健康保护还是产业保护:食品内源标准

Wei Xia, Liming Wang, Yinchu Zeng
{"title":"健康保护还是产业保护:食品内源标准","authors":"Wei Xia, Liming Wang, Yinchu Zeng","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.2288099","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This study argued that food standards are endogenous and determined by the contest or balance among five relevant interest groups: industry, government, consumers (civil society), academia, and external influence. After a comprehensive review on the Maximum Residue Limit regulation system around the world, this study carried out an econometric estimation to find out what factors determined the stringency of MRLs.The results show that the stringency of MRLs is majorly determined by good governance and MRLs generally reflect consumer’s demand for higher health protection. The stable government with low corruption and good credibility in its people, which can provide high quality of public, civil services and relevant services, tends to have relax MRLs, while government focusing on formulating and enforcing effective rule of law and implement sound policies to permit and promote private interests (regulatory quality), tends to generate tight MRLs. Net apple importers and net traditional apple exporters tend to impose loose MRLs while countries specified in world food market but not in apple tend to apply stricter MRLs. Consumers in richer countries with free access to information and have great accountability on their government tends to demand more stringent import MRLs. Countries with higher proportion of employers in R&D and more journal publications tend to have more stringent MRLs while more expenditure in R&D tends to generate less stringent MRLs when all other factors controlled. The role of scientific evidence in determining the regulatory stringency could be very complicated. However, this study does not find evidence that MRLs are related to a country's competition environment in the world market or its political importance of agriculture/apple industry or its export-driven strategy.","PeriodicalId":175783,"journal":{"name":"Food Law & Policy eJournal","volume":"61 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2013-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Health Protection or Industry Protection: The Endogenous Food Standards\",\"authors\":\"Wei Xia, Liming Wang, Yinchu Zeng\",\"doi\":\"10.2139/ssrn.2288099\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This study argued that food standards are endogenous and determined by the contest or balance among five relevant interest groups: industry, government, consumers (civil society), academia, and external influence. After a comprehensive review on the Maximum Residue Limit regulation system around the world, this study carried out an econometric estimation to find out what factors determined the stringency of MRLs.The results show that the stringency of MRLs is majorly determined by good governance and MRLs generally reflect consumer’s demand for higher health protection. The stable government with low corruption and good credibility in its people, which can provide high quality of public, civil services and relevant services, tends to have relax MRLs, while government focusing on formulating and enforcing effective rule of law and implement sound policies to permit and promote private interests (regulatory quality), tends to generate tight MRLs. Net apple importers and net traditional apple exporters tend to impose loose MRLs while countries specified in world food market but not in apple tend to apply stricter MRLs. Consumers in richer countries with free access to information and have great accountability on their government tends to demand more stringent import MRLs. Countries with higher proportion of employers in R&D and more journal publications tend to have more stringent MRLs while more expenditure in R&D tends to generate less stringent MRLs when all other factors controlled. The role of scientific evidence in determining the regulatory stringency could be very complicated. However, this study does not find evidence that MRLs are related to a country's competition environment in the world market or its political importance of agriculture/apple industry or its export-driven strategy.\",\"PeriodicalId\":175783,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Food Law & Policy eJournal\",\"volume\":\"61 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2013-07-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Food Law & Policy eJournal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2288099\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Food Law & Policy eJournal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2288099","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本研究认为,食品标准是内生的,由行业、政府、消费者(公民社会)、学术界和外部影响这五个相关利益群体之间的竞争或平衡决定。本研究在全面回顾世界各国最大残留限量法规体系的基础上,进行了计量经济学估计,找出哪些因素决定了最大残留限量的严格程度。结果表明,最大限量的严格程度主要取决于良好的治理,最大限量通常反映了消费者对更高健康保护的需求。腐败程度低、民众信任度高、能够提供高质量公共服务、公务员服务和相关服务的稳定政府往往会放宽最高限制值,而专注于制定和执行有效法治、实施健全政策以允许和促进私人利益(监管质量)的政府往往会产生严格的最高限制值。苹果净进口国和传统苹果净出口国倾向于实施宽松的最大限量,而世界食品市场中指定但不包括苹果的国家倾向于实施更严格的最大限量。富裕国家的消费者可以自由获取信息,对政府负有很大的责任,他们倾向于要求更严格的进口最大限量。在控制所有其他因素的情况下,研发雇主比例较高和期刊发表量较多的国家往往具有更严格的最大残留限量,而研发支出较多的国家往往产生较不严格的最大残留限量。科学证据在确定监管严格程度方面的作用可能非常复杂。然而,本研究没有发现证据表明MRLs与一个国家在世界市场上的竞争环境或其农业/苹果产业的政治重要性或其出口驱动战略有关。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Health Protection or Industry Protection: The Endogenous Food Standards
This study argued that food standards are endogenous and determined by the contest or balance among five relevant interest groups: industry, government, consumers (civil society), academia, and external influence. After a comprehensive review on the Maximum Residue Limit regulation system around the world, this study carried out an econometric estimation to find out what factors determined the stringency of MRLs.The results show that the stringency of MRLs is majorly determined by good governance and MRLs generally reflect consumer’s demand for higher health protection. The stable government with low corruption and good credibility in its people, which can provide high quality of public, civil services and relevant services, tends to have relax MRLs, while government focusing on formulating and enforcing effective rule of law and implement sound policies to permit and promote private interests (regulatory quality), tends to generate tight MRLs. Net apple importers and net traditional apple exporters tend to impose loose MRLs while countries specified in world food market but not in apple tend to apply stricter MRLs. Consumers in richer countries with free access to information and have great accountability on their government tends to demand more stringent import MRLs. Countries with higher proportion of employers in R&D and more journal publications tend to have more stringent MRLs while more expenditure in R&D tends to generate less stringent MRLs when all other factors controlled. The role of scientific evidence in determining the regulatory stringency could be very complicated. However, this study does not find evidence that MRLs are related to a country's competition environment in the world market or its political importance of agriculture/apple industry or its export-driven strategy.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信