IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/apecpp/v47y2025i3p1209-1231.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Are veterinary drug maximum residue limits protectionist? International evidence

Author

Listed:
  • Akinbode Okunola
  • Elliott Dennis
  • John Beghin

Abstract

We analyze the distribution of maximum residue limits (MRLs) on veterinary drugs used in animal production and aquaculture in a global context of food consumption and trade. We compare MRLs by drug‐product pairs for a large set of countries, commodities, and drugs. International standards by Codex cover a small fraction (27%) of existing drug‐product pairs. When Codex MRLs exist, deviations from Codex MRLs are minimal. Little protectionism prevails overall, although countries with a larger presence in world markets and with larger net imports in the regulated commodity have stricter standards. Higher variation prevails when Codex standards do not exist. MRLs exhibit an anti‐protectionist lower tail that is fatter than that of those MRLs for which Codex has a standard. Increasing the institutional capacity of Codex Alimentarius for establishing a larger set of MRLs is likely to facilitate greater alignment of MRLs across countries. We highlight the leading regulatory roles of Codex, the European Union, and the United States in helping set MRLs for other countries to which 41, 6, and 5 countries fully defer, respectively.

Suggested Citation

  • Akinbode Okunola & Elliott Dennis & John Beghin, 2025. "Are veterinary drug maximum residue limits protectionist? International evidence," Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 47(3), pages 1209-1231, July.
  • Handle: RePEc:wly:apecpp:v:47:y:2025:i:3:p:1209-1231
    DOI: 10.1002/aepp.13516
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1002/aepp.13516
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1002/aepp.13516?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
    ---><---

    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:wly:apecpp:v:47:y:2025:i:3:p:1209-1231. 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://doi.org/10.1002/(ISSN)2040-5804 .

    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.