IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/isu/genstf/201407290700001046.html

The political economy of food standard determination: international evidence from maximum residue limits

Author

Listed:
  • Li, Yuan
  • Xiong, Bo
  • Beghin, John C.

Abstract

Food safety standards have proliferated as multilateral and bilateral trade agreements constrain traditional barriers to agricultural trade. Stringent food standards can be driven by rising consumer and public concern about food safety and other social objectives, or by the lobbying efforts from domestic industries in agriculture. We investigate the economic and political determinants of the maximum residue limits (MRLs) on pesticides and veterinary drugs. Using a political economy framework and econometric investigation, we find that nations with higher income and larger population adopt stricter MRLs. We also find that countries set more stringent MRLs in their more competitive sectors. Moreover, we show that MRLs and import tariffs are policy substitutes for policy makers. Finally, we find that countries with higher regulatory quality set tougher food standards.

Suggested Citation

  • Li, Yuan & Xiong, Bo & Beghin, John C., 2014. "The political economy of food standard determination: international evidence from maximum residue limits," ISU General Staff Papers 201407290700001046, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
  • Handle: RePEc:isu:genstf:201407290700001046
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://dr.lib.iastate.edu/server/api/core/bitstreams/f710abd0-3a22-4acb-80fa-0fba52322799/content
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Jiang, Dongpo & Li, Qi & Li, Xia & Sun, Ruiqiang, 2023. "The Effect of Maximum Residue Limits on Agri-Food Trade: Evidence from Chinese Exports to the EU," German Journal of Agricultural Economics, Humboldt-Universitaet zu Berlin, Department for Agricultural Economics, vol. 72(03), January.
    2. Lota D. Tamini & Maurice Doyon & Rodrigue Simon, 2016. "Analyzing Trade Liberalization Effects in the Egg Sector Using a Dynamic Gravity Model," Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue canadienne d'agroeconomie, Canadian Agricultural Economics Society/Societe canadienne d'agroeconomie, vol. 64(2), pages 383-411, June.
    3. Anirudh Shingal & Malte Ehrich & Liliana Foletti, 2017. "Re-estimating the effects of stricter standards on trade: endogeneity matters," RSCAS Working Papers 2917/20, European University Institute.
    4. Lota Tamini & Dupuis Raymond & Maurice Doyon, 2014. "Commerce international des produits alimentaires - Capacité d'application de la réciprocité des normes (innocuité, environnement et social) et leviers à la disposition des gouvernements," CIRANO Project Reports 2014rp-11, CIRANO.
    5. 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.
    6. David Karemera & Bo Xiong & Gerald Smalls & Louis Whitesides, 2022. "The political economy of maximum residue limits: A long‐term health perspective," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 73(3), pages 709-719, September.
    7. Traoré, Ousmane Z & Tamini, Lota D., 2020. "The Net Effect of the Technical Non-Tariff Measures in OECD countries on African Exports of Plant Products," 2020 Annual Meeting, July 26-28, Kansas City, Missouri 304460, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    8. 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.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • F13 - International Economics - - Trade - - - Trade Policy; International Trade Organizations
    • Q17 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Agriculture - - - Agriculture in International Trade
    • Q18 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Agriculture - - - Agricultural Policy; Food Policy; Animal Welfare Policy

    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:isu:genstf:201407290700001046. 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: Curtis Balmer (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/deiasus.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.