Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-2pzkn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-30T21:39:26.658Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A Differentiated Goods Model of the Effects of European Policies in International Poultry Markets

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 April 2015

Julian M. Alston  and
Grant M. Scobie
Julian M. Alston
Affiliation:
Victorian Department of Agriculture and Rural Affairs, Australia
Grant M. Scobie
Affiliation:
New Zealand
Get access

Abstract

The Common Agricultural Policy increases European poultry production costs, prohibits imports, increases domestic prices, and subsidizes exports. This policy has displaced some U.S. exports. However, the net impact in the U.S. has been quite modest, even assuming poultry is homogeneous, independent of source country. Costs to U.S. producers are almost entirely offset by gains to U.S. consumers. Effects in the U.S. are even smaller when imperfect substitutability between poultry from different countries is accounted for. A retaliatory U.S. export subsidy would have more dramatic effects in U.S. markets.

Keywords

international tradepoultryCommon Agricultural PolicyU.S. marketsdifferentiated goods modelexport subsidies
Type
Submitted Articles
Information
Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics , Volume 19 , Issue 1 , July 1987 , pp. 59 - 68
Copyright
Copyright © Southern Agricultural Economics Association 1987

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. The Effects of the European Community's Common Agricultural Policy in Interational Markets for Poultry Meat, Agricultural Experiment Station Research Bulletin No. 471, North Carolina State University, March 1985.Google Scholar
Armington, P.S. “A Theory of Demand for Products Distinguished by Place of Production.” International Monetary Fund Staff Papers, 16(1969):159–178.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chavas, J. P., and Johnson, S. R. “Supply Dynamics: The Case of U.S. Broilers and Turkeys.” Amer. J. Agr. Econ., 64(1982):558–564.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
George, P. S., and King, G. A. Consumer Demand for Food Commodities in the United States with Projections for 1980. Giannini Foundation Monograph No. 26, University of California, Davis, 1971.Google Scholar
Grennes, T., Johnson, P. R., and Thursby, M.. The Economics of World Grain Trade. New York: Praeger, 1978.Google Scholar
Harling, K. F., and Thompson, R. L. “Government Intervention in the Poultry Industries: A Cross-Country Comparison.” Amer. J. Agr. Econ., 67(1985):243–250.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Johnson, P. R. Studies in the Demand for U.S. Exports of Agricultural Commodities. Economics Research Report No. 15, North Carolina State University, 1971.Google Scholar
Johnson, P. R. The Economics of the Tobacco Industry. New York: Praeger, 1984.Google Scholar
Koester, U. Policy Options for the European Community: Policy Options for Developing Countries, Research Report 35, International Food Policy Research Institute, Washington, D.C., 1982.Google Scholar
Mageira, S. L. “EC Export Refunds on Poultry—Refunds or Subsidies?” Unpublished paper. USDA, ERS, Washington, D.C., 1982.Google Scholar
McClelland, J. C. “Effects of European Community Poultry Export Subsidies on U.S. Poultry Exports.” M.S. thesis, University of Georgia, 1983.Google Scholar
Monke, E., and Petzel, T.. “Market Integration: An Application to International Trade in Cotton.” Amer. J. Agr. Econ., 66,4(1984):481–487.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
National Broiler Council et al. “Petition Seeking Relief Under Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974, As Amended,” The Importance of Agriculture to the U.S. Economy. Hearings before the Congressional Subcommittee on Agriculture and Transportation, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C., 1982.Google Scholar
Rowan, W. S. “Subsidized EC Poultry Exports Displace U.S. Product in Important World Markets.” Foreign Agriculture, 18(1980):18–19.Google Scholar
Thomson, K. J., and Harvey, D. R. “The Efficiency of the Common Agricultural Policy.” European Rev. of Agr. Econ., 8(1981):57–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
United Nations Secretariat. Commodity Trade Statistics. Department of International Economic and Social Affairs, New York, 1959-1983, monthly.Google Scholar
Wohlgenant, M. K., and Hahn, W. F. “Dynamic Adjustment in Monthly Consumer Demands for Meats.” Amer. J. Agr. Econ., 64(1982):553–557.CrossRefGoogle Scholar