Welfare impacts of the 2006 United States – Canada Softwood Lumber Agreement
Abstract
In this paper, we evaluate the market and welfare effects of the 2006 United States (U.S.) – Canada Softwood Lumber Agreement (SLA 2006) based on a U.S. import demand model for Canadian softwood lumber. We find that SLA 2006 reduces the U.S. lumber imports from Canada by 7.78% in the months when export taxes took effect. The welfare analysis based on a partial equilibrium framework shows that U.S. lumber producers gained $1.6 billion and U.S. consumers lost $2.3 billion in 9 years under SLA 2006.
Résumé
Dans cet article, nous évaluons les effets de marché et les impacts sociaux de l’Accord canado–américain sur le bois d’œuvre résineux de 2006 sur la base d’un modèle de demande d’importation de bois d’œuvre résineux canadien. Cet accord a réduit de 7,78 % les importations américaines de bois d’œuvre en provenance du Canada dans les mois qui ont suivi l’entrée en vigueur des taxes à l’exportation. L’analyse des impacts sociaux dans un cadre d’équilibre partiel montre que les producteurs américains de bois d’œuvre ont réalisé des gains de 1,6 G $ et que les consommateurs américains ont perdu 2,3 G $ sur neuf ans dans le cadre de cet accord. [Traduit par la Rédaction]
Get full access to this article
View all available purchase options and get full access to this article.
References
Adams D.M. 2003. Market and resource impacts of a Canadian lumber tariff. J. For. 101: 48–52.
Baek J. 2007. The J-curve effect and the US–Canada forest products trade. J. For. Econ. 13: 245–258.
Baek J. 2011. Dynamics of the US–Canada softwood lumber trade: market and welfare effects of the 2006 Softwood Lumber Agreement. The Estey Centre Journal of International Law Trade Policy, 12(2): 69–81.
Baek J. 2012. The long-run determinants of U.S. lumber imported from Canada revisited. For. Pol. Econ. 14: 69–73.
Baek J. and Yin R. 2006. U.S.–Canada softwood lumber trade: measuring the market and welfare impacts of restrictions. For. Sci. 52(4): 390–400.
B.C. Ministry of Forest, Mines and Lands. 2010. The State of British Columbia’s Forests. 3rd edition. Forest Practices and Investment Branch, Victoria, BC. Available from https://www.for.gov.bc.ca/hfp/sof/2010/SOF_2010_Web.pdf [accessed 1 June 2015].
BC Timber Sales. 2015. BC timber sales. Available from www.for.gov.bc.ca/bcts/ [accessed 1 July 2015].
Boyd R. and Krutilla K. 1987. The welfare impacts of US trade restrictions against the Canadian softwood lumber industry: a spatial equilibrium analysis. Can. J. Econ. 20(1): 17–35.
Buongiorno J., Chou J.J., and Stone R.N. 1979. A monthly model of the United States demand for softwood lumber imports. For. Sci. 25(4): 641–655.
Buongiorno J., Chavas J.-P., and Uusivouri J. 1988. Exchange rates, Canadian lumber imports and United States prices: a time-series analysis. Can. J. For. Res. 18(12): 1587–1594.
Chen N.-J., Ames G.C.W., and Hammett L. 1988. Implications of a tariff on imported Canadian softwood lumber. Can. J. Agric. Econ. 36: 69–81.
Christensen, N. 2015. Branching out: preparing for life without a softwood lumber agreement. Canada West Foundation. Available from http://cwf.ca/publications-1/branching-out-preparing-for-life-without-a-softwood-lumber-agreement [accessed 1 October 2015].
Devadoss S. 2006. Is there an end to US–Canadian softwood lumber disputes? J. Agric. Appl. Econ. 38(1): 137–153.
Devadoss S., Aguiar A.H., Shook S.R., and Araji J. 2005. A spatial equilibrium analysis of US–Canadian disputes on the world softwood lumber market. Can. J. Agric. Econ. 53: 177–192.
Elliott G., Rothenberg T.J., and Stock J.H. 1996. Efficient tests for an autoregressive unit root. Econometrica, 64: 813–836.
Farnia F., Frayret J.-M., Beaudry C., and Lebel L. 2015. Time-based combinatorial auction for timber allocation and delivery coordination. For. Pol. Econ. 50: 143–152.
Foreign Affairs, Trade and Development Canada (FATDC). 2006–2015. Softwood lumber exports report (various monthly issues). Trade Controls Bureau. Available from http://www.international.gc.ca/controls-controles/softwood-bois_oeuvre/index.aspx?lang=eng [accessed 1 October 2015].
Giles, D. 2011. Cointegration at the hips. Econometrics Beat: Dave Giles’ blog. Available from http://davegiles.blogspot.com/2011/05/cointegrated-at-hips.html [accessed 2 June 2016].
Greene, W. 2011. Econometric analysis. 7th edition. Pearson Education Ltd.
Jennings S., Adamowicz W., and Constantino L. 1991. The Canadian lumber industry and the macroeconomy: a vector autoregression analysis. Can. J. For. Res. 21(3): 288–299.
Johansen S. 1988. Statistical analysis of cointegration vectors. J. Econ. Dynam. Cont. 12: 231–254.
Johansen, S. 1995. Likelihood based inference in cointegrated vector autoregressive models. Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK.
Johansen S., Mosconi R., and Nielsen R. 2000. Cointegration analysis in the presence of structural breaks in the deterministic trend. Econometrics J. 3: 216–249.
Joyeux, R. 2007. How to deal with structural breaks in practical cointegration analysis? In Cointegration for the applied economist. 2nd edition. Edited by B. Rao. Palgrave Macmillan, New York. pp. 195–221.
Jung C. and Doroodian K. 1994. The law of one price for US softwood lumber: a multivariate cointegration test. For. Sci. 40(4): 595–600.
Kinnucan H.W. and Zhang D. 2004. Incidence of the 1996 Canada–U.S. Softwood Lumber Agreement and the optimal export tax. Can. J. Agric. Econ. 52: 73–88.
Lindsey, B.L., Groombridge, M.A., and Loungani, P. 2000. Nailing the homeowner. The economic impact of trade protection of the softwood lumber industry. Center for Trade Policy Studies Rep. No. 11, CATO Institute, Washington, DC.
Mogus A., Stennes B., and van Kooten G.C. 2006. Canada–US softwood lumber trade revisited: substitution bias in the context of a spatial price equilibrium framework. For. Sci. 52(4): 411–421.
Myneni G., Dorfman J.H., and Ames G.C.W. 1994. Welfare impacts of the Canada–U.S. softwood lumber trade dispute: beggar thy consumer trade policy. Can. J. Agric. Econ. 42: 261–271.
Nagubadi R.V. and Zhang D. 2013. US imports for Canadian softwood lumber in the context of trade dispute: a cointegration approach. For. Sci. 59(5): 517–523.
Nagubadi R.V., Zhang D., Prestemon J.P., and Wear D.N. 2004. Softwood lumber products in the United States: substitutes, complements, or unrelated? For. Sci. 50(4): 416–426.
Nanang D.M. 2000. A multivariate cointegration test of the law of one price for Canadian softwood lumber markets. For. Pol. Econ. 1: 347–355.
Natural Resources Canada. 2015. Mountain pine beetle (factsheet). Available from www.nrcan.gc.ca/forests/insects-diseases/13397 [accessed 1 October 2015].
Niquidet K. 2008. Revitalized? An event study of forest policy reform in British Columbia. J. For. Econ. 14(4): 227–241.
Parajuli R. and Chang S.J. 2015. The softwood sawtimber stumpage market in Louisiana: market dynamics, structural break, and vector error correction model. For. Sci. 61(5): 904–913.
Parajuli R., Chang S.J., and Hill R.C. 2015. How effective is the United States–Canada Softwood Lumber Agreement 2006? An econometric study. For. Sci. 61(6): 1041–1049.
Perron P. 1989. The great crash, the oil prices shock and the unit root hypothesis. Econometrica, 57: 1361–1401.
Prestemon J.P. and Holmes T.P. 2000. Timber price dynamics following a natural catastrophe. Am. J. Agric. Econ. 82: 145–160.
Random Lengths. 2015. Forest products market, prices, and statistics. Eugene, Oregon.
Shahi C., Kant S., and Yang F. 2006. The law of one price in the North American softwood lumber markets. For. Sci. 52(4): 353–366.
Softwood Lumber Agreement (SLA). 2006. Softwood Lumber Agreement between the Government of Canada and the Government of the United States of America: legal text. Available from http://www.treaty-accord.gc.ca/text-texte.aspx?id=105072&lang=eng [accessed 1 October 2015].
Song N., Chang S.J., and Aguilar F.X. 2011. U.S. softwood lumber demand and supply estimation using cointegration in dynamic equations. J. For. Econ. 17: 19–33.
Statistics Canada. 2015. CANSIM — Canadian Socioeconomic Database from Statistics Canada. Available from http://www.statcan.gc.ca/ [accessed 1 October 2015].
Sun C. and Zhang D. 2003. The effects of exchange rate volatility on U.S. forest commodities exports. For. Sci. 49(5): 807–814.
Taylor, R. 2009. B.C. sawmill closures “no surprise”. In Logging & Sawmilling Journal. Available from http://forestnet.com/LSJissues/nov2013/closures.php [accessed 1 October 2015].
Toppinen A. and Toivonen R. 1998. Roundwood market integration in Finland: a multivariate cointegration analysis. J. For. Econ. 4(3): 241–265.
U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (US BLS). 2015. Overview of BLS statistics on inflation and prices. Available from www.bls.gov/bls/inflation.htm [accessed 1 October 2015].
US Census Bureau. 2015. New residential construction, new privately owned housing units started. Available from http://www.census.gov/construction/nrc/historical_data/index.html [accessed 1 October 2015].
USDA Economic Research Service (US ERS). 2015. United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service. Available from http://www.ers.usda.gov/data-products/agricultural-exchange-rate-data-set.aspx [accessed 1 October 2015].
van Kooten G.C. 2002. Economic analysis of the Canada–United States softwood lumber dispute: playing the quota game. For. Sci. 48(4): 712–721.
Wear D.N. and Lee K.J. 1993. US policy and Canadian lumber: effects of the 1986 memorandum of understanding. For. Sci. 39(4): 799–815.
Wood Markets. 2015. Canada & U.S. Top 20 Lumber Producers’ Annual Ranking: 2014. News release. International Wood Markets Group Inc. BC Canada. Available from https://www.woodmarkets.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/15-03-26-Press-Release-Top-20-US-Canada-Lbr-Producers-RT2.pdf [accessed 1 October 2015].
Zhang D. 2001. Welfare impacts of the 1996 United States–Canada Softwood Lumber (trade) Agreement. Can. J. For. Res. 31(11): 1958–1967.
Zhang D. 2006. Welfare impacts of the 1996 United States–Canada softwood lumber agreement: an update. Can. J. For. Res. 36(1): 255–261.
Zhang, D. 2007. The softwood lumber war: politics, economics, and the long US–Canadian trade dispute. RFF Press, DC.
Zivot E. and Andrews D.W.K. 1992. Further evidence on the great crash, the oil-price shock, and the unit-root hypothesis. J. Bus. Econ. Stat. 10(3): 251–270.
Information & Authors
Information
Published In
Canadian Journal of Forest Research
Volume 46 • Number 7 • July 2016
Pages: 950 - 958
History
Received: 25 March 2016
Accepted: 18 May 2016
Published online: 24 May 2016
Copyright
© 2016.
Key Words
Mots-clés
Authors
Metrics & Citations
Metrics
Other Metrics
Citations
Cite As
Rajan Parajuli and Daowei Zhang. 2016. Welfare impacts of the 2006 United States – Canada Softwood Lumber Agreement. Canadian Journal of Forest Research.
46(7): 950-958. https://doi.org/10.1139/cjfr-2016-0141
Export Citations
If you have the appropriate software installed, you can download article citation data to the citation manager of your choice. Simply select your manager software from the list below and click Download.
Cited by
1. An econometric study of Oregon's log and lumber markets: Estimation of price elasticities using two approaches
2. Effects of Maize Importation on the Economic Welfare of Maize Producers and Consumers in Kenya: A Partial Equilibrium Model Approach
3. Wood pellets versus pulp and paper: Quantifying the impacts of wood pellets on the pulpwood markets in the southeastern United States
4. Do protectionist trade policies integrate domestic markets? Evidence from the Canada-U.S. softwood lumber dispute
5. US Import Demand for Softwood Plywood: A Cointegration Approach
6. Spatial and cross-product price linkages in the Brazilian pine timber markets
7. Tariff and US Paper Products Trade
8. Province specific impacts of the 2006 United States-Canada Softwood Lumber Agreement: A seemingly unrelated regression approach
9. Potential Effects of US Protectionism and Trade Wars on the Global Forest Sector
10. What's next in the U.S.-Canada softwood lumber dispute? An economic analysis of restrictive trade policy measures
11. An assessment of gains and losses from international trade in the forest sector
12. Cointegration in China's log import demand: Price endogeneity and structural change
13. An Econometric Study of the Hardwood Sawtimber Stumpage Market in Louisiana
14. North American Trade Policy for Agriculture and Forestry: Can Economics Trump Politics?
15. Impact of inefficient quota allocation under the Canada-U.S. softwood lumber dispute: A calibrated mixed complementarity approach
16. The United States-Canada softwood lumber trade: An actual versus optimal export tax
17. Policy impacts estimates are sensitive to data selection in empirical analysis: evidence from the United States – Canada softwood lumber trade dispute
View Options
Get Access
Login options
Check if you access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.