Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-rcrh6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-28T15:13:38.305Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Policy Implications of Textile Trade Management and the U.S. Cotton Industry

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  15 September 2016

Shangnan Shui ,
Michael K. Wohlgenant  and
John C. Beghin
Shangnan Shui
Affiliation:
University of Arkansas
Michael K. Wohlgenant
Affiliation:
Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics, North Carolina State University
John C. Beghin
Affiliation:
Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics, North Carolina State University
Get access

Abstract

This study investigates the effects on the U.S. cotton industry of textile trade liberalization using a multi-market equilibrium displacement model. The simulation results suggest that textile trade liberalization would induce small changes in the total demand for U.S. cotton but would affect considerably U.S. cotton demand structure, making U.S. cotton growers more dependent on world markets. The welfare analyses reveal that textile trade liberalization would result in a small welfare loss for U.S. cotton producers. As expected, textile trade liberalization also would lead to considerable substitution of imports for domestic production and substantial declines in prices of all textile products.

Type
Trade Liberalization and International Agricultural Development
Information
Agricultural and Resource Economics Review , Volume 22 , Issue 1 , April 1993 , pp. 37 - 47
Copyright
Copyright © 1993 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

Alston, J.M., Carter, C.A., Green, R., and Pick, D. “Whither Armington Trade Models.” American Journal of Agricultural Economics 72 (1990): 455–67.Google Scholar
Anderson, J.E., and Neary, J.P. “Trade Reform With Quotas, Partial Rent Retention, and Tariffs.” Econometrica, 60, No. 1 (1992): 57–76.Google Scholar
Anson, R., and Simpson, P. World Textile Trade and Production Trends. The Economist Intelligence Unit Limited, London, 1988.Google Scholar
Bailey, K.W., and Womack, A.W. “Wheat Acreage response: A Regional Econometric Investigation.” Southern Journal of Agricultural Economics 17 (1986): 171–80.Google Scholar
Bigman, D. “Derived Demand and Distributive Shares in a Multifactor Multisector Model.” American Economic Review 68, No. 5 (1978): 923–28.Google Scholar
Cline, R. The Future of World Trade in Textiles and Apparel. Institute for International Economics, Washington, D.C., 1987.Google Scholar
Coleman, J., and Thigpen, M.E. “An Economic Model of the World Cotton and Non-Cullulosic Fibers Markets” World Bank Commodity Working Paper #24, Washington D.C., 1991.Google Scholar
Comitextil: Bulletin of Comitextil, Brussels, various issues.Google Scholar
Duffy, P.A., Richardson, J., and Wohlgenant, M.K. “Regional Cotton Acreage Response.” Southern Journal of Agricultural Economics 19 (1987): 145–52.Google Scholar
Duffy, P.A., Wohlgenant, M.K., and Richardson, J. “The Elasticity of Export Demand for U.S. Cotton.” American Journal of Agricultural Economics 72 (1990): 468–74.Google Scholar
Duffy, P.A., and Wohlgenant, M.K. “Effect of an Export Subsidy on the U.S. Cotton Industry. Southern Journal of Agricultural Economics 23 (1991): 1–8.Google Scholar
Gardiner, W.H., and Dixit, P.M. Price Elasticity of Export Demand. USDA, ERS Staff Report no. AFES 860408, Washington, D.C., 1986.Google Scholar
GATT, Textiles and Clothing in World Economy. GATT Publications, Geneva, July, 1984.Google Scholar
Hall, R.E. “The Specification of Technology with Several Kinds of outputs.” Journal of Political Economy 81 (1973): 878–92.Google Scholar
Hufbauer, G., Berliner, D., and Elliott, K. Trade Protection in the United States: 31 Case Studies. Institute for International Economics, Washington, D.C., 1986.Google Scholar
Monke, E., and Taylor, L.D. “International Trade Constrains and Commodity Market Models: An Application to the Cotton Market.” Review of Economics and Statistics 67 (1985): 98–104.Google Scholar
Muth, R. “The Derived Demand for a Productive Factor and the Industry Supply Curve.” Oxford Economics Papers 16 (1964): 38–45.Google Scholar
Pelzman, J. “The Tariff Equivalents of the Existing Quotas Under the MFA.” Unpublished manuscript, American University, Washington, D.C., 1988.Google Scholar
Shui, S., “Impacts on the U.S. Cotton Industry of Removing the Multi-Fiber Arrangement,” Unpublished Ph.D. thesis, North Carolina State University, 1991.Google Scholar
Shui, S.J. Beghin, and Wolhgenant, M.K. “The Impact of Technical Change, Scale Effects and Forward Ordering on U.S. Fiber Demand.” American Journal of Agricultural Economics 75 (1993), in press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shui, S., Beghin, , and Wolhgenant, M.K. “Textile Trade Liberalization and its Welfare Implications for U.S. Cotton Producers in Issues in Agricultural Development: Sustainability and Cooperation. Bellamy, M. and Greenshields, B. (eds). Aldershot, UK: Darmouth Publishing Company, 1992: 191–95.Google Scholar
Textile Economic Bureau. Textile Organon. Roseland, N.J., various issues.Google Scholar
Trela, I., and Whalley, J. “Global Effects of Developed Country Trade Restrictions on Textiles and Apparel.” The Economic Journal 100 (1990): 1190–205.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
USDA. Cotton and Wool: Situation and Outlook Report. Various issues, Washington, D.C.Google Scholar
U.S. International Trade Commission. U.S. Imports of Textiles and Apparel Under the MFA: Statistical Report Trough 1986, 1987. Washington, D.C.Google Scholar
U.S. International Trade Commission. The Economic Effects of Significant U.S. Import Restrictions, Phase I: Manufacturing. Washington, D.C., 1989.Google Scholar