IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/worlde/v28y2005i1p49-62.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Eco‐labelling and the Trade‐Environment Debate

Author

Listed:
  • Daniel Melser
  • Peter E. Robertson

Abstract

In this paper we consider the effectiveness of eco‐labels as a substitute for alternative, but trade‐restrictive, environmental policies. Specifically, while there are concerns that eco‐labelling requirements increase the cost of international trade, due to their potential for misuse as technical trade barriers, little attention has been given to the environmental benefits of eco‐labelling. We show that incentive problems inherent in eco‐labelling policies make it a very weak tool of environmental policy. Despite this, we argue that eco‐labelling schemes may remain popular, owing to the lack of alternative WTO compliant environmental policies. We also use this framework to consider the economic and political conflicts facing the EU with regard to its policies on genetically modified organisms.

Suggested Citation

  • Daniel Melser & Peter E. Robertson, 2005. "Eco‐labelling and the Trade‐Environment Debate," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 28(1), pages 49-62, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:worlde:v:28:y:2005:i:1:p:49-62
    DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-9701.2005.00674.x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9701.2005.00674.x
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/j.1467-9701.2005.00674.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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Trish Kelly, 2003. "The WTO, the Environment and Health and Safety Standards," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 26(2), pages 131-151, February.
    2. Ian M. Sheldon, 2002. "Regulation of biotechnology: will we ever 'freely' trade GMOs?," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 29(1), pages 155-176, 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. Naveed HAYAT* & Anwar HUSSAIN** & Heman Das LOHANO***, 2019. "FACTORS DETERMINING GOVERNMENT TO INTRODUCE NATIONAL ECO-LABEL SCHEME: Case Study of Pakistan Trade Partners 1994-2014," Pakistan Journal of Applied Economics, Applied Economics Research Centre, vol. 29(1), pages 53-70.
    2. Prosperi, Maurizio & Viscecchia, Rosaria, 2007. "Indirect Effects of Eco-labelling of agricultural products on Natural Resources," 105th Seminar, March 8-10, 2007, Bologna, Italy 7868, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    3. Peter E. Robertson, 2007. "Global Resources and Eco‐labels: a Neutrality Result," Review of International Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 15(4), pages 735-743, September.
    4. Monteiro, Jose-Antonio, 2010. "Eco-label Adoption in an Interdependent World," MPRA Paper 20268, University Library of Munich, Germany.

    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. Cadot, Olivier & Suwa-Eisenmann, Akiko & Traça, Daniel, 2003. "OGM et relations commerciales transatlantiques," Cahiers d'Economie et de Sociologie Rurales (CESR), Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique (INRA), vol. 68.
    2. Fredrik Carlsson & Peter Frykblom & Carl-Johan Lagerkvist, 2004. "Consumer Benefits of Labels and Bans on GMO Foods: An Emprical Analysis Using Choice Experiments," Working Papers 04-02, Department of Economics, Appalachian State University.
    3. Colson, Gregory, 2009. "Improving nutrient content through genetic modification: Evidence from experimental auctions on consumer acceptance and willingness to pay for intragenic foods," ISU General Staff Papers 200901010800001872, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
    4. Vigani, Mauro & Raimondi, Valentina & Olper, Alessandro, 2010. "GMO Regulations, International Trade and the Imperialism of Standards," 14th ICABR Conference, June 16-18, 2010, Ravello, Italy 188116, International Consortium on Applied Bioeconomy Research (ICABR).
    5. GianCarlo Moschini & Harun Bulut & Luigi Cembalo, 2005. "On the Segregation of Genetically Modified, Conventional and Organic Products in European Agriculture: A Multi‐market Equilibrium Analysis," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 56(3), pages 347-372, December.
    6. Stephan S. Marette & Anne-Célia Disdier & John C Beghin, 2020. "A Comparison of EU and US consumers' willingness to pay for gene-edited food: Evidence from apples," PSE Working Papers halshs-02872222, HAL.
    7. Gruere, Guillaume P., 2006. "A preliminary comparison of the retail level effects of genetically modified food labelling policies in Canada and France," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 31(2), pages 148-161, April.
    8. John C. Beghin & Heidi Schweizer, 2021. "Agricultural Trade Costs," Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 43(2), pages 500-530, June.
    9. GianCarlo Moschini & Harvey E. Lapan, 2005. "Labeling Regulations and Segregation of First- and Second-Generation Genetically Modified Products: Innovation Incentives and Welfare Effects," Center for Agricultural and Rural Development (CARD) Publications 05-wp391, Center for Agricultural and Rural Development (CARD) at Iowa State University.
    10. Stéphan Marette & Anne‐Célia Disdier & Anastasia Bodnar & John Beghin, 2023. "New plant engineering techniques, R&D investment and international trade," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 74(2), pages 349-368, June.
    11. Long, Thomas B. & Blok, Vincent, 2018. "Integrating the management of socio-ethical factors into industry innovation: towards a concept of Open Innovation 2.0," International Food and Agribusiness Management Review, International Food and Agribusiness Management Association, vol. 21(4).
    12. Gehl Sampath, Padmashree, 2004. "Agricultural Biotechnology: Issues for Biosafety Governance in Asian Countries," UNU-INTECH Discussion Paper Series 2004-13, United Nations University - INTECH.
    13. Aparna Sawhney, 2005. "Quality Measures in Food Trade: The Indian Experience," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 28(3), pages 329-348, March.
    14. Simona Romeo Lironcurti & Federica Demaria & Raffaele D’Annolfo & Roberta Sardone, 2023. "Consumer Evaluations of and Attitudes towards New Genome Editing Techniques: An Italian Case Study," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 14(1), pages 1-22, December.
    15. Fernando, Estrada, 2013. "Ronald Coase 1910-2013, In memoriam," MPRA Paper 49558, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    16. Matthias Gruber, 2004. "Inside or outside? The role of the WTO in the settlement of the transatlantic trade dispute on GMOs," Intereconomics: Review of European Economic Policy, Springer;ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics;Centre for European Policy Studies (CEPS), vol. 39(1), pages 36-45, January.
    17. Sheldon, Ian M., 2008. "The Biotechnology Sector: "Bounds" to Market Structure," 2008 Annual Meeting, July 27-29, 2008, Orlando, Florida 6078, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    18. Zinatul Zainol & Rohaida Nordin & Frank Akpoviri, 2015. "Mandatory labelling of genetically modified (GM) foods," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 15(2), pages 199-216, May.
    19. Nielsen, Chantal Pohl & Thierfelder, Karen & Robinson, Sherman, 2003. "Consumer preferences and trade in genetically modified foods," Journal of Policy Modeling, Elsevier, vol. 25(8), pages 777-794, November.
    20. Crespi, John M. & Marette, Stephan, 2003. "Some Economic Implications Of Public Labeling," Journal of Food Distribution Research, Food Distribution Research Society, vol. 34(3), pages 1-12, November.

    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:worlde:v:28:y:2005:i:1:p:49-62. 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/journal.asp?ref=0378-5920 .

    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.