IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ags/aareaj/342977.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Global agricultural trade impact of the 2011 triple disaster in Japan: A gravity approach

Author

Listed:
  • Dadakas Dr., PhD, Dimitrios
  • Tatsi, Stavroula

Abstract

We examine the evolution of global agricultural trade flows in the light of the 2011 earthquake, tsunami and nuclear accident in Fukushima, Japan. After the 2011 disasters, safety concerns led to the implementation of international surveillance measures on agricultural products from Japan. The physical damages, the domestic and foreign restrictions to production and trade, combined with actual and perceived health risks, affected consumer behaviour and reshaped production, consumption and trade. The existing literature has thoroughly examined individual sectoral effects, mainly through stylised facts and mainly for Japan; however, there is no analysis to date on the effects of the triple disaster on global trade flows of agriculture. With Japan holding 4.1 per cent of global exports of agricultural products and 0.4 per cent of global imports, transmission of the effects to global markets could lead to disruptions in global supply chains, worldwide distribution and trade. We use a gravity approach, together with 2000–2018 panel data and a Poisson Pseudo Maximum Likelihood (PPML) estimator to discuss the impact of the disasters on global trade flows of agriculture. Results for Japan indicate a negative effect on both exports and imports extending until 2014. Counterfactual analysis results suggest transmission of the negative effects to global exports of agricultural products.

Suggested Citation

  • Dadakas Dr., PhD, Dimitrios & Tatsi, Stavroula, 2021. "Global agricultural trade impact of the 2011 triple disaster in Japan: A gravity approach," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 65(04), January.
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:aareaj:342977
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.342977
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/342977/files/Global%20agricultural%20trade%20impact.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.342977?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. James E. Anderson & Eric van Wincoop, 2003. "Gravity with Gravitas: A Solution to the Border Puzzle," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 93(1), pages 170-192, March.
    2. Baldwin, Richard & Taglioni, Daria, 2006. "Gravity for Dummies and Dummies for Gravity Equations," CEPR Discussion Papers 5850, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    3. Bachev, Hrabrin Ianouchev & Ito, Fusao, 2014. "Implications Of Fukushima Nuclear Disaster For Japanese Agri-Food Chains," International Journal of Food and Agricultural Economics (IJFAEC), Alanya Alaaddin Keykubat University, Department of Economics and Finance, vol. 2(01), pages 1-26, January.
    4. James E. Anderson & Mario Larch & Yoto V. Yotov, 2018. "GEPPML: General equilibrium analysis with PPML," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 41(10), pages 2750-2782, October.
    5. Kentaka Aruga, 2017. "Consumer responses to food produced near the Fukushima nuclear plant," Environmental Economics and Policy Studies, Springer;Society for Environmental Economics and Policy Studies - SEEPS, vol. 19(4), pages 677-690, October.
    6. Jean-François Arvis & Ben Shepherd, 2013. "The Poisson quasi-maximum likelihood estimator: a solution to the ‘adding up’ problem in gravity models," Applied Economics Letters, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 20(6), pages 515-519, April.
    7. Bergstrand, Jeffrey H, 1985. "The Gravity Equation in International Trade: Some Microeconomic Foundations and Empirical Evidence," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 67(3), pages 474-481, August.
    8. Bergstrand, Jeffrey H. & Larch, Mario & Yotov, Yoto V., 2015. "Economic integration agreements, border effects, and distance elasticities in the gravity equation," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 78(C), pages 307-327.
    9. Shigeyuki Abe & Shandre M. Thangavelu, 2012. "Natural Disasters and Asia: Introduction," Asian Economic Journal, East Asian Economic Association, vol. 26(3), pages 181-187, September.
    10. Scott L. Baier & Jeffrey H. Bergstrand & Matthew W. Clance, 2015. "Heterogeneous Economic Integration Agreement Effects," CESifo Working Paper Series 5488, CESifo.
    11. Anderson, James E, 1979. "A Theoretical Foundation for the Gravity Equation," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 69(1), pages 106-116, March.
    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. Doyoung Park & William Ridley, 2025. "Thirsty for Trade: How Globalization Shapes Virtual Water Trade," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 88(2), pages 279-338, February.
    2. William Ridley & Farzana Shirin, 2025. "The effectiveness of development‐oriented nonreciprocal trade preferences in promoting agricultural trade," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 107(1), pages 81-107, January.

    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. Dimitrios Dadakas & Stavroula Tatsi, 2021. "Global agricultural trade impact of the 2011 triple disaster in Japan: A gravity approach," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 65(4), pages 937-972, October.
    2. Mario Larch & Serge Shikher & Constantinos Syropoulos & Yoto V. Yotov, 2022. "Quantifying the impact of economic sanctions on international trade in the energy and mining sectors," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 60(3), pages 1038-1063, July.
    3. Yoto V. Yotov, 2024. "The evolution of structural gravity: The workhorse model of trade," Contemporary Economic Policy, Western Economic Association International, vol. 42(4), pages 578-603, October.
    4. Scott L. Baier & Amanda Kerr & Yoto V. Yotov, 2018. "Gravity, distance, and international trade," Chapters, in: Bruce A. Blonigen & Wesley W. Wilson (ed.), Handbook of International Trade and Transportation, chapter 2, pages 15-78, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    5. Mario Larch & Yoto V. Yotov, 2016. "General Equilibrium Trade Policy Analysis with Structural Gravity," CESifo Working Paper Series 6020, CESifo.
    6. Anderson, James E. & Borchert, Ingo & Mattoo, Aaditya & Yotov, Yoto V., 2018. "Dark costs, missing data: Shedding some light on services trade," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 105(C), pages 193-214.
    7. Rebecca Freeman & Mario Larch & Angelos Theodorakopoulos & Yoto Yotov, 2021. "Unlocking New Methods to Estimate Country-specific Trade Costs and Trade Elasticitie," School of Economics Working Paper Series 2021-17, LeBow College of Business, Drexel University.
    8. Felbermayr, Gabriel & Yotov, Yoto V., 2021. "From theory to policy with gravitas: A solution to the mystery of the excess trade balances," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 139(C).
    9. Rutger Teulings, 2017. "Brexit and The Impact of Gradual Economic Integration on Export," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 17-075/VI, Tinbergen Institute.
    10. Baier, Scott L. & Yotov, Yoto V. & Zylkin, Thomas, 2019. "On the widely differing effects of free trade agreements: Lessons from twenty years of trade integration," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 116(C), pages 206-226.
    11. Yoto V. Yotov, 2021. "The Variation of Gravity within Countries (or 15 Reasons Why Gravity Should Be Estimated with Domestic Trade Flows)," CESifo Working Paper Series 9057, CESifo.
    12. Roberta Piermartini & Yoto Yotov, 2016. "Estimating Trade Policy Effects with Structural Gravity," School of Economics Working Paper Series 2016-10, LeBow College of Business, Drexel University.
    13. C. Chafer & S. Gil‐Pareja & R. Llorca‐Vivero, 2022. "Warning: Bilateral trade agreements do not create trade," Bulletin of Economic Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 74(1), pages 135-144, January.
    14. Yoto V. Yotov, 2022. "On the role of domestic trade flows for estimating the gravity model of trade," Contemporary Economic Policy, Western Economic Association International, vol. 40(3), pages 526-540, July.
    15. Saba GULNAZ & Hemlata MANGLANI, 2022. "Does gravity work in the context of India and ASEAN bilateral trade? An application of the FGLS method," Theoretical and Applied Economics, Asociatia Generala a Economistilor din Romania / Editura Economica, vol. 0(1(630), S), pages 143-160, Spring.
    16. Federico Carril-Caccia & José María Martín Martín & Francisco Javier Sáez-Fernández, 2024. "How important are borders for tourism? The case of Europe," Tourism Economics, , vol. 30(1), pages 27-43, February.
    17. 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.
    18. Michele Fratianni & Francesco Marchionne, 2011. "The Limits to Integration," Chapters, in: Miroslav N. Jovanović (ed.), International Handbook on the Economics of Integration, Volume I, chapter 9, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    19. Marco Dueñas & Giorgio Fagiolo, 2013. "Modeling the International-Trade Network: a gravity approach," Journal of Economic Interaction and Coordination, Springer;Society for Economic Science with Heterogeneous Interacting Agents, vol. 8(1), pages 155-178, April.
    20. Michele FRATIANNI & Chang HOON HO, 2007. "On the Relationship Between RTA Expansion and Openness," Working Papers 288, Universita' Politecnica delle Marche (I), Dipartimento di Scienze Economiche e Sociali.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    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:aareaj:342977. 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/aaresea.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.