IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/nbaesp/342915.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

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–commodity pairs for a large set of countries, commodities, and drugs. We find that international standards by Codex Alimentarius only cover a small fraction of the drug-commodity pairs. We compare countries’ MRLs to Codex MRLs when they exist and look at potential deviations from the science-based MRLs in either direction (more or less stringent than Codex). For drugs without Codex standard, we look at deviation from median values. When Codex MRLs exist, variation and stringency above codex MRLs are minimal, a somewhat surprising and hopeful finding. Little protectionism prevails when a Codex standard exists. We find higher variation when Codex standards do not exist. We test for significant differences in MRL variation for cases with and without a Codex MRL and find robust evidence of higher variation for the latter. Increasing the institutional capacity of Codex for establishing a larger set of MRLs would reduce the heterogeneity of MRLs across countries.

Suggested Citation

  • Akinbode Okunola & Elliott Dennis & John Beghin, 2024. "Are veterinary drug maximum residue limits protectionist? International evidence," Staff Papers 342915, University of Nebraska-Lincoln, Department of Agricultural Economics.
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:nbaesp:342915
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.342915
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/342915/files/ODB%20working%20paper%202024%202.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.342915?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. Barrett, Christopher B. & Yang, Yi-Nung, 2001. "Rational incompatibility with international product standards," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 54(1), pages 171-191, June.
    2. Achterbosch, Thom J. & Engler, Alejandra & Rau, Marie-Luise & Toledo, Roger, 2009. "Measure the measure: the impact of differences in pesticide MRLs on Chilean fruit exports to the EU," 2009 Conference, August 16-22, 2009, Beijing, China 51765, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    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. Federica DeMaria & Sophie Drogue, 2017. "EU Trade Regulation for Baby Food: Protecting Health or Trade?," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 40(7), pages 1430-1453, July.
    2. Kjersti Nes & K. Aleks Schaefer, 2022. "Retaliatory use of public standards in trade," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 60(1), pages 142-161, January.
    3. Hoekman, Bernard & Mavroidis, Petros C., 2002. "Economic development, competition policy, and the World Trade Organization," Policy Research Working Paper Series 2917, The World Bank.
    4. 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.
    5. Katia Berti & Rod Falvey, 2018. "Does trade weaken product standards?," Review of International Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 26(4), pages 852-868, September.
    6. Federica Demaria & Sophie S. Drogue, 2012. "Protéger la santé ou le commerce un dilemme pour les aliments pour bébés," Post-Print hal-02745379, HAL.
    7. Gründler, Klaus & Hillman, Arye L., 2021. "Ambiguous protection," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 68(C).
    8. Hejazi, Mina & Grant, Jason H. & Peterson, Everett, 2016. "Hidden Trade Costs? Maximum Residue Limits and US Exports to Trans-Atlantic and Trans-Pacific Trading Partners," 2016 Annual Meeting, July 31-August 2, Boston, Massachusetts 235847, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    9. John C. Beghin & Miet Maertens & Johan Swinnen, 2017. "Nontariff Measures and Standards in Trade and Global Value Chains," World Scientific Book Chapters,in: Nontariff Measures and International Trade, chapter 2, pages 13-38 World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    10. John C. Beghin & Miet Maertens & Johan Swinnen, 2017. "Nontariff Measures and Standards in Trade and Global Value Chains," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: John Christopher Beghin (ed.), Nontariff Measures and International Trade, chapter 2, pages 13-38, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    11. Joseph A. Clougherty & Michal Grajek, 2009. "ISO 9000: New form of protectionism or common language in international trade?," ESMT Research Working Papers ESMT-09-006, ESMT European School of Management and Technology.
    12. Vitor Trindade & Johannes Moenius, 2007. "Networks, Standards and Intellectual Property Rights," Working Papers 0705, Department of Economics, University of Missouri.
    13. Yuan Li & John C. Beghin, 2017. "Protectionism indices for non-tariff measures: An application to maximum residue levels," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: John Christopher Beghin (ed.), Nontariff Measures and International Trade, chapter 10, pages 167-178, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    14. repec:ebl:ecbull:v:6:y:2007:i:4:p:1-7 is not listed on IDEAS
    15. Foletti, Liliana & MILE 02, Anirudh Shingal, 2014. "Stricter regulation boosts exports: the case of Maximum Residue Levels in pesticides," Papers 836, World Trade Institute.
    16. Baquero, Maria & Kuroda, Toshifumi, 2015. "Analysis of the role of international network effects on the diffusion of second and third generation mobile communication networks," 26th European Regional ITS Conference, Madrid 2015 127126, International Telecommunications Society (ITS).
    17. Mikhail Klimenko & Jingwen Qu, 2023. "Global digital platforms, technology transfer and foreign direct investment policies in two‐sided markets," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 61(3), pages 584-604, July.
    18. Burnquist, Heloisa Lee & Souza, Mauricio Jorge Pinto de & Faria, Rosane Nunes de & Rau, Marie-Luise & Shutes, Karl, 2012. "A Systematic Approach to Regulatory Heterogeneity Applied to EU Agri-Food Trade," 2012 Conference, August 18-24, 2012, Foz do Iguacu, Brazil 126470, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    19. Choi, Jong Woo & Yue, Chengyan, 2016. "Investigating the impact of maximum residue limit standards on the vegetable trade in Japan," International Food and Agribusiness Management Review, International Food and Agribusiness Management Association, vol. 20(1), November.
    20. Anirudh Shingal & Malte Ehrich & Liliana Foletti, 2021. "Re‐estimating the effect of heterogeneous standards on trade: Endogeneity matters," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 44(3), pages 756-787, March.
    21. Rastogi, Siddhartha, 2010. "Trade Standards for Welfare Maximization: A Case of Indo-US Trade in Wheat and Mango," Conference papers 330246, Purdue University, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Global Trade Analysis Project.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Food Consumption/Nutrition/Food Safety; International Relations/Trade;

    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:nbaesp:342915. 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/daunlus.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.