IDEAS home Printed from
   My bibliography  Save this paper

A Need for Caution in Applying the Volume-Based Special Safeguard Mechanism


  • Ivanic, Maros
  • Martin, William J.


The proximate cause of the collapse of the Doha Agenda negotiations in 2008 was disagreement over the volume-based Special Safeguard Mechanism (SSM). This measure would provide a right, but not an obligation, for developing countries to impose a duty when imports increase. While many simulations of its impact on domestic prices are available, there appear to be no analyses of its potential impacts on the welfare of poor households. Whether such a safeguard will increase or reduce poverty can only be determined empirically—if there are enough small, poor farmers who are net sellers of the commodity when the duty is imposed, then imposition of a safeguard duty may reduce poverty. If, by contrast, most small, poor farmers are net buyers of the products subject to the duty, then it is likely that poverty will rise. Empirical analysis for twenty-eight countries finds that poverty is generally increased following the imposition of a safeguard-type measure. The adverse poverty impact of the safeguard-induced increase in prices is typically larger when the safeguard can be triggered, because the adverse output shocks typically giving rise to import surges when import prices have not declined reduce the benefit to poor producing households from higher prices.

Suggested Citation

  • Ivanic, Maros & Martin, William J., 2011. "A Need for Caution in Applying the Volume-Based Special Safeguard Mechanism," 2011 Annual Meeting, July 24-26, 2011, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 103969, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
  • Handle: RePEc:ags:aaea11:103969

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: no


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

    Cited by:

    1. Peyton M Ferrier & Amanda M Leister, 2011. "Trigger Points of the Special Safeguard Mechanism," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 31(4), pages 3211-3220.

    More about this item


    International Relations/Trade;

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:


    Access and download statistics


    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:ags:aaea11:103969. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (AgEcon Search). General contact details of provider: .

    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 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.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.