Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-g7gxr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-19T03:03:15.817Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Phytosanitary Regulation and Agricultural Flows: Tobacco Inputs and Cigarettes Outputs

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  15 September 2016

Benny Overton ,
John Beghin  and
William Foster
Benny Overton
Affiliation:
Economics Department, Campbell University
John Beghin
Affiliation:
Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics, North Carolina State University
William Foster
Affiliation:
Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics, North Carolina State University
Get access

Abstract

This paper examines the effects of the use of increasingly-popular phytosanitary regulations on production costs, and output and factor trade flows. The case addressed is that of the European regulation of maximum chemical residues in cigarettes manufactured with tobacco containing maleic hydrazide. The paper presents simulations of the effects of tightening the EU regulation on the tobacco growing and manufacturing industries. The analysis focusses on input/output market linkages and on the substitution away from the residue-contaminated U.S. input to residue-free non-U.S. inputs. This induced substitution results in higher costs, lower quantity supplied of the final product, and higher prices for U.S. cigarettes in Europe. Cross-price effects lead to higher quantities of EU cigarettes sold and a corresponding increase in the use of all inputs, including U.S. tobacco. When the U.S. tobacco price is allowed to fall, direct price effects stimulate the EU derived demand for U.S. tobacco. Although the regulation is protectionist in the output market, it leads to increased EU imports of the residue-contaminated input. When the price of U.S. tobacco adjusts, the regulation is actually antiprotective for EU growers. The regulation also indirectly influences production practices of U.S. tobacco growers and leads to lower levels of MH residues on U.S. leaf.

Type
Articles
Information
Agricultural and Resource Economics Review , Volume 24 , Issue 2 , October 1995 , pp. 221 - 231
Copyright
Copyright © 1995 Northeastern Agricultural and Resource Economics Association 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Applelbaum, E. “The Estimation of the Degree of Oligopoly Power,” Journal of Econometrics (August 1982):287–99.Google Scholar
Babcock, B.A. and Foster, W.E. Economic Rents Under Supply Controls with Marketable Quota. American Journal of Agricultural Economics. 74, No. 3 (1992): 630–7.Google Scholar
Beghin, J., and Chang, R. Differentiated Products and Supply Controls in the Analysis of Agricultural Policy Reform: The Case of Tobacco. Agricultural Economics. (1992): 301–315.Google Scholar
Brown, A.B. Effects of an Increase in the Federal Excise Tax on Cigarettes: Revisited. Unpublished manuscript. 1994.Google Scholar
Chambers, R.G., and Pick, D.H. “Marketing Orders as Nontariff Trade Barriers,” American Journal of Agricultural Economics 76(February 1994): 47–54.Google Scholar
Creek, L., Capehart, T., and Grise, V. U.S. Tobacco Statistics, 1935–92. United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service. Statistical Bulletin Number 869. Washington, D.C., April 1994.Google Scholar
Ferrara, G. “The New European Community Agricultural Policy.” Unpublished manuscript. 1993.Google Scholar
Forsythe, K., and Lynch, L. Effects of a Free Trade Agreement on U.S. and Mexican Sanitary and Phytosanitary Regulations. United States Department of Agriculture. Economic Research Service. Agriculture Information Bulletin No. 649. May 1992.Google Scholar
GATT Secretariat. Multilateral Trade Negotiations-The Uruguay Round. Document UR-93-0246, Geneva, December 15, 1993.Google Scholar
Kinsey, J.D., and Houck, J.P. “The Growing Demand for Food Quality: Implications for International Trade.” Chapter 4 The Environment and International Trade . Editors: Shane, M.D. and von Witzke, H. USDA, Washington, D.C. 1993, p. 45–66.Google Scholar
National Center for Food and Agricultural Policy. “Should Agriculture Go With The GATT?” Resources for the Future. Washington, D.C.: 1991.Google Scholar
Sheets, T.J., Leidy, R.B., Jones, W.L., Reinbold, K.G., Yeatts, J.L., and Barbour, K.S. Rate of Pesticide Residues on Tobacco. North Carolina State University, Raleigh, N.C., May 6, 1992.Google Scholar
Sheldon, I.M., and von Witzke, H. On the Economics of Food Quality Standards and Integration in the European Community. Occasional Paper Series, Organization and Performance of World Food Systems: NC-194. January 1992.Google Scholar
Sullivan, D. “Testing Hypotheses About Firm Behavior in the Cigarette Industry,” Journal of Political Economy 93 (1985): 86–98.Google Scholar
Sumner, D.A. “Measurement of Monopoly Power Behavior: An Application to the Cigarette Industry,” Journal of Political Economy 89 (1981): 1010–9.Google Scholar
Sumner, D.A., and Alston, J.M. “Substitutability for Farm Commodities: The Demand for US Tobacco in Cigarette Manufacturing.” American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 69(2), 1987, p. 258–65.Google Scholar
Sumner, D.A., and Wohlgenant, M.K. Effects of an Increase in the Federal Excise Tax on Cigarettes. American Journal of Agricultural Economics. 67, No. 2 (1985): 235–42.Google Scholar
Tremblay, C.H., and Tremblay, V.J. “The Impact of Cigarette Advertising on Consumer Surplus, Profit, and Social Welfare,” Contemporary Economic Policy XIII (1995): 113–124.Google Scholar
United States Department of Agriculture. “The Biologic and Economic Assessment of Maleic Hydrazide.” Technical Bulletin No. 1634. Washington, D.C., 1 Oct. 1979.Google Scholar
United States Department of Agriculture. Environmental and Sanitary and Phytosanitary Issues for the Western Hemisphere Agriculture. International Agriculture and Trade Reports: Western Hemisphere, Situation and Outlook Series. Washington, D.C., June 1994.Google Scholar
Yelverton, F. in Flue-Cured Tobacco: 1992 Information. North Carolina State University. North Carolina Cooperative Extension Service. Raleigh, N.C., 1992.Google Scholar
Zaini, M. Hasyim. Impact of Domestic Content Requirement on the U.S. Tobacco and Cigarette Industries, paper presented at International Economics Workshop, North Carolina State University, October 12, 1994.Google Scholar