IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/agecon/v17y1997i2-3p147-164.html

Four case studies of agri‐food CVDs and a proposal for reforming national administered protection agencies

Author

Listed:
  • Karl D. Meilke
  • Rakhal Sarker

Abstract

This paper reviews the role of national administered protection agencies, whose primary responsibility is the enforcement of national teade remedy laws. After reviewing four recent cases of trade disputes between Canada and the United States, it is argued that the role of national administered protection agencies should be changed. The growth of regional trading blocks, the increasing use of anti‐dumping and countervailing duty actions against fairly traded imports and the additional responsibilities assumed by the WTO in administering the Agreement on Agriculture strongly suggest that all trade disputes should be taken to the WTO for settlement. The role of national administered protection agencies should be changed to make them agents for trade liberalization. This would involve these agencies taking on three primary functions: (i) as transparency agents; (ii) as investigatory agents; and (iii) as advocacy agents.

Suggested Citation

  • Karl D. Meilke & Rakhal Sarker, 1997. "Four case studies of agri‐food CVDs and a proposal for reforming national administered protection agencies," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 17(2-3), pages 147-164, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:agecon:v:17:y:1997:i:2-3:p:147-164
    DOI: 10.1111/j.1574-0862.1997.tb00470.x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1574-0862.1997.tb00470.x
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/j.1574-0862.1997.tb00470.x?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:

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Young, Linda M., 2002. "Alternatives To Current Trade Remedy Law Within Nafta," 2002 Annual meeting, July 28-31, Long Beach, CA 19679, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    2. Meilke, Karl D. & Rude, James & Zahniser, Steven, 2006. "The Search for "NAFTA Plus"," 2006 NAAMIC Workshop III: Achieving NAFTA Plus 163881, North American Agrifood Market Integration Consortium (NAAMIC).
    3. Sarker, Rakhal & Ratnesena, Shashini, 2014. "Revealed Comparative Advantage and Half-A-Century Competitiveness of Canadian Agriculture: A Case Study of Wheat, Beef and Pork Sectors," Working Papers 165675, Canadian Agricultural Trade Policy Research Network.
    4. Knutson, Ronald D. & Ochoa, Rene F., 2005. "Market and Policy Integration in Times of Crisis," 2005 NAAMIC Workshop II: Agrifood Regulatory and Policy Integration under Stress 163864, North American Agrifood Market Integration Consortium (NAAMIC).
    5. John Wainio & Linda M. Young & Karl Meilke, 2003. "Trade Remedy Actions in NAFTA: Agriculture and Agri‐Food Industries," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 26(7), pages 1041-1065, July.
    6. Dell'Aquila, Crescenzo & Sarker, Rakhal & Meilke, Karl D., 1999. "Regionalism And Trade In Agrifood Products," Working Papers 14591, International Agricultural Trade Research Consortium.
    7. Mario Larch & Jeff Luckstead & Yoto V. Yotov, 2024. "Economic sanctions and agricultural trade," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 106(4), pages 1477-1517, August.
    8. Unknown, 2006. "Agrifood Regulatory and Policy Integration Under Stress," 2005 NAAMIC Workshop II: Agrifood Regulatory and Policy Integration under Stress 252451, North American Agrifood Market Integration Consortium (NAAMIC).
    9. Anonymous & Meilke, Karl D. & Knutson, Ronald D. & Ochoa, Rene F. & Rude, James, 2005. "Agrifood Regulatory and Policy Integration Under Stress," 2005 NAAMIC Workshop II: Agrifood Regulatory and Policy Integration under Stress 163858, North American Agrifood Market Integration Consortium (NAAMIC).

    More about this item

    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:bla:agecon:v:17:y:1997:i:2-3:p:147-164. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/iaaeeea.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.