Non-tariff barriers, integration and the transatlantic economy

We examine the potential impact of TTIP through trade-cost reductions, applying a mix of econometric and computational methods to develop estimates of the benefits (and costs) for the EU, United States, and third countries. Econometric results point to an approximate 80% growth in bilateral trade with an ambitious trade agreement. However, at the same time, computable general equilibrium (CGE) estimates highlight distributional impacts across countries and factors not evident from econometrics alone. Translated through our CGE framework, while bilateral trade increases roughly 80%, there is a fall of about 2.5% in trade with the rest of the world in our central case. The estimated gains in annual consumption range between 1% and 2.25% for the United States and EU, respectively. A purely discriminatory agreement would harm most countries outside the agreement, while the direction of third-country effects hinges critically on whether NTB reductions end up being discriminatory or not. Within the United States and EU, while labour gains across skill categories, the impact on farmers is mixed.

How do free trade agreements reduce tariff rates and non-tariff barriers?

This paper empirically investigates how far free trade agreements (FTAs) successfully lower tariff rates and non-tariff barriers (NTBs) for manufacturing industries by employing the bilateral tariff and NTB data in a time series for countries around the world. We find that FTAs under GATT Article XXIV and the Enabling Clause contribute to reducing tariff rates by 2.1% points and 1.5% points, respectively. In the case of NTBs, their respective impacts are 6.6% points and 5.7% points. Membership in the World Trade Organization (WTO) does not contribute greatly to reducing tariff rates but does play a significant role in reducing NTBs. These results provide important implications for the literature on numerical assessments of FTAs.

Impact of non-tariff barriers on the ability of small business to export to Japan [microform] : hearing before the Select Committee on Small Business, United States Senate, Ninety-sixth Congress, second session, on impact of non-tariff barriers on the ability of small business to export to Japan, June 25, 1980.

Reuse of record except for individual research requires license from Congressional Information Service, Inc.

Quantifying Non-Tariff Measures for TTIP. Paper No. 12 in the CEPS-CTR project ‘TTIP in the Balance’ and CEPS Special Report No. 116/July 2015

This paper provides an overview of methods employed to quantify non-tariff measures (NTMs) and then analyses their differences and looks at what these mean for the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) negotiations. The authors find several similarities in the approaches taken. Because all studies conclude that NTMs matter, they argue that policy-makers are right to focus on ‘regulatory cooperation’ in TTIP. Given the significant differences in NTMs across sectors, policy-makers are urged to dive deep into sector-specific elements of NTMs and focus on those sectors where the largest potential gains can be made (i.e. where NTMs are highest, such as in agriculture, automobiles, steel, textiles and insurance services). An area identified for further research is the fact that unlike trade taxes (i.e. tariffs), regulatory barriers to trade are not generally targeted as the primary policy objective, but rather stem from other strategic policy concerns such as consumer safety and/or social and environmental protection. This element should be further investigated.

The Impact of Environmental Non-Tariff Measures on China's Agricultural Exports

This article assesses the impact of environmental non-tariff measures on China's agricultural exports. It uses two measures to show which countries make most intensive use of environmental non-tariff measures and which agricultural products exported by China are the most affected. Environmental non-tariff measures were most prevalence in Malaysia, Vietnam, Philippines, Mexico, Japan, Russian, USA, Germany, and Netherland. Labor-intensive agricultural products, such as fish, vegetables, and fruit were most seriously affected.

L'élimination des barrières non tarifaires au commerce interprovincial et l'Accord sur le commerce intérieur du Canada

L'Accord sur le commerce intérieur est un accord de libre-échange pancanadien visant l'abaissement des barrières non tarifiaires au commerce interprovincial. La notion de barrières au commerce interprovincial, en soi, suscite maintes controverses. Aucun consensus n'existe à savoir quelles sont les barrières au commerce, quelles en sont leurs coûts, mais surtout, s'il faut les abaisser. La grande majorité des experts concoivent que beaucoup de ces barrières non tarifaires au commerce se retrouvent dans le secteur des produits agroalimentaires. À ce titre, ce domaine est, depuis plusieurs décennies, traditionnellement protectionniste et constitue donc un marché des plus difficiles à intégrer. Cette réalité prévaut tant au niveau international qu'interprovincial. Au Canada, l'outil privilégié après des années de négociations constitutionnelles infructueuses fut l'Accord sur le commerce intérieur. Cet accord, aux allures de traité international, vise l'intégration graduelle du marché interne canadien. La volonté de devenir un marché intégré et compétitif au niveau mondial se heurte à la détermination des provinces de protéger leur souveraineté législative. Ainsi, l'outil d'ouverture du marché que constitue l'Accord sur le commerce intérieur, qui navigue entre ces positions antagonistes, fut rédigé de manière assez complexe et peu accessible. Le contexte politique et constitutionnel particulier dans lequel se sont inscrites les négociations de cet accord a ainsi teinté le texte de l'accord et sa rédaction. En plus de sa simplification, plusieurs solutions intervenant sous plusieurs facettes de l'Accord sur le commerce intérieur permettraient à ce dernier de se voir plus efficace dans sa mission d'intégration du marché interprovincial canadien, en plus d'augmenter sa notoriété, sa crédibilité et de permettre une meilleure mise en œuvre.

Agreements and disputes over non-tariff measures

In trade agreements, governments can design remedies to ensure compliance (property rule) or to compensate victims (liability rule). This paper describes an economic framework to explain the pattern of remedies over non-tariff restrictions—particularly domestic subsidies and nonviolation complaints subject to liability rules. The key determinants of the contract form for any individual measure are the expected joint surplus from an agreement and the expected loss to the constrained government. The loss is higher for domestic subsidies and nonviolations because these are the policies most likely to correct domestic distortions. Governments choose property rules when expected gains from compliance are sufficiently high and expected losses to the constrained country are sufficiently low. Liability rules are preferable when dispute costs are relatively high, because inefficiencies in the compensation process reduce the number of socially inefficient disputes filed.

On the effects of non-tariff measures on Brazilian exports

This article proposes an alternative methodology for estimating the effects of non-tariff measures on trade flows, based on the recent literature on gravity models. A two-stage Heckman selection model is applied to the case of Brazilian exports, where the second stage gravity equation is theoretically grounded on the seminal Melitz model of heterogeneous firms. This extended gravity equation highlights the role played by zero trade flows as well as firm heterogeneity in explaining bilateral trade among countries, two factors usually omitted in traditional gravity specifications found in previous literature. Last, it also proposes a economic rationale for the effects of NTM on trade flows, helping to shed some light on its main operating channels under a rather simple Cournot’s duopolistic competition framework.

On the effects of non tariff measures on Brazilian exports

This article proposes an alternative methodology for estimating the effects of non-tariff measures on trade flows, based on the recent literature on gravity models. A two-stage Heckman selection model is applied to the case of Brazilian exports, where the second stage gravity equation is theoretically grounded on the seminal Melitz model of heterogeneous firms. This extended gravity equation highlights the role played by zero trade flows as well as firm heterogeneity in explaining bilateral trade among countries, two factors usually omitted in traditional gravity specifications found in previous literature. Last, it also proposes a economic rationale for the effects of NTM on trade flows, helping to shed some light on its main operating channels under a rather simple Cournot’s duopolistic competition framework

Seafood safety: economics of Hazard Analysis and Critical Control Point (HACCP) programmes

Seventy percent of the world's catch of fish and fishery products is consumed as food. Fish and shellfish products represent 15.6 percent of animal protein supply and 5.6 percent of total protein supply on a worldwide basis. Developing countries account for almost 50 percent of global fish exports. Seafood-borne disease or illness outbreaks affect consumers both physically and financially, and create regulatory problems for both importing and exporting countries. Seafood safety as a commodity cannot be purchased in the marketplace and government intervenes to regulate the safety and quality of seafood. Theoretical issues and data limitations create problems in estimating what consumers will pay for seafood safety and quality. The costs and benefits of seafood safety must be considered at all levels, including the fishers, fish farmers, input suppliers to fishing, processing and trade, seafood processors, seafood distributors, consumers and government. Hazard Analysis Critical Control Point (HACCP) programmes are being implemented on a worldwide basis for seafood. Studies have been completed to estimate the cost of HACCP in various shrimp, fish and shellfish plants in the United States, and are underway for some seafood plants in the United Kingdom, Canada and Africa. Major developments within the last two decades have created a set of complex trading situations for seafood. Current events indicate that seafood safety and quality can be used as non-tariff barriers to free trade. Research priorities necessary to estimate the economic value and impacts of achieving safer seafood are outlined at the consumer, seafood production and processing, trade and government levels. An extensive list of references on the economics of seafood safety and quality is presented. (PDF contains 56 pages; captured from html.)

Intellectual Property and the EU’s Deep Trade Agenda

The EU is considered to be one of the main proponents of what has been called the deep trade agenda—that is, the push for further trade liberalization with an emphasis on the removal of domestic non-tariff regulatory measures affecting trade, as opposed to the traditional focus on the removal of trade barriers at borders. As negotiations on the Doha Development Round have stalled, the EU has attempted to achieve these aims by entering into comprehensive free trade agreements (FTAs) that are not only limited exclusively to tariffs but also extend to non-tariff barriers, including services, intellectual property rights (IPRs), competition, and investment. These FTAs place great emphasis on regulatory convergence as a means to secure greater market openings. The paper examines the EU's current external trade policy in the area of IP, particularly its attempts to promote its own regulatory model for the protection of IP rights through trade agreements. By looking at the IP enforcement provisions of such agreements, the article also examines how the divisive issues that are currently hindering the progress of negotiations at WTO level, including the demands from developing countries to maintain a degree of autonomy in the area of IP regulation as well as the need to balance IP protection with human rights protection, are being dealt with in recent EU FTAs.