Open AccessRegulatory patterns in international pork trade and similarity with the EU SPS/TBT standards
Author(s) -
Jurgen Peci,
Ana I. Sanjuán
Publication year - 2020
Publication title -
spanish journal of agricultural research
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.337
H-Index - 36
eISSN - 2171-9292
pISSN - 1695-971X
DOI - 10.5424/sjar/2020181-15005
Subject(s) - context (archaeology) , international trade , harmonization , european union , business , commercial policy , international economics , technical barriers to trade , bilateral trade , trade barrier , conformity assessment , similarity (geometry) , incentive , economics , china , political science , geography , computer science , operations management , physics , image (mathematics) , archaeology , artificial intelligence , acoustics , law , microeconomics
Aim of study: With the increasing protagonism of non-tariff measures (NTMs) in trade policy, better indexes are needed to depict the prevalence and similarity of NTMs across countries for further use in trade impact assessments.Area of study: Worldwide, with special focus on the European Union (EU)Material and methods: Using the TRAINS database on NTMs, we calculated and proposed some indicators, stressing both regulatory intensity and diversity, as well as similarity of regulatory patterns between trade partners. Our application focuses on pork trade and main importers, amongst which, the EU is singled out.Main results: We found a high level of heterogeneity in NTMs’ application, both, in the number and variety of measures. The bilateral similarity was relatively low, such as only 30% of sanitary and phytosanitary measures (SPS) and 20% of technical barriers to trade were shared, providing ground and incentive for discussing trade policy harmonization. Our analysis suggests that SPS regulations prevail in those sectors and countries more engaged in trade, while a negative correlation with tariffs raises protectionism concerns. Our bilateral indicators rank country pairs according to the similarity of their regulatory patterns. The EU, for instance, is closer in SPS regulations to China or USA than to Canada or New Zealand, which will require actions in the context of the bilateral trade agreements in course.Research highlights: The low similarity of regulatory patterns evidence the challenges faced by policy makers to streamline technical regulations. For an accurate representation of regulatory patterns and their impact on trade, both uni- and bilateral indicators need to be considered.