IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/agecon/v48y2017i2p165-174.html

Quota prices as indicators of comparative advantage in supply-managed industries

Author

Listed:
  • Predrag Rajsic
  • Glenn Fox

Abstract

The Canadian Farm Products Agencies Act (2012) requires that comparative advantage be used to guide the allocation of new quota under supply management. This requirement, however, has not been met in practice. Agricultural economists have proposed several ways of making this legal requirement operational. We review and evaluate these proposed approaches and find that quota prices are the only direct measure of comparative advantage in supply managed industries. We develop an agent-based general equilibrium model of quota exchange to illustrate the use of quota prices as indicators of comparative advantage. Our approach complements the proposal by Meilke (2009) to use quota prices as indicators of comparative advantage in supply managed industries and also addresses the concerns of Larue and Gervais (2008) that quota prices may not be theoretically consistent with comparative advantage. We also discuss potential practical challenges of using quota prices as indicators of comparative advantage in the Canadian supply managed industries. Finally, we provide an example of calculating provincial shares of new quota using recent quota price data according to two prototype decision rules.
(This abstract was borrowed from another version of this item.)

Suggested Citation

  • Predrag Rajsic & Glenn Fox, 2017. "Quota prices as indicators of comparative advantage in supply-managed industries," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 48(2), pages 165-174, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:agecon:v:48:y:2017:i:2:p:165-174
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1111/agec.2017.48.issue-2
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version below or

    for a different version of it.

    Other versions of this item:

    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:48:y:2017:i:2:p:165-174. 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.