Special Agricultural Safeguards in the International Trade of Meat Analysis and Impacts on the Brazilian Economy

  • Cinthia Cabral da CostaEmail author
  • Heloisa Lee Burnquist
  • Joaquim J. M. Guilhoto
Conference paper
Part of the Springer Proceedings in Business and Economics book series (SPBE)


This study identified the impact of special agricultural safeguards (SSG) for the global market of meat and for the Brazilian economy. The tariff lines (TLs) subject to SSG were selected and the period of analysis was 1995 (when the rules about the SSGs were established) to 2015 (more recent period for which there are notifications). The value of additional tariff was calculated for each of the most important TLs in Brazilian export value and together with the price elasticities for imports, was used to estimate the impacts on imports. Finally, the effect of an increase in Brazilian exports of meat without SSG taxes was calculated as well as its impact in the country’s economy by using an input-output matrix for Brazil. The most important markets that applied SSGs to Brazilian exports were the US for beef and European Union for poultry. However, the additional tariffs could be estimated in only two of the sixteen years that the US applied SSGs on beef imports, suggesting that its use has been enforced when the average annual price has been lower than the trigger price level. Therefore, with the additional tariffs that could be estimated, the results indicated that the impact of the value of the meat that could not be exported to both markets EU and US, due to SSGs was equivalent to BRL 3.7 billion of the economy’s production value (at 2015 prices) and almost BRL 2 billion of the Brazilian GDP.


Beef Poultry meat SSG tariff Input-output matrix Brazil 


  1. Aznal, M. (2007). Special products and special safeguard mechanism in WTO agriculture negotiation. Briefing Paper, 1.Google Scholar
  2. Brazil. (2018). Instituto Brasileiro de Geografia e Estatística—IBGE. Available at: Download. Statistics. National Accounts Accessed in: 2018.
  3. Costa, C. C., Burnquist, H. L., & Guilhoto, J. J. M. (2015). Special safeguard tariff impacts on the Brazilian sugar exports. Journal of International Trade Law and Policy, 14(2), 70–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Eurostat—European Commission. (2018). International Trade. Data. Database. Available at: Access: 2018.
  5. FAO—Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. (2002). FAO papers on selected issues relating to the WTO negotiations on agriculture. Rome.Google Scholar
  6. FAO—Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. (2018a). FAOSTAT. Available at: Statistics. Databases. Data. Food Balance. Commodity balances—livestock and fish primary equivalent.
  7. FAO—Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. (2018b). FAOSTAT. Available at: Statistics. Databases. Data. Trade. Crops and livestock products.
  8. FAPRI—Food and Agriculture Policy Research Institute. (2018). Tools. Elasticities database. Available at: Access: January 20, 2018.
  9. Finger, J. M. (2009). A special safeguard mechanism for agricultural imports and the management of reform. World Bank: Policy Research Working Paper, n. 4927.Google Scholar
  10. Guilhoto, J. J. M., & Sesso Filho, U. A. (2010). Estimation of the input-output matrix using preliminary data from national accounts: application and analysis of economic indicators for Brazil in 2005. Economy & Technology UFPR/TECPAR. Year 6 (Vol. 23) October/December.Google Scholar
  11. Harris, D. (2008). Special safeguards and agricultural trade liberalization. Rural Industries Research and Development Corporation: Australian Government. Publication no. 08/125.Google Scholar
  12. Hertel, T. W., Martin, W., Leister, A. M. (2010). Potential implications of a special safeguard mechanism in the World Trade Organization: The case of wheat. World Bank Economic Review, 1–30.Google Scholar
  13. Miller, R. E., & Blair, P. D. (2009). Input-output analysis: Foundations and extensions (2nd ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. OECD-FAO. (2015). Agricultural outlook 2015–2024. Available at: Access: 2015.
  15. Orcutt, G. H. (1950). Measurement of price elasticities in international trade. The Review of Economics and Statistics, 32(2), 117–132.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Pal, P., & Wadhwa, D. (2006). An analysis of the special safeguard mechanisms in the Doha Round of Negotiations. ICRIER Indian Council for Research on International Economic Relations. Working Paper, n. 189.Google Scholar
  17. United Nations. (2018). Comtrade Database. Available at: Get Data. Extract data. Accessed in: 2018.
  18. USITC—United States International Trade Commission. (2018). Trade DataWeb. Available at: Access: 2018.
  19. Wolfe, R. (2009). The special safeguard fiasco in the WTO: The perils of inadequate analysis and negotiation. World Trade Review, 8(4), 517–544.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. WTO—World Trade Organization. (2018a). Available at: Document, data and resources. Documents Online search facility. Accessed in: 2018a.
  21. WTO—World Trade Organization. (2018b). Available at: Document, data and resources. Statistics. Tariffs. Tariff Analysis Online Access in: 2018b.

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Cinthia Cabral da Costa
    • 1
    Email author
  • Heloisa Lee Burnquist
    • 2
  • Joaquim J. M. Guilhoto
    • 3
  1. 1.Embrapa InstrumentationSão CarlosBrazil
  2. 2.ESALQ/USPPiracicabaBrazil
  3. 3.Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD)ParisFrance

Personalised recommendations