Chlorine-washed chicken and hormone-treated beef

Trade protection through the use of tariffs is well covered in the news. It is also important to consider another form of trade protectionism, often referred to as ‘non-tariff’ barriers in the media, or alternatively known as administrative restraints on trade. This form of trade barrier involves the use of rules and regulations imposed on imported goods that act as a barrier to their entry into a country.

One of the accusations the US government has made is that the EU uses extensive administrative barriers to protect its farmers. There are two high-profile examples of this: hormone-treated beef and chlorine-washed chicken. US farmers use both of these farming methods, but they are not allowed in Europe.

The EU argues that importing chlorine-washed chicken could lead to lower animal welfare standards. By allowing poultry farmers in the US to wash their chickens in chlorine, which kills dangerous bacteria, these farmers do not have to achieve the same animal welfare standards as European poultry farmers, which gives US farmers a cost advantage over their EU counterparts. If chlorine-washed chicken could be imported into the EU from the US, the EU farmers could argue to use chlorine washing in their poultry farming methods, which would reduce EU animal welfare standards. 

A similar argument applies to hormone-treated beef. There are concerns about animal welfare, but also concerns about the possible health implications of people who eat hormone-treated beef. Some scientific studies show that eating hormone-treated beef is associated with poor health outcomes. 

One argument made by people who support the removal of trade restrictions on hormone-treated beef and chlorine-washed chicken is that consumers have the right to buy these products if they are clearly labelled in shops. This would mean cheaper food for households, particularly benefiting those on low incomes. The problem with this is that it would lead to a decrease in the consumption of EU beef and chicken, which would decrease the producer surplus of EU beef and poultry farmers. 

Allowing US-produced chlorine-washed chicken and hormone-treated beef to enter the EU without restriction could be part of a trade negotiation between the US and the EU. This might benefit EU steel producers and car manufacturers, who could receive lower tariffs when they export to the US.

All countries use administrative trade barriers to protect their domestic markets, and the reduction of these barriers could benefit the stakeholders, but their reduction also comes with certain costs. 

Possible questions for discussion

1. What are the different types of trade barriers?
2. How do administrative barriers work as a trade barrier?
3. How do chlorine-washed chicken and hormone-treated beef work as trade barriers?
4. Discuss the impact of using chlorine-washed chicken and hormone-treated beef as trade barriers on different stakeholders in the EU.