Marie-Agnès Jouanjean, Jean-Christophe Maur, Ben Shepherd
{"title":"US phytosanitary restrictions: the forgotten non-tariff barrier","authors":"Marie-Agnès Jouanjean, Jean-Christophe Maur, Ben Shepherd","doi":"10.1108/JITLP-10-2015-0027","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Purpose \n \n \n \n \nThis paper aims to provide new evidence that the US phytosanitary regime is associated with a restrictive market access environment for fruit and vegetable products. One chief reason seems to be that the US regime uses a positive list approach, under which only authorized countries can export. \n \n \n \n \nDesign/methodology/approach \n \n \n \n \nThe methodology of the paper is primarily qualitative. This paper reviews the US sanitary and phytosanitary measures (SPS) system and its scope for use to protect markets, in addition to protecting life and health. The approach is institutional and political economic. \n \n \n \n \nFindings \n \n \n \n \nFor most products, only a portion of global production is authorized for export to the USA. Even among authorized countries, only a small proportion is actually exported. As a result, the number of countries exporting fresh fruit and vegetables to the USA is far lower than those exporting to countries like the EU and Canada, but it is on a par with markets known to be restrictive in this area, such as Australia and Japan. Using a data set of fruit and vegetable market access and political contributions, this paper also provides evidence showing that domestic political economy considerations may influence the decision to grant market access to foreign producers. \n \n \n \n \nOriginality/value \n \n \n \n \nThe US SPS system has not previously been analyzed in this way, and the distinction between negative and positive list approaches is highlighted in terms of its implications for third-party exporters. Similarly, the analysis of political contributions is novel and suggestive of an important dynamic at work in the determination of the US policy.","PeriodicalId":42719,"journal":{"name":"Journal of International Trade Law and Policy","volume":"15 1","pages":"2-27"},"PeriodicalIF":1.0000,"publicationDate":"2016-08-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1108/JITLP-10-2015-0027","citationCount":"9","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of International Trade Law and Policy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/JITLP-10-2015-0027","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 9
Abstract
Purpose
This paper aims to provide new evidence that the US phytosanitary regime is associated with a restrictive market access environment for fruit and vegetable products. One chief reason seems to be that the US regime uses a positive list approach, under which only authorized countries can export.
Design/methodology/approach
The methodology of the paper is primarily qualitative. This paper reviews the US sanitary and phytosanitary measures (SPS) system and its scope for use to protect markets, in addition to protecting life and health. The approach is institutional and political economic.
Findings
For most products, only a portion of global production is authorized for export to the USA. Even among authorized countries, only a small proportion is actually exported. As a result, the number of countries exporting fresh fruit and vegetables to the USA is far lower than those exporting to countries like the EU and Canada, but it is on a par with markets known to be restrictive in this area, such as Australia and Japan. Using a data set of fruit and vegetable market access and political contributions, this paper also provides evidence showing that domestic political economy considerations may influence the decision to grant market access to foreign producers.
Originality/value
The US SPS system has not previously been analyzed in this way, and the distinction between negative and positive list approaches is highlighted in terms of its implications for third-party exporters. Similarly, the analysis of political contributions is novel and suggestive of an important dynamic at work in the determination of the US policy.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of International Trade Law and Policy is a peer reviewed interdisciplinary journal with a focus upon the nexus of international economic policy and international economic law. It is receptive, but not limited, to the methods of economics, law, and the social sciences. As scholars tend to read individual articles of particular interest to them, rather than an entire issue, authors are not required to write with full accessibility to readers from all disciplines within the purview of the Journal. However, interdisciplinary communication should be fostered where possible. Thus economists can utilize quantitative methods (including econometrics and statistics), while legal scholars and political scientists can invoke specialized techniques and theories. Appendices are encouraged for more technical material. Submissions should contribute to understanding international economic policy and the institutional/legal architecture in which it is implemented. Submissions can be conceptual (theoretical) and/or empirical and/or doctrinal in content. Topics of interest to the Journal are expected to evolve over time but include: -All aspects of international trade law and policy -All aspects of international investment law and policy -All aspects of international development law and policy -All aspects of international financial law and policy -Relationship between economic policy and law and other societal concerns, including the human rights, environment, health, development, and national security