citation

  • Emily Blanchard & Mark Wu, 2018. "Externalities and Agricultural Import Bans: Evaluating Regionalization Measures in Light of the Russia – Pigs Dispute," RSCAS Working Papers 2018/60, European University Institute.
    • Handle: RePEc:rsc:rsceui:2018/60
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://cadmus.eui.eu/bitstream/handle/1814/60212/RSCAS_2018_60.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/1814/60212
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Michael Margolis & Jason Shogren, 2012. "Disguised Protectionism, Global Trade Rules and Alien Invasive Species," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 51(1), pages 105-118, January.
    2. Saggi, Kamal & Wu, Mark, 2017. "Trade and Agricultural Disease: Import Restrictions in the Wake of the India–Agricultural Products Dispute," World Trade Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 16(2), pages 279-302, April.
    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. Linda Fernandez & Glenn Sheriff, 2013. "Optimal Border Policies for Invasive Species Under Asymmetric Information," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 56(1), pages 27-45, September.
    2. Dalmazzone, Silvana & Giaccaria, Sergio, 2014. "Economic drivers of biological invasions: A worldwide, bio-geographic analysis," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 105(C), pages 154-165.
    3. Emma Aisbett & Magdalene Silberberger, 2021. "Tariff liberalization and product standards: Regulatory chill and race to the bottom?," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 15(3), pages 987-1006, July.
    4. Lawley, Chad, 2013. "Protectionism versus risk in screening for invasive species," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 65(3), pages 438-451.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Externalities; Dispute Settlement; SPS; African Swine Flu; Agricultural Disease;
    All these keywords.

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:rsc:rsceui:2018/60. 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: RSCAS web unit (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/rsiueit.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.