IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/okl/wpaper/0909.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Mycotoxin Regulations and Trade

Author

Listed:
  • Abdul Munasib

    (Oklahoma State University)

  • Devesh Roy

    (International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI))

Abstract

This research assesses the effects of mycotoxins regulations on international trade flows. Mycotoxins regulations reflected in the mandatory maximum residue limits impose costs on the producers that could take the form of both variable and fixed costs. Little empirical research exists on the effects of food safety regulations on international trade flows. The same holds true for the assessment of the effects of aflatoxins regulations on trade flows. In case of aflatoxins standards, Otsuki, Wilson and Sewadeh (2001) in an earlier paper explored the trade effect of the proposal of European Commission (EC) to harmonize aflatoxin standards announced in 1998. It was later implemented in 2002. The paper predicted the trade effect of setting aflatoxin standards under three regulatory scenarios: standards set at pre-EU harmonized levels (status quo), the harmonized EU standard adopted across Europe, and a standard set by the Codex. Otsuki, Wilson and Sewadeh (2001) used the Gravity Model, an empirical model that has been used for a long period of time in empirical analysis of trade flows. Since the publication of the paper, two main developments have occurred in the evolution of the gravity model of trade both of which have important implications for assessing the effects of mycotoxins regulations on trade. First, bilateral trade costs as used in Otsuki, Wilson and Sewadeh(2001) – and several other papers of that vintage – was not the measure of trade costs that followed theoretical derivation of the gravity model. Anderson and van Wincoop (2003) showed that trade costs had to be measured as a multilateral resistance term as opposed to a bilateral cost. The second major development was regarding the issue of zero trade in trade models. Following Melitz (2003) and Melitz et al. (2008) gravity models have been derived using a theoretical framework where firms differ in productivity and there are fixed costs to exporting which are partner specific. Hence, only firms that have a level of productivity beyond a certain threshold can export. If no firm/farm has productivity levels high enough to benefit from exporting, zero trade at the product, and even at the aggregate level, is possible between two countries. Our methodological framework is based on Melitz (2003), Melitz, Helpman and Rubinstein (2008), and Djankov, Freund and Pham (2008), all of which consider the fixed costs of exporting. In our case we capture the effect of aflatoxin regulations as being reflected in costs of exporting which could vary across markets.

Suggested Citation

  • Abdul Munasib & Devesh Roy, 2010. "Mycotoxin Regulations and Trade," Economics Working Paper Series 0909, Oklahoma State University, Department of Economics and Legal Studies in Business.
  • Handle: RePEc:okl:wpaper:0909
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://business.okstate.edu/site-files/docs/ecls-working-papers/0909_MuansibRoy_Mycotoxin.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Otsuki, Tsunehiro & Wilson, John S. & Sewadeh, Mirvat, 2001. "Saving two in a billion: : quantifying the trade effect of European food safety standards on African exports," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 26(5), pages 495-514, October.
    2. Marc J. Melitz, 2003. "The Impact of Trade on Intra-Industry Reallocations and Aggregate Industry Productivity," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 71(6), pages 1695-1725, November.
    3. Hummels, David, 2001. "Time As A Trade Barrier," Working papers 28701, Purdue University, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Global Trade Analysis Project.
    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. Bo Xiong & John Beghin, 2017. "Disentangling Demand-Enhancing And Trade-Cost Effects Of Maximum Residue Regulations," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: John Christopher Beghin (ed.), Nontariff Measures and International Trade, chapter 6, pages 105-108, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    2. Christian Volpe Martincus, 2016. "Out of the Border Labyrinth: An Assessment of Trade Facilitation Initiatives in Latin America and the Caribbean," IDB Publications (Books), Inter-American Development Bank, number 96856, February.
    3. Pedro Albarran & Raquel Carrasco & Adelheid Holl, 2013. "Domestic transport infrastructure and firms’ export market participation," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 40(4), pages 879-898, May.
    4. Chen, Natalie & Novy, Dennis, 2012. "On the measurement of trade costs: direct vs. indirect approaches to quantifying standards and technical regulations," World Trade Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 11(3), pages 401-414, July.
    5. Anirudh Shingal & Malte Ehrich, 2019. "Trade effects of standards harmonization in the EU: improved access for non-EU partners," Indian Council for Research on International Economic Relations (ICRIER) Working Paper 372, Indian Council for Research on International Economic Relations (ICRIER), New Delhi, India.
    6. Eyal RONEN, 2017. "Quantifying the trade effects of NTMs: A review of the empirical literature," Journal of Economics and Political Economy, KSP Journals, vol. 4(3), pages 263-274, September.
    7. Chen, Natalie & Novy, Dennis, 2008. "International Trade Integration: A Disaggregated Approach," CEPR Discussion Papers 7103, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    8. Martina Lawless, 2010. "Deconstructing gravity: trade costs and extensive and intensive margins," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 43(4), pages 1149-1172, November.
    9. Michael J. Ferrantino, 2006. "Quantifying the Trade and Economic Effects of Non-Tariff Measures," OECD Trade Policy Papers 28, OECD Publishing.
    10. Magnus Lodefalk, 2014. "The role of services for manufacturing firm exports," Review of World Economics (Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv), Springer;Institut für Weltwirtschaft (Kiel Institute for the World Economy), vol. 150(1), pages 59-82, February.
    11. Munasib, Abdul B.A. & Roy, Devesh, 2011. "Nontariff Barriers as Bridge to Cross," 2012 Conference, August 18-24, 2012, Foz do Iguacu, Brazil 125025, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    12. Fabio Gaetano Santeramo & Emilia Lamonaca, 2019. "The Effects of Non‐tariff Measures on Agri‐food Trade: A Review and Meta‐analysis of Empirical Evidence," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 70(3), pages 595-617, September.
    13. David Kohn & Fernando Leibovici & Michal Szkup, 2016. "Financial Frictions And New Exporter Dynamics," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 57(2), pages 453-486, May.
    14. George Alessandria & Joseph P. Kaboski & Virgiliu Midrigan, 2010. "Inventories, Lumpy Trade, and Large Devaluations," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 100(5), pages 2304-2339, December.
    15. Paul Bergin & Reuven Glick, 2005. "Tradability, Productivity, and Understanding International Economic Integration," Working Papers 294, University of California, Davis, Department of Economics.
    16. Pauline Bourgeon & Jean-Charles Bricongne & Guillaume Gaulier, 2012. "Financing time to trade: Evidence from French firms," Post-Print halshs-00677343, HAL.
    17. Ferro, Esteban & Otsuki, Tsunehiro & Wilson, John S., 2015. "The effect of product standards on agricultural exports," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(C), pages 68-79.
    18. Schmidt-Eisenlohr, Tim, 2013. "Towards a theory of trade finance," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 91(1), pages 96-112.
    19. Olivier Cadot & Julien Gourdon, 2016. "Non-tariff measures, preferential trade agreements, and prices: new evidence," Review of World Economics (Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv), Springer;Institut für Weltwirtschaft (Kiel Institute for the World Economy), vol. 152(2), pages 227-249, May.
    20. Soloaga, Isidro & Wilson, John S. & Mejia, Alejandro, 2006. "Moving forward faster : trade facilitation reform and Mexican competitiveness," Policy Research Working Paper Series 3953, The World Bank.

    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:okl:wpaper:0909. 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: Harounan Kazianga (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/sboksus.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.