IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ags/ecjilt/129842.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Abstinence and the Single Desk: Canada – US Wheat Trade Relations in a post-CWB World

Author

Listed:
  • Rude, James

Abstract

The elimination of the single-desk monopsony/monopoly granted to the Canadian Wheat Board for western Canadian milling wheat acquisitions and sales will have ramifications for Canadian-U.S. trade relations. This article speculates on the volume of future north/south wheat trade flows. Given this perspective on trade prospects, an examination of the history of Canada-U.S. wheat trade disputes is considered. Historical experience is then used to gauge the potential for future trade remedy actions. The prospects for future contingent protection measures – antidumping and countervailing duties – are then considered, and possible steps for policy makers, farmers, and agribusinesses are presented.

Suggested Citation

  • Rude, James, 2012. "Abstinence and the Single Desk: Canada – US Wheat Trade Relations in a post-CWB World," Estey Centre Journal of International Law and Trade Policy, Estey Centre for Law and Economics in International Trade, vol. 13(2).
  • Handle: RePEc:ags:ecjilt:129842
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://purl.umn.edu/129842
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Richard Gray, 1997. "Third-Country Effects and Second-Best Grain Trade Policies: Export Subsidies and Bilateral Liberalization," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 79(4), pages 1300-1310.
    2. Bruce A. Blonigen, 2006. "Evolving discretionary practices of U.S. antidumping activity," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 39(3), pages 874-900, August.
    3. James Rude & Jean-Philippe Gervais, 2009. "Biases in Calculating Dumping Margins: The Case of Cyclical Products," Review of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 31(1), pages 122-142.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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:ecjilt:129842. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (AgEcon Search). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/esteyca.html .

    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 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.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.