Groundnut policies, global trade dynamics, and the impact of trade liberalization

Groundnut products are of central economic importance to millions of smallholders in Africa, India, and Southern China. The products generate 60 percent of rural cash income and account for about 70 percent of the rural labor force in Senegal and The Gambia. Groundnut trade is heavily distorted, and this has affected the competitive position of various players in world markets. Using a partial-equilibrium, multi-market, international model, the authors analyze the trade and welfare effects of several groundnut trade liberalization scenarios compared with the recent historical baseline. They evaluate net welfare as the sum of consumers'equivalent variation, quasi-profits in farming, quasi-profits in crushing, and taxpayers'revenues and outlays implied by distortions. The authors find that trade liberalization in groundnut markets has a strong South-South dimension with policies in India, and to a lesser extent China, heavily depressing the world prices of groundnut products at the expense of smaller developing countries mainly located in Africa. Under free trade, African exporters would gain because they are net sellers of groundnut products. In India, consumers would be better off with lower consumer prices resulting from the removal of prohibitive tariffs and large imports of groundnut products. The cost of adjustment would fall on Indian farmers and crushers. In China, crush margins would improve because of the large terms of trade effects in the groundnut oil market relative to the seed market. China's groundnut product exports would expand dramatically. Net buyers of groundnut products in OECD countries would be worse off. The authors draw implications for the Doha negotiations.Food&Beverage Industry,Environmental Economics&Policies,Markets and Market Access,Crops&Crop Management Systems,Economic Theory&Research,Crops&Crop Management Systems,Environmental Economics&Policies,Food&Beverage Industry,Economic Theory&Research,Access to Markets

Dirty exports and environmental regulation : do standards matter to trade?

How to address the link between environmental regulation and trade was an important part of discussions at the World Trade Organization Ministerial in Doha, Qatar in November 2001. Trade ministers agreed to launch negotiations on trade and the environment, specifically clarification of WTO rules. The authors address an important part of the background context for deciding whether or how to link trade agreements to the environment from a developing country perspective.The authors ask whether environmental regulations affect exports of pollution-intensive or"dirty"goods in 24 countries between 1994 and 1998. Based on a Heckscher-Ohlin-Vanek (HOV) model, net exports in five pollution-intensive industries are regressed on factor endowments and measures of environmental standards (legislation in force). The results suggest that, if country heterogeneity such as enforcement of environmental regulations is controlled for, more stringent environmental standards imply lower net exports of metal mining, nonferrous metals, iron, and steel and chemicals. The authors find find that a trade agreement on a common environmental standard will cost a non-OECD country substantially more than an OECD country. Developing countries will, on average, reduce exports of the five pollution-intensive products by 0.37 percent of GNP. This represents 11 percent of annual exports of these products from the 24 studied countries.Water and Industry,Economic Theory&Research,Public Health Promotion,Environmental Economics&Policies,Sanitation and Sewerage,Environmental Economics&Policies,Water and Industry,Environmental Governance,Economic Theory&Research,Health Monitoring&Evaluation

ENVIRONMENTAL STANDARDS AND DIRTY EXPORTS: A CASE STUDY ANALYSIS OF 24 COUNTRIES

This paper examines how the stringency of environmental regulations impact international trade patterns. It explores the hypothesis that environmental regulation does not have a significant impact on trade. An econometric analysis is conducted for 24 countries ranging from highly developed to extremely poor to investigate whether environmental regulations have a significant impact on countries exports of pollution intensive goods. This econometric model extends Leamer (1984)'s cross-section Heckscher-Ohlin-Vanek (HOV) model by incorporating measures of stringency of environmental regulation. Correlation between capital intensity and exports are mitigated by grouping the sample countries. The results suggest that Metal, Steels, Pulp and Paper, and Chemicals Industries exhibit a negative relationship.Environmental Economics and Policy, International Relations/Trade,

A race to the top? A case study of food safety standards and African exports

Growing concern over health risks associated with food products is at the forefront of trade policy debate. At the heart of this debate is the"precautionary principle,"which holds that precautions should be taken against health, safety, and environmental risks even whenscience has not established direct cause-and-effect relationships--as with, for example, the EUropean ban on hormone-treated beef. The authors quantify the impact on food exports from African countries of new EUropean Union standards for aflatoxins, structurally related toxic compounds that contaminate certain foods and lead to the production of acute liver carcinogens in the human body. The authors estimate the impact of changes in differing levels of such protection based on the EU standards (and suggested by international standards) for 15 EUropean countries and 9 African countries between 1989 and 1998. The results suggest that implementation of the EU's new aflatoxin standards will significantly hurt African exports to EUrope of nuts, cereals, and dried fruits, which are highly sensitive to the aflatoxin standards. The EU standards would reduce health risks by only about 1.4 deaths per billion a year but would cut African exports by 64 percent, or $670 million, compared with their level under international standards.Economic Theory&Research,Health Economics&Finance,Environmental Economics&Policies,Food&Beverage Industry,TF054105-DONOR FUNDED OPERATION ADMINISTRATION FEE INCOME AND EXPENSE ACCOUNT

THE IMPACT OF GROUNDNUT TRADE LIBERALIZATION: IMPLICATION FOR THE DOHA ROUND

We use a partial-equilibrium multi-market international model to analyze trade and agricultural policies affecting peanut/groundnut products markets. The model covers four goods (food and crush quality groundnuts, groundnut oil and cake) in 13 countries/regions including a large set of developing countries (Argentina, China, the Gambia, India, Malawi, Mexico, Nigeria, Senegal, and South Africa). Welfare is evaluated by looking at the consumer's equivalent variation, quasi-profits in farming (groundnut farming, livestock), quasi-profit in crushing, and taxpayers' revenues and outlays implied by distortions. We calibrate the model on recent historical data. We analyze several groundnut trade liberalization scenarios. The impact of the reforms is measured in deviation from the recent historical baseline. Trade liberalization in groundnut markets has a strong South-South dimension opposing two large developing countries (India and China) to smaller developing countries mainly located in Africa. Current Chinese and Indian policies substantially depress the world prices of edible groundnuts, groundnut oil and groundnut meal. Following the removal of these distortions, African exporters present in these world markets would gain because they are net sellers of the cash crops. Consumers in China and India would be better off as well with lower consumer prices resulting from the removal of high tariffs more than offsetting the higher world prices of groundnut oil. The cost of adjustment would fall on farmers in India and China who would have to shift to other crops or activities. Crushing in India would also decrease because crushing margins would deteriorate. Net buyers of groundnut products in OECD countries will be worse off. We draw implications for Doha negotiations.International Relations/Trade,

Groundnut Trade Liberalization: A South-South Debate?

We use a new partial-equilibrium, multi-market international model to analyze trade and agricultural policies affecting markets for peanut/groundnut products. The model covers four goods in thirteen countries/regions, including a large set of developing countries. Welfare is evaluated by looking at consumers’ equivalent variation, quasiprofits in farming, quasi-profits in crushing, and taxpayers’ revenues and outlays implied by distortions. We calibrate the model on recent historical data and current policy information. We analyze several groundnut trade liberalization scenarios in deviation from the recent historical baseline. Trade liberalization in groundnut markets has a strong South-South dimension, opposing India and, to a lesser extent, China to smaller developing countries mainly located in Africa. In the former, current policies, exacerbated by their market size, depress the world prices of groundnut products. Under free trade, African exporters present in these world markets would gain because they are net sellers of groundnut products. In India, consumers would be better off, with lower consumer prices resulting from the removal of prohibitive tariffs and large imports of groundnut products. The cost of the adjustment would fall on Indian farmers and crushers. In China, crush margins would improve because of the large terms-of-trade effects in the oil market relative to the seed market. China’s groundnut product exports would expand dramatically. Net buyers of groundnut products in OECD (Organisation of Economic Co-operation and Development) countries would be worse off. We draw implications for Doha negotiations

ENVIRONMENTAL STANDARDS AND DIRTY EXPORTS: A CASE STUDY ANALYSIS OF 24 COUNTRIES

This paper examines how the stringency of environmental regulations impact international trade patterns. It explores the hypothesis that environmental regulation does not have a significant impact on trade. An econometric analysis is conducted for 24 countries ranging from highly developed to extremely poor to investigate whether environmental regulations have a significant impact on countries exports of pollution intensive goods. This econometric model extends Leamer (1984)'s cross-section Heckscher-Ohlin-Vanek (HOV) model by incorporating measures of stringency of environmental regulation. Correlation between capital intensity and exports are mitigated by grouping the sample countries. The results suggest that Metal, Steels, Pulp and Paper, and Chemicals Industries exhibit a negative relationship

Groundnut Trade Liberalization: A South-South Debate?

We use a new partial-equilibrium, multi-market international model to analyze trade and agricultural policies affecting markets for peanut/groundnut products. The model covers four goods in thirteen countries/regions, including a large set of developing countries. Welfare is evaluated by looking at consumers’ equivalent variation, quasiprofits in farming, quasi-profits in crushing, and taxpayers’ revenues and outlays implied by distortions. We calibrate the model on recent historical data and current policy information. We analyze several groundnut trade liberalization scenarios in deviation from the recent historical baseline. Trade liberalization in groundnut markets has a strong South-South dimension, opposing India and, to a lesser extent, China to smaller developing countries mainly located in Africa. In the former, current policies, exacerbated by their market size, depress the world prices of groundnut products. Under free trade, African exporters present in these world markets would gain because they are net sellers of groundnut products. In India, consumers would be better off, with lower consumer prices resulting from the removal of prohibitive tariffs and large imports of groundnut products. The cost of the adjustment would fall on Indian farmers and crushers. In China, crush margins would improve because of the large terms-of-trade effects in the oil market relative to the seed market. China’s groundnut product exports would expand dramatically. Net buyers of groundnut products in OECD (Organisation of Economic Co-operation and Development) countries would be worse off. We draw implications for Doha negotiations.</p