IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ags/inrace/206069.html

Varietal utility and patriotic preference: the cas of European agriculture

Author

Listed:
  • Philippidis, George
  • Hubbard, Lionel

Abstract

No abstract is available for this item.

Suggested Citation

  • Philippidis, George & Hubbard, Lionel, 2003. "Varietal utility and patriotic preference: the cas of European agriculture," Cahiers d'Economie et de Sociologie Rurales (CESR), Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique (INRA), vol. 66.
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:inrace:206069
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.206069
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/206069/files/CESR-66-5-22.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.206069?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
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Hertel, Thomas W., 1994. "The 'procompetitive' effects of trade policy reform in a small, open economy," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 36(3-4), pages 391-411, May.
    2. Volker Nitsch, 2000. "National borders and international trade: evidence from the European Union," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 33(4), pages 1091-1105, November.
    3. Maurice Obstfeld & Kenneth Rogoff, 2001. "The Six Major Puzzles in International Macroeconomics: Is There a Common Cause?," NBER Chapters, in: NBER Macroeconomics Annual 2000, Volume 15, pages 339-412, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    4. Keith Head & Thierry Mayer, 2000. "Non-Europe: The magnitude and causes of market fragmentation in the EU," Review of World Economics (Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv), Springer;Institut für Weltwirtschaft (Kiel Institute for the World Economy), vol. 136(2), pages 284-314, June.
    5. Venables, Anthony J, 1987. "Trade and Trade Policy with Differentiated Products: A Chamberlinian-Ricardian Model," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 97(387), pages 700-717, September.
    6. Helpman, Elhanan, 1981. "International trade in the presence of product differentiation, economies of scale and monopolistic competition : A Chamberlin-Heckscher-Ohlin approach," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 11(3), pages 305-340, August.
    7. Hertel, Thomas W. & Swaminathan, Padma V., 1996. "Introducing Monopolistic Competition Into The Gtap Model," Technical Papers 28704, Purdue University, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Global Trade Analysis Project.
    8. Bach, Christian Friis & Ken Pearson, 1996. "Implementing Quotas in GTAP Using GEMPACK or How to Linearize an Inequality," GTAP Technical Papers 307, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Department of Agricultural Economics, Purdue University.
    9. Marius Brülhart & Robert C. Hine (ed.), 1999. "Intra-Industry Trade and Adjustment," Palgrave Macmillan Books, Palgrave Macmillan, number 978-1-349-27173-3, December.
    10. Vousden,Neil, 1990. "The Economics of Trade Protection," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521346696, January.
    11. Lancaster, Kelvin, 1991. "The 'product variety' case for protection," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 31(1-2), pages 1-26, August.
    12. Phillip D White, 1979. "Attitudes of U.S. Purchasing Managers Toward Industrial Products Manufactured in Selected Western European Nations," Journal of International Business Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Academy of International Business, vol. 10(1), pages 81-90, March.
    13. Francois, Joseph & McDonald, Brad & Nordström, Håkan, 1996. "A User's Guide to Uruguay Round Assessments," CEPR Discussion Papers 1410, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    14. Johan Torstensson, 1999. "Intra-Industry Trade: What Does the Theory Predict and How Robust Are the Empirical Estimates?," Palgrave Macmillan Books, in: Marius Brülhart & Robert C. Hine (ed.), Intra-Industry Trade and Adjustment, chapter 2, pages 13-35, Palgrave Macmillan.
    15. Weyerbrock, Silvia, 1998. "Reform of the European Union's Common Agricultural Policy: How to reach GATT-compatibility?," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 42(2), pages 375-411, February.
    16. McCallum, John, 1995. "National Borders Matter: Canada-U.S. Regional Trade Patterns," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 85(3), pages 615-623, June.
    17. Warren J Bilkey & Erik Nes, 1982. "Country-of-Origin Effects on Product Evaluations," Journal of International Business Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Academy of International Business, vol. 13(1), pages 89-100, March.
    18. C. F. Bach & S. E. Frandsen & H. G. Jensen, 2000. "Agricultural and Economy‐Wide Effects of European Enlargement: Modelling the Common Agricultural Policy," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 51(2), pages 162-180, May.
    19. Dixit, Avinash K & Stiglitz, Joseph E, 1977. "Monopolistic Competition and Optimum Product Diversity," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 67(3), pages 297-308, June.
    20. Krugman, Paul R., 1979. "Increasing returns, monopolistic competition, and international trade," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 9(4), pages 469-479, November.
    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. Eriksson, Clas, 2011. "Home bias in preferences and the political economics of agricultural protection," Review of Agricultural and Environmental Studies - Revue d'Etudes en Agriculture et Environnement (RAEStud), Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique (INRA), vol. 92(01).
    2. Clas Eriksson, 2011. "Home bias in preferences and the political economics of agricultural protection," Review of Agricultural and Environmental Studies - Revue d'Etudes en Agriculture et Environnement, INRA Department of Economics, vol. 92(1), pages 5-23.

    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. George Philippidis & Lionel Hubbard, 2003. "Modelling hierarchical consumer preferences: an application to global food markets," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 35(15), pages 1679-1687.
    2. Alexander Osharin & Valery Verbus, 2018. "Heterogeneity of consumer preferences and trade patterns in a monopolistically competitive setting," Journal of Economics, Springer, vol. 125(3), pages 211-237, November.
    3. Valeriano Martínez-San Román & Marta Bengoa & Blanca Sánchez-Robles, 2016. "Foreign direct investment, trade integration and the home bias: evidence from the European Union," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 50(1), pages 197-229, February.
    4. Feuerstein Switgard, 2002. "Home Bias, internationale Preisdifferenzierung und Wirtschaftsintegration / Home Bias, International Price Discrimination and Economic Integration," Journal of Economics and Statistics (Jahrbuecher fuer Nationaloekonomie und Statistik), De Gruyter, vol. 222(1), pages 112-131, February.
    5. Alessandro Olper & Valentina Raimondi, 2008. "Explaining National Border Effects in the QUAD Food Trade," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 59(3), pages 436-462, September.
    6. Davis, Donald R. & Weinstein, David E., 1999. "Economic geography and regional production structure: An empirical investigation," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 43(2), pages 379-407, February.
    7. Tomas Havranek & Zuzana Irsova, 2017. "Do Borders Really Slash Trade? A Meta-Analysis," IMF Economic Review, Palgrave Macmillan;International Monetary Fund, vol. 65(2), pages 365-396, June.
    8. Keith Head & Thierry Mayer, 2002. "Effet frontière, intégration économique et “Forteresse Europe”," Economie & Prévision, La Documentation Française, vol. 0(1), pages 71-92.
    9. Jacint Balaguer & Jordi Ripollés, 2018. "Revisiting the importance of border effect in sub‐national regions. Evidence from a quasi‐experimental design," Papers in Regional Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 97(4), pages 1113-1130, November.
    10. James E. Anderson & Eric van Wincoop, 2004. "Trade Costs," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 42(3), pages 691-751, September.
    11. Rauscher, Michael, 2001. "International trade, foreign investment, and the environment," Thuenen-Series of Applied Economic Theory 29, University of Rostock, Institute of Economics.
    12. G. Nesdale, 1996. "Tariffs and Intra-Industry Trade," Economics Discussion / Working Papers 96-11, The University of Western Australia, Department of Economics.
    13. José De Sousa & Anne-Célia Disdier, 2006. "La qualité du cadre juridique constitue-t-elle une barrière au commerce ?. Application aux économies en transition," Revue économique, Presses de Sciences-Po, vol. 57(1), pages 135-149.
    14. Davis, Donald R. & Weinstein, David E., 2003. "Market access, economic geography and comparative advantage: an empirical test," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 59(1), pages 1-23, January.
    15. Jan Fidrmuc & Jarko Fidrmuc, 2003. "Disintegration and Trade," Review of International Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 11(5), pages 811-829, November.
    16. Philippidis, G. & Hubbard, L. J., 2001. "The economic cost of the CAP revisited," Agricultural Economics, Blackwell, vol. 25(2-3), pages 375-385, September.
    17. Mayer, Thierry & Pierre-Phillippe Combes & Miren Lafourcade, 2003. "Can Business and Social Networks Explain the Border Effect Puzzle?," Royal Economic Society Annual Conference 2003 150, Royal Economic Society.
    18. Biswas, Rajit, 2014. "Metzler paradox and home market effects in presence of internationally mobile capital and non-traded goods," MPRA Paper 56335, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    19. Inga Heiland, 2017. "Five Essays on International Trade, Factor Flows and the Gains from Globalization," ifo Beiträge zur Wirtschaftsforschung, ifo Institute - Leibniz Institute for Economic Research at the University of Munich, number 74, July.
    20. Gordon H. Hanson & Chong Xiang, 2004. "The Home-Market Effect and Bilateral Trade Patterns," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 94(4), pages 1108-1129, September.

    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:inrace:206069. 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/inratfr.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.