However, Brenton and Pinna (2000), who use highly disaggregated import data to
separate out changes in quality (defined as movements to higher value products) from
pure price movements within the bundle of imported footwear products, suggest there
was no change or even a decrease in the import prices of the skilled intensive machinery
industries relative to footwear. Thus, the traditional trade theory link from falling
relative prices to falling relative wages is difficult to support in the case of footwear, but
these authors do find support for falling relative import prices for textiles and for
clothing.
Imports used in the above exercise were measured at the border and hence the
calculated prices did not capture tariffs and the impact of non-tariff barriers. Thus, even
if border prices did not change, producer and consumer prices may have fallen if trade
barriers have been reduced. However, in the EU there has been little change in the
degree of tariff protection of footwear producers over the past 30 years. Footwear
remains a relatively highly protected industry. The average tariff on EU imports of
industrial products is now around 3 per cent whilst for leather footwear the tariff is 8 per
cent and for footwear with non-leather uppers the tariff is currently equal to 17 per cent.
In 1976 the tariff on finished leather footwear was 8 per cent whilst that on non-leather
footwear was 20 per cent, the latter has only declined since 1994.
In addition to customs duties, imports of footwear into EU countries have often been
subjected to non-tariffs measures including quantitative restrictions and voluntary
export restraints and anti-dumping measures. Prior to the creation of the Single Market
in the EU there were a number of bilateral trade restrictions on imports of footwear. For
example, the French and Italian footwear industries pleaded successfully with the
Commission to be allowed to impose VERs in the mid-1987s on imports of non-leather
footwear from Asian countries, specifically Taiwan and Korea. The Commission
justified this action on the basis that different types of footwear are substitutable in
demand and that the sharp rise in imports of synthetic and textile footwear contributed
directly to the fall of more than 70 million pairs in Community production of leather
footwear.2 The removal of border and customs formalities that was necessitated by the
Single Market implied that bilateral restrictions could no longer be maintained. Thus,
2 Commission of the European Communities, Official Journal no. 161/16, 27