IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/aaea25/361033.html

The United States Trade in Fish and Fishery Products: Trends, Determinants, and Competitiveness

Author

Listed:
  • Abdal, FMS
  • Deb, Uttam K.

Abstract

The United States is the world’s top importer and the eleventh-largest exporter of fish and fishery products, with US$4.5 billion. This study provides a comprehensive analysis of the U.S. trade performance, comparative advantage, and competitiveness in exports, as well as the potential of fish and fishery product exports over the last two decades. Estimates of the gravity model via Poisson Pseudo Maximum Likelihood (PPML) revealed that U.S. exports are significantly influenced by the GDP and population of importing countries, as well as by free trade agreements. Conversely, domestic fish production in importing nations tends to substitute for U.S. exports. The market assessment estimates show that the U.S. had a mixed performance in market utilization with its major trading partners. High performance was observed in countries like Lithuania, the Netherlands, Italy, and Thailand, while share was lost in recent years in South Korea, France, and China. The market utilization rate for the U.S. is close to or slightly higher than the market potential for long-term trading partners, such as Canada and Japan. Revealed Comparative Advantage was used to measure the competitiveness, and the U.S. had a consistent competitiveness in the export of frozen fish (HS 0303), fish fillet and other fish meat (HS 0304), dried/salted/in-brine and smoked fish (HS 0305). For other products, the U.S. had a comparative advantage with a few destinations only. The U.S. can expand its exports through enhancing domestic processing capacity, improving trade facilitation with the EU, strengthening maritime infrastructure, and supporting exporters in meeting international standards.

Suggested Citation

  • Abdal, FMS & Deb, Uttam K., 2025. "The United States Trade in Fish and Fishery Products: Trends, Determinants, and Competitiveness," 2025 AAEA & WAEA Joint Annual Meeting, July 27-29, 2025, Denver, CO 361033, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:aaea25:361033
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.361033
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/361033/files/75281_104374_105300_AAEA_FMSAbdal_UD.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.361033?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. Anne-Célia Disdier & Keith Head, 2008. "The Puzzling Persistence of the Distance Effect on Bilateral Trade," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 90(1), pages 37-48, February.
    2. Anderson, James E. & Yotov, Yoto V., 2016. "Terms of trade and global efficiency effects of free trade agreements, 1990–2002," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 99(C), pages 279-298.
    3. Bergstrand, Jeffrey H, 1985. "The Gravity Equation in International Trade: Some Microeconomic Foundations and Empirical Evidence," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 67(3), pages 474-481, August.
    4. Gordon Wilmsmeier & Inmaculada Martínez-Zarzoso, 2009. "Determinants of maritime transport costs -- a panel data analysis for Latin American trade," Transportation Planning and Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 33(1), pages 105-121, October.
    5. Yoto V. Yotov, 2022. "Gravity at Sixty: The Workhorse Model of Trade," CESifo Working Paper Series 9584, CESifo.
    6. Andrew K. Rose, 2004. "Do We Really Know That the WTO Increases Trade?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 94(1), pages 98-114, March.
    7. Tamás Krisztin & Manfred M. Fischer, 2015. "The Gravity Model for International Trade: Specification and Estimation Issues," Spatial Economic Analysis, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 10(4), pages 451-470, December.
    8. Baier, Scott L. & Bergstrand, Jeffrey H., 2007. "Do free trade agreements actually increase members' international trade?," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 71(1), pages 72-95, March.
    9. Huafeng Zhai, 2023. "Evaluation of China-ASEAN trade status and trade potential: An empirical study based on a gravity model," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 18(9), pages 1-17, September.
    10. Glediana Zeneli (Foto) & Arsen Benga & Altin Hoti, 2024. "Analysis of Albania’s Trade Direction: Is the Open Balkan a New Center of Gravity?," Economies, MDPI, vol. 12(7), pages 1-30, July.
    11. Anderson, James E, 1979. "A Theoretical Foundation for the Gravity Equation," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 69(1), pages 106-116, March.
    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. Yoto V. Yotov, 2024. "The evolution of structural gravity: The workhorse model of trade," Contemporary Economic Policy, Western Economic Association International, vol. 42(4), pages 578-603, October.
    2. Vandenbussche, Hylke & Zanardi, Maurizio, 2010. "The chilling trade effects of antidumping proliferation," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 54(6), pages 760-777, August.
    3. Silviano Esteve-Pérez & Salvador Gil-Pareja & Rafael Llorca-Vivero, 2020. "Does the GATT/WTO promote trade? After all, Rose was right," Review of World Economics (Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv), Springer;Institut für Weltwirtschaft (Kiel Institute for the World Economy), vol. 156(2), pages 377-405, May.
    4. Head, Keith & Mayer, Thierry, 2014. "Gravity Equations: Workhorse,Toolkit, and Cookbook," Handbook of International Economics, in: Gopinath, G. & Helpman, . & Rogoff, K. (ed.), Handbook of International Economics, edition 1, volume 4, chapter 0, pages 131-195, Elsevier.
    5. Scott L. Baier & Amanda Kerr & Yoto V. Yotov, 2018. "Gravity, distance, and international trade," Chapters, in: Bruce A. Blonigen & Wesley W. Wilson (ed.), Handbook of International Trade and Transportation, chapter 2, pages 15-78, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    6. Jacqueline Karlsson & Helena Melin & Kevin Cullinane, 2018. "The impact of potential Brexit scenarios on German car exports to the UK: an application of the gravity model," Journal of Shipping and Trade, Springer, vol. 3(1), pages 1-22, December.
    7. Bergstrand, Jeffrey H. & Larch, Mario & Yotov, Yoto V., 2015. "Economic integration agreements, border effects, and distance elasticities in the gravity equation," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 78(C), pages 307-327.
    8. Lennard Welslau & Raquel Artecona & Daniel E. Perrotti, 2024. "Export competition between China and Latin America and the Caribbean in the United States market," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 47(7), pages 2947-2969, July.
    9. Shadat Hossain, 2018. "SAFTA and AFTA: a comparative welfare analysis of two regional trade agreements," Journal of Economic Structures, Springer;Pan-Pacific Association of Input-Output Studies (PAPAIOS), vol. 7(1), pages 1-27, December.
    10. Hayakawa, Kazunobu, 2013. "How serious is the omission of bilateral tariff rates in gravity?," Journal of the Japanese and International Economies, Elsevier, vol. 27(C), pages 81-94.
    11. Thomas L. Vollrath & Mark J. Gehlhar & Charles B. Hallahan, 2009. "Bilateral Import Protection, Free Trade Agreements, and Other Factors Influencing Trade Flows in Agriculture and Clothing," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 60(2), pages 298-317, June.
    12. Rodolfo Campos & Mario Larch & Jacopo Timini & Elena Vidal & Yoto Yotov, 2024. "Does the WTO Promote Trade? A Meta-analysis," School of Economics Working Paper Series 2024-11, LeBow College of Business, Drexel University.
    13. Bo Xiong & Sixia Chen, 2014. "Estimating gravity equation models in the presence of sample selection and heteroscedasticity," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 46(24), pages 2993-3003, August.
    14. Magda Kondaridze & Xin Liu & Jeff Luckstead, 2026. "Dairy Trade Reconsidered: Gravity and the Distributional Effect of Non‐Tariff Barriers and Distance," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 57(1), January.
    15. Clougherty, Joseph A. & Grajek, Michał, 2014. "International standards and international trade: Empirical evidence from ISO 9000 diffusion," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 36(C), pages 70-82.
    16. Mario Larch & Yoto Yotov, 2017. "On the impact of TTIP in Southeastern and Eastern Europe: A quantitative analysis," Economic Thought journal, Bulgarian Academy of Sciences - Economic Research Institute, issue 3, pages 54-73,74-92.
    17. Paola Cardamone, 2007. "A Survey of the Assessments of the Effectiveness of Preferential Trade Agreements using Gravity Models," Economia Internazionale / International Economics, Camera di Commercio Industria Artigianato Agricoltura di Genova, vol. 60(4), pages 421-473.
    18. Yvonne Umulisa, 2020. "Estimation of the East African Community's trade benefits from promoting intra‐regional trade," African Development Review, African Development Bank, vol. 32(1), pages 55-66, March.
    19. Scott L. Baier & Narendra R. Regmi, 2023. "Using Machine Learning to Capture Heterogeneity in Trade Agreements," Open Economies Review, Springer, vol. 34(4), pages 863-894, September.
    20. Salvador Gil-Pareja, 2011. "Do nonreciprocal preference regimes increase exports?," ERSA conference papers ersa11p1561, European Regional Science Association.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:ags:aaea25:361033. 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: AgEcon Search (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/aaeaaea.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.