Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Market Access Asymmetry in Food Trade

  • Published:
Review of World Economics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Using a bilateral trade equation derived from a monopolistic competition model, we investigate market access reciprocity in food trade among the United States, Canada, the European Union and Japan. We explore country- and industry-specific market access asymmetry through a border effect approach. Our findings reveal marked asymmetries in reciprocal border effects, both across countries and industries. Trade policy measures, particularly non-tariff barriers (NTBs), the degree of product differentiation and a ‘home bias’ in preferences, are important factors in explaining levels in border effects. Asymmetries in border effects are mainly explained by trade policies.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Anderson, J. E. (1979). A Theoretical Foundation for the Gravity Equation. American Economic Review 69 (1): 106–116.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Anderson, J. E., and J. P. Neary (2005). Measuring the Restrictiveness of International Trade Policy. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.

  3. Anderson, J. E., and E. van Wincoop (2003). Gravity with Gravitas: A Solution to the Border Puzzle. American Economic Review 93 (1): 170–192.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Anderson, J. E., and E. van Wincoop (2004). Trade Costs. Journal of Economic Literature XLII (3): 691–751.

  5. Bergstrand, J. H. (1989). The Generalized Gravity Equation, Monopolistic Competition and the Factor-Proportion Theory in International Trade. Review of Economics Statistics 71 (1): 143–153.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Bouët, A., Y. Décreux, L. Fontagné, S. Jean, and D. Laborde (2008). Assessing Applied Protection across the World. Review of International Economics (forthcoming).

  7. Brusch, L., and E. Reinhart (1999). Industrial Location and Protection: The Political and Economic Geography of U.S. Nontariff Barriers. American Journal of Political Science 43 (4): 1028–1050.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Bureau, J. C., and L. Salvatici (2004a). WTO Negotiation on Market Access: What We Know, What We Don’t and What We Should. In G. Anania, M. Bhoman, C. Carter, and A. McCalla (eds.), Agricultural Policy Reform and the WTO. Where Are We Heading? Cheltenam: Edward Elgar.

  9. Bureau, J. C., and L. Salvatici (2004b). WTO Negotiation on Market Access in Agriculture: A Comparison of Alternative Tariff Cut Proposals for the EU and the US. Topics in Economic Analysis & Policy 4 (1): 1–33.

  10. Chen, N. (2004). Intra-National versus International Trade in the European Union: Why Do National Border Matter? Journal of International Economics 63 (1): 93–118.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Combes, P.-P., M. Lafourcade, and T. Mayer (2005). The Trade-Creating Effects of Business and Social Networks: Evidence from France. Journal of International Economics 66 (1): 1–29.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Deardorff, A. V. (1998). Determinants of Bilateral Trade: Does Gravity Work in a Neoclassic World. In J. A. Frankel (ed.), The Regionalization of the World Economy. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

  13. Disdier, A. C., and T. Mayer (2007). Je t’aime, moi non plus: Bilateral Opinions and International Trade. European Journal of Political Economy 23 (4): 1140–1159.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Dixit, A. K., and E. Stiglitz (1977). Monopolistic Competition and Optimum Product Diversity. American Economic Review 67 (3): 297–308.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Eaton, G., and S. Kortum (2002). Technology, Geography and Trade. Econometrica 70 (5): 1241–1279.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Evans, C. L. (2003). The Economic Significance of National Border Effects. American Economic Review 93 (4): 1291–1312.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Feenstra, R. (2004). Advanced International Trade. Theory and Evidence. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

  18. Ferrantino, M. (2006). Quantifying the Trade and Economic Effect of Non-Tariff Measures. OECD Trade Policy Working Paper No. 28.

  19. Fontagné, L., T. Mayer, and S. Zignago (2005). Trade in the Triad: How Easy Is the Access to Large Markets? Canadian Journal of Economics 38 (4): 1401–1430.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Furtan, W. H., and B. M. van Melle (2004). Canada’s Agricultural Trade in North America: Do National Borders Matter?’ Review of Agricultural Economics 26 (3): 317–331.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Gallezot, J. (2003). Real Access to the EU’s Agricultural Market. Mimeo, UMR Economie publique INRA-INAPG, Paris: Institute National de la Recherche Agronomique.

  22. Haveman, J., U. Nair-Reichert, and J. G. Thursby (2003). How Effective Are Trade Barriers? An Analysis of Trade Reduction, Diversion and Compression. Review of Economics and Statistics 85 (2): 488–485.

    Google Scholar 

  23. Head, K., and T. Mayer (2000). Non-Europe: The Magnitude and Causes of Market Fragmentation in Europe. Weltwirschaftliches Archiv/Review of World Economics 136 (2): 285–314.

  24. Head, K., and T. Mayer (2002). Illusory Border Effects: Distance Mismeasurement Inflates Estimates of Bias in Trade. CEPII Discussion Paper No. 2002-01.

  25. Head, K., and J. Ries (2001). Increasing Return vs. National Product Differentiation as an Explanation for the Pattern of US-Canada trade. American Economic Review 91 (4): 848–876.

    Google Scholar 

  26. Hillberry, R. (1999). Explaining the ‘Home Bias’: What Can Be Learned from Disaggregated Commodity Flow Data? Indiana University Graduate Student Economics Working Paper Series No. 9802.

  27. Hillberry, R. (2002). Aggregation Bias, Compositional Change, and the Border Effect. Canadian Journal of Economics 35 (3): 517–530.

    Google Scholar 

  28. Hillberry, R., and D. Hummels (2002). Explain Home Bias in Consumption: The Role of Intermediate Input Trade. Working Paper, Purdue University.

  29. Kee, H. L., A. Nicita, and M. Olarreaga (2006). Estimating Trade Restrictive Index. World Bank Policy Research Working Paper No. 3840.

  30. Krugman, P. (1980). Scale Economies, Product Differentiation, and the Pattern of Trade. American Economic Review 70 (5): 950–959.

    Google Scholar 

  31. Lopez, R., E. Pagoulatos, and M. A. Gonzales (2006). Home Bias and US Imports of Processed Foods. North American Journal of Trade and Finance 17 (3): 367–392.

    Google Scholar 

  32. Manova, K. (2006). Credit Constraints, Heterogeneous Firms, and International Trade. Working Paper, November 2006, Harvard University.

  33. Mayer, T., and S. Zignago (2005). Market Access in Global and Regional Trade. Working Paper 2005-02. Centre d’Etudes Prospectives et d’Informations Internationales (CEPII). Paris: CEPII.

  34. McCallum, J. (1995). National Borders Matter: Canada-U.S. Regional Trade Patterns. American Economic Review 85 (3): 615–623.

    Google Scholar 

  35. Messerlin, P. (2001). Measuring the Costs of Protection in Europe: European Commercial Policy in the 2000s. Washington, D.C.: Institute of International Economics.

  36. OECD (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development) (2003). Structural Statistics for Industry and Services 1993–2000. Paris: OECD Publishing.

  37. Olper, A., and V. Raimondi (2006). Explaining the Border Effects: The Role of Policy and Non-Policy Barriers in the Quad Food Trade. Paper presented at the IATRC Summer Symposium, Bonn, 28–30 May.

  38. Rauch, J. E. (1999). Networks versus Markets in International Trade. Journal of International Economic 48 (1): 7–35.

    Google Scholar 

  39. Sheldon, I. (2005). Monopolistic Competition and Trade: Does the Theory Carry any Empirical ‘Weight’?. Paper presented at the Winter Meeting of the IATRC, San Diego, CA, 4-6 December, 2005.

  40. Wei, S.-J. (1996). Intra-National versus International Trade: How Stubborn are Nations in Global Integration? NBER Working Paper No. 5531.

  41. Wolf, H. C. (2000). International Home Bias in Trade. Review of Economics and Statistics 82 (4): 555–569.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. DEPA-Università degli Studi di Milano, University of Milano, via Celoria, 2, I-20133, Milano, Italy

    Alessandro Olper & Valentina Raimondi

Authors
  1. Alessandro Olper
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Valentina Raimondi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Alessandro Olper.

Additional information

JEL no.

F13, F14, Q17

About this article

Cite this article

Olper, A., Raimondi, V. Market Access Asymmetry in Food Trade. Rev World Econ 144, 509–537 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10290-008-0158-8

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10290-008-0158-8

Keywords

Search

Navigation