IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/caa/jnlage/v64y2018i3id235-2016-agricecon.html

Measuring Japan's technical barriers to trade based on the China's fruit exports to Japan

Author

Listed:
  • Qianhui GAO

    (School of Management, China University of Mining and Technology, Xuzhou City, Jiangsu Province, China)

  • Shoichi ITO

    (Faculty of Agriculture, Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Kyushu University, Japan)

  • Hisamitsu SAITO

    (Graduate School of Economics and Business Administration, Hokkaido University, Japan)

Abstract

The study analyses the influence of technical barriers to agricultural trade carried out by Japan on China's fruit exports. In order to measure the tariff equivalents of technical barriers, the price wedge method is utilized. Based on the utility function specified in the study, the constructed model is adopted to evaluate the elasticity of substitution between the imported fruits and Japanese domestic fruits, and the consumers' preference parameters for different kinds of fruits. Sample data are chosen from the beginning of 2002 to the end of 2015. Based on the estimated preference parameters and elasticity of substitution, the results show that Japanese consumers prefer domestic fruits to the imported fruits. Besides, the results reveal that although the substitution and preference parameters are higher for the improved quality of imported fruits in the context of the positive list system, the scales of tariff equivalents of technical barriers are larger than the regular custom tariffs, and the technical barriers would cause extra huge costs for the imported fruits. Especially, in the three consecutive years after the implementation of the positive list system, tariff equivalents of technical barriers almost reached 150%, and then gradually decreased in the following years.

Suggested Citation

  • Qianhui GAO & Shoichi ITO & Hisamitsu SAITO, 2018. "Measuring Japan's technical barriers to trade based on the China's fruit exports to Japan," Agricultural Economics, Czech Academy of Agricultural Sciences, vol. 64(3), pages 141-147.
    • Handle: RePEc:caa:jnlage:v:64:y:2018:i:3:id:235-2016-agricecon
    DOI: 10.17221/235/2016-AGRICECON
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://agricecon.agriculturejournals.cz/doi/10.17221/235/2016-AGRICECON.html
    Download Restriction: free of charge
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.17221/235/2016-AGRICECON?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to

    for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. 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.
    2. Tsunehiro Otsuki & John S. Wilson, 2001. "What price precaution? European harmonisation of aflatoxin regulations and African groundnut exports," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 28(3), pages 263-284, October.
    3. Calvin, Linda & Krissoff, Barry, 1998. "Technical Barriers To Trade: A Case Study Of Phytosanitary Barriers And U.S. - Japanese Apple Trade," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 23(2), pages 1-16, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Qianhui Gao & Shoichi Ito & Kolawole Ogundari & Hisamitsu Saito, 2016. "Evaluating Welfare Effects of Rice Import Quota in Japan: Based on Measuring Non-Tariff Barriers of SBS Rice Imports," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(8), pages 1-13, August.
    2. Naoto JINJI, 2009. "An Economic Theory of the SPS Agreement," Discussion papers 09033, Research Institute of Economy, Trade and Industry (RIETI).
    3. Bossoma Doriane N’DOUA, 2022. "The Impact of Technical Barriers to Trade and Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures on Trade in the Forest-Wood-Paper Sector," Bordeaux Economics Working Papers 2022-01, Bordeaux School of Economics (BSE).
    4. Zheng, Yuqing & Muth, Mary & Brophy, Jenna, 2013. "The Impact of Food Safety Third-Party Certifications on China’s Food Exports to the United States," 2013 Annual Meeting, August 4-6, 2013, Washington, D.C. 149926, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    5. Inaba, Masaru & Nutahara, Kengo, 2009. "The role of investment wedges in the Carlstrom-Fuerst economy and business cycle accounting," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 105(3), pages 200-203, December.
    6. Agyekum, Michael & Jolly, Curtis M., 2017. "Peanut trade and aflatoxin standards in Europe: Economic effects on trading countries," Journal of Policy Modeling, Elsevier, vol. 39(1), pages 114-128.
    7. Drogué, Sophie & DeMaria, Federica, 2012. "Pesticide residues and trade, the apple of discord?," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(6), pages 641-649.
    8. Bossoma Doriane N'Doua, 2022. "The Impact of Technical Barriers to Trade and Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures on Trade in the Forest-Wood-Paper Sector," Working Papers hal-03573168, HAL.
    9. Annalisa Zezza & Federica Demaria & Maria Rosaria Pupo d'Andrea & Jo Swinnen & Giulia Meloni & Senne Vandevelde & Alessandro Olper & Daniele Curzi & Valentina Raimondi & Sophie Drogue, 2018. "Research for AGRI Committee - Agricultural trade: assessing reciprocity of standards," Working Papers hal-02787948, HAL.
    10. Otsuki, Tsunehiro & Wilson,John S. & Sewadeh, Mirvat, 2001. "A race to the top? A case study of food safety standards and African exports," Policy Research Working Paper Series 2563, The World Bank.
    11. Adnan Haider Bukhari & Safdar Ullah Khan, 2008. "A Small Open Economy DSGE Model for Pakistan," The Pakistan Development Review, Pakistan Institute of Development Economics, vol. 47(4), pages 963-1008.
    12. Croce, M.M. & Nguyen, Thien T. & Raymond, S. & Schmid, L., 2019. "Government debt and the returns to innovation," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 132(3), pages 205-225.
    13. Lutz Arnold & Christian Bauer, 2009. "On the growth and welfare effects of monopolistic distortions," Journal of Economics, Springer, vol. 97(1), pages 19-40, May.
    14. Liliana Meza-González & Jaime Marie Sepulveda, 2019. "The impact of competition with China in the US market on innovation in Mexican manufacturing firms," Latin American Economic Review, Springer;Centro de Investigaciòn y Docencia Económica (CIDE), vol. 28(1), pages 1-21, December.
    15. de Groot, Henri L. F. & Nahuis, Richard, 1998. "Taste for diversity and the optimality of economic growth," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 58(3), pages 291-295, March.
    16. Colin Davis, 2013. "Regional integration and innovation offshoring with occupational choice and endogenous growth," Journal of Economics, Springer, vol. 108(1), pages 59-79, January.
    17. Masashige Hamano & Pierre M. Picard, 2017. "Extensive and intensive margins and exchange rate regimes," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 50(3), pages 804-837, August.
    18. Taran Fæhn & Elisabeth Thuestad Isaksen, 2014. "Diffusion of climate technologies in the presence of commitment problems," Discussion Papers 768, Statistics Norway, Research Department.
    19. Llanes Gastón & Trento Stefano, 2011. "Anticommons and Optimal Patent Policy in a Model of Sequential Innovation," The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 11(1), pages 1-27, August.
    20. Knut Blind & Andre Jungmittag, 2008. "The impact of patents and standards on macroeconomic growth: a panel approach covering four countries and 12 sectors," Journal of Productivity Analysis, Springer, vol. 29(1), pages 51-60, February.

    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:caa:jnlage:v:64:y:2018:i:3:id:235-2016-agricecon. 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: Ivo Andrle (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cazv.cz/en/home/ .

    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.