IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ibn/ijbmjn/v13y2018i3p252.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Research on Factors Which Affect Anti-dumping Investigation: Based on Probit Model

Author

Listed:
  • Rou Li

Abstract

Using country-industry data, this study investigates factors which affect anti-dumping investigation via Probit model. We find that with the increase of trade, GDP per capita, population, exchange rate, accession to WTO and the occurrence of financial crisis, China more likely suffer from anti-dumping investigation，while with the increase of distance, China less likely suffer from anti-dumping investigation. Further, after divided the export into extensive margin and intensive margin, we find that the negative effect of trade on anti-dumping investigation mainly comes from the increase of intensive margin. The increases of extensive margin may reduce the chances of suffering from anti-dumping investigation.

Suggested Citation

  • Rou Li, 2018. "The Research on Factors Which Affect Anti-dumping Investigation: Based on Probit Model," International Journal of Business and Management, Canadian Center of Science and Education, vol. 13(3), pages 252-252, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:ibn:ijbmjn:v:13:y:2018:i:3:p:252
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.ccsenet.org/journal/index.php/ijbm/article/download/72957/40542
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: http://www.ccsenet.org/journal/index.php/ijbm/article/view/72957
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Thomas J. Prusa, 2005. "Anti‐dumping: A Growing Problem in International Trade," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 28(5), pages 683-700, May.
    2. Feinberg, Robert M. & Hirsch, Barry T., 1989. "Industry rent seeking and the filing of unfair trade complaints," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 7(3), pages 325-340.
    3. Dutt, Pushan & Mihov, Ilian & Van Zandt, Timothy, 2013. "The effect of WTO on the extensive and the intensive margins of trade," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 91(2), pages 204-219.
    4. Aggarwal, Aradhna, 2004. "Macro Economic Determinants of Antidumping: A Comparative Analysis of Developed and Developing Countries," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 32(6), pages 1043-1057, June.
    5. Michael M. Knetter & Thomas J. Prusa, 2021. "Macroeconomic factors and antidumping filings: evidence from four countries," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Thomas J Prusa (ed.), Economic Effects of Antidumping, chapter 8, pages 153-169, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    6. Mr. Douglas A. Irwin, 2005. "The Rise of U.S. Antidumping Activity in Historical Perspective," IMF Working Papers 2005/031, International Monetary Fund.
    7. Jai Mah, 2000. "Antidumping decisions and macroeconomic variables in the USA," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 32(13), pages 1701-1709.
    8. Douglas A. Irwin, 2005. "The Rise of US Anti‐dumping Activity in Historical Perspective," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 28(5), pages 651-668, May.
    9. David Hummels & Peter J. Klenow, 2005. "The Variety and Quality of a Nation's Exports," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 95(3), pages 704-723, June.
    10. Robert M. Feinberg & Kara M. Reynolds, 2007. "Tariff Liberalisation and Increased Administrative Protection: Is There a Quid Pro Quo?," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 30(6), pages 948-961, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Kokko, Ari & Gustavsson Tingvall, Patrik & Videnord, Josefin, 2017. "Which Antidumping Cases Reach the WTO?," Ratio Working Papers 286, The Ratio Institute.
    2. Yi Liu & Ning Zhang, 2015. "Sustainability of Trade Liberalization and Antidumping: Evidence from Mexico’s Trade Liberalization toward China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(9), pages 1-20, August.
    3. Koichi Kagitani & Yasunobu Tomoda, 2022. "Foreign macroeconomic conditions and antidumping actions: evidence from the USA," International Economics and Economic Policy, Springer, vol. 19(4), pages 863-883, October.
    4. Neha Bhardwaj Upadhayay, 2020. "Uncovering the proliferation of contingent protection through channels of retaliation, gender and development assistance," Erudite Ph.D Dissertations, Erudite, number ph20-02 edited by Julie Lochard & Catherine Bros, February.
    5. Eunmi Kim & Minho Kim, 2007. "Determinants of US antidumping decisions: four perspectives of international trade policymaking," Applied Economics Letters, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 14(12), pages 893-897.
    6. Durling, James P. & Prusa, Thomas J., 2006. "The trade effects associated with an antidumping epidemic: The hot-rolled steel market, 1996-2001," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 22(3), pages 675-695, September.
    7. Robert M. Feinberg & Kara M. Reynolds, 2006. "The Spread of Antidumping Regimes and the Role of Retaliation in Filings," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 72(4), pages 877-890, April.
    8. Yi Liu & Jun Deng, 2016. "Antidumping under International Fragmentation: Evidence from China," Review of Development Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 20(1), pages 306-316, February.
    9. Michael Moore, 2015. "Sanctuary markets and antidumping: an empirical analysis of U.S. exporters," Review of World Economics (Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv), Springer;Institut für Weltwirtschaft (Kiel Institute for the World Economy), vol. 151(2), pages 309-328, May.
    10. Bown, Chad P., 2009. "The global resort to antidumping, safeguards, and other trade remedies amidst the economic crisis," Policy Research Working Paper Series 5051, The World Bank.
    11. Feinberg Robert M., 2011. "Antidumping as a Development Issue," Global Economy Journal, De Gruyter, vol. 11(3), pages 1-17, September.
    12. Mustapha Sadni Jallab & Monnet Benoît Patrick Gbakou & René Sandretto, 2008. "L'influence des facteurs macroéconomiques sur les ouvertures d'enquêtes antidumping : le cas de l'Union Européenne et des États-Unis," Revue d'économie politique, Dalloz, vol. 118(4), pages 573-600.
    13. Ray-Yun Chang & Hong Hwang & Cheng-Hau Peng, 2020. "Antidumping protection and welfare in a differentiated duopoly," The Japanese Economic Review, Springer, vol. 71(3), pages 421-446, July.
    14. Li, Yue & Li, Wanli, 2022. "Are innovative exporters vulnerable to anti-dumping investigations?," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 112(C).
    15. Thomas J. Prusa & Robert Teh, 2010. "Protection Reduction and Diversion: PTAs and the Incidence of Antidumping Disputes," NBER Working Papers 16276, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    16. Kara M. Reynolds, 2009. "From Agreement to Application: An Analysis of Determinations under the WTO Antidumping Agreement," Review of International Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 17(5), pages 969-985, November.
    17. Robert Feinberg, 2013. "Antidumping and Industrial Organization," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 42(4), pages 365-368, June.
    18. Michael O. Moore & Maurizio Zanardi, 2011. "Trade Liberalization and Antidumping: Is There a Substitution Effect?," Review of Development Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 15(4), pages 601-619, November.
    19. Tobias D. Ketterer, 2016. "EU Anti-dumping and Tariff Cuts: Trade Policy Substitution?," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 39(5), pages 576-596, May.
    20. Chad P. Bown, 2010. "China's WTO Entry: Antidumping, Safeguards, and Dispute Settlement," NBER Chapters, in: China's Growing Role in World Trade, pages 281-337, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • R00 - Urban, Rural, Regional, Real Estate, and Transportation Economics - - General - - - General
    • Z0 - Other Special Topics - - General

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ibn:ijbmjn:v:13:y:2018:i:3:p:252. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Canadian Center of Science and Education (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/cepflch.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.