Author
Listed:
- BOWN, CHAD P.
- TRACHTMAN, JOEL P.
Abstract
This paper provides a legal-economic analysis of the Appellate Body decision in Brazil–Retreaded Tyres. We develop a simple economic model that we use to analyze the market structure and environmental externalities that were most relevant to this case. We start by analyzing Brazil's policies in a model in which tyre retreading generates a positive production externality through the delay it provides society before a used tyre becomes a waste product with the potential to harm society through its adverse impact on human health and the environment. We examine the different welfare implications of (i) a production subsidy for retreading of once-used Brazilian tyres, (ii) a tariff on imports of retreaded tyres, and (iii) a ban on imports of retreaded tyres. While a production subsidy is the first-best instrument to address this type of externality, there are reasons to believe that it might be infeasible. The welfare implications of the other measures depend importantly on the magnitude of the positive production externality. From the lens provided by this economic analysis, we draw three primary insights. First, we identify the critical piece of empirical information that the Panel and Appellate Body require to make a rational judgment of the utility of the Brazilian policies contested in the dispute – i.e., the size of the underlying externality associated with retreading. Second, if the justification for the original import ban on retreaded tyres was based on the argument that it was a second-best Brazilian policy designed to combat a large externality, then Brazil's failure to enforce a ban on used-tyre imports has the troubling result of eroding those potential welfare gains through a reduction in equilibrium production (and consumption) of Brazilian retreaded tyres. Third, the Brazilian policy that exempted from the ban retreaded imports from MERCOSUR partners also has the same troubling feature. The second and third points are congruent with the reasons for the Appellate Body's determination that the Brazilian policy did not qualify under the chapeau of Article XX. We examine the WTO jurisprudence of Article XX(b), in order to compare the methodology developed under this jurisprudence to the type of examination of changes to total welfare from implementing one policy relative to a postulated alternative policy that most economists would follow. We find that the WTO jurisprudence in this area is internally incoherent, and also fails to evaluate the types of concerns that an economic-welfare analysis would evaluate.
Suggested Citation
Bown, Chad P. & Trachtman, Joel P., 2009.
"Brazil – Measures Affecting Imports of Retreaded Tyres: A Balancing Act,"
World Trade Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 8(1), pages 85-135, January.
Handle:
RePEc:cup:wotrrv:v:8:y:2009:i:01:p:85-135_00
Download full text from publisher
Citations
Citations are extracted by the
CitEc Project, subscribe to its
RSS feed for this item.
Cited by:
- Kyle Bagwell & Chad P. Bown & Robert W. Staiger, 2016.
"Is the WTO Passé?,"
Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 54(4), pages 1125-1231, December.
- Kyle Bagwell & Chad P. Bown & Robert W. Staiger, 2015.
"Is the WTO passé?,"
NBER Working Papers
21303, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Bagwell,Kyle & Bown,Chad P. & Staiger,Robert W. & Bagwell,Kyle & Bown,Chad P. & Staiger,Robert W., 2015.
"Is the WTO passe ?,"
Policy Research Working Paper Series
7304, The World Bank.
- Bown, Chad & Crowley, Meredith A., 2016.
"The Empirical Landscape of Trade Policy,"
CEPR Discussion Papers
11216, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
- Chad P. Bown & Meredith Crowley, 2016.
"The Empirical Landscape of Trade Policy,"
Cambridge Working Papers in Economics
1624, Faculty of Economics, University of Cambridge.
- Bown,Chad P. & Crowley,Meredith A & Bown,Chad P. & Crowley,Meredith A, 2016.
"The empirical landscape of trade policy,"
Policy Research Working Paper Series
7620, The World Bank.
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:cup:wotrrv:v:8:y:2009:i:01:p:85-135_00. 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: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/wtr .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.