IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ucp/jlstud/v34y2005p515-555.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Trade Remedies and World Trade Organization Dispute Settlement: Why Are So Few Challenged?

Author

Listed:
  • Chad P. Bown

Abstract

Antidumping and related trade remedies are the most popular policy instruments that many of the largest importing countries in the World Trade Organization (WTO) system use to restrict international trade. This paper empirically investigates the trade remedy and WTO dispute settlement interaction by focusing on determinants of WTO members’ decisions of whether to challenge U.S. trade remedies imposed between 1992 and 2003. While I confirm that the size of the economic market at stake and the capacity to retaliate under potentially authorized sanctions influence the decision to formally challenge a measure, I also find that if the negatively affected foreign industry has the capacity to directly retaliate through a reciprocal antidumping measure of its own, its government is less likely to pursue the case on its behalf at the WTO. I speculate that potential complainants may be avoiding WTO litigation in favor of pursuing reciprocal antidumping and hence “vigilante justice.”

Suggested Citation

  • Chad P. Bown, 2005. "Trade Remedies and World Trade Organization Dispute Settlement: Why Are So Few Challenged?," The Journal of Legal Studies, University of Chicago Press, vol. 34(2), pages 515-555, June.
  • Handle: RePEc:ucp:jlstud:v:34:y:2005:p:515-555
    DOI: 10.1086/429849
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/429849
    Download Restriction: Access to the online full text or PDF requires a subscription.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1086/429849?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version below or search for a different version of it.

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Maurizio Zanardi, 2004. "Anti‐dumping: What are the Numbers to Discuss at Doha?," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 27(3), pages 403-433, March.
    2. Thomas J. Prusa, 2021. "Why are so many antidumping petitions withdrawn?," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Thomas J Prusa (ed.), Economic Effects of Antidumping, chapter 2, pages 1-20, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    3. Tarullo, Daniel K., 2003. "Paved with good intentions: the dynamic effects of WTO review of anti-dumping action," World Trade Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 2(3), pages 373-393, November.
    4. Wendy L Hansen & Thomas J Prusa, 2021. "Cumulation and ITC decision-making: The sum of the parts is greater than the whole," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Thomas J Prusa (ed.), Economic Effects of Antidumping, chapter 9, pages 171-194, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    5. Bown, Chad P. & Crowley, Meredith A., 2007. "Trade deflection and trade depression," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 72(1), pages 176-201, May.
    6. Chad Bown, 2013. "How Different Are Safeguards from Antidumping? Evidence from US Trade Policies Toward Steel," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 42(4), pages 449-481, June.
    7. Bown, Chad P., 2002. "Why are safeguards under the WTO so unpopular?," World Trade Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 1(1), pages 47-62, March.
    8. Robert W. Staiger & Frank A. Wolak, 1994. "Measuring Industry-Specific Protection: Antidumping in the United States," Brookings Papers on Economic Activity, Economic Studies Program, The Brookings Institution, vol. 25(1994 Micr), pages 51-118.
    9. Irwin, Douglas A., 2003. "Causing problems? The WTO review of causation and injury attribution in US Section 201 cases," World Trade Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 2(3), pages 297-325, November.
    10. Kyle Bagwell & Robert W. Staiger, 2004. "The Economics of the World Trading System," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262524341, December.
    11. repec:wbk:wbpubs:12425 is not listed on IDEAS
    12. Heckman, James, 2013. "Sample selection bias as a specification error," Applied Econometrics, Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration (RANEPA), vol. 31(3), pages 129-137.
    13. 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.
    14. John Greenwald, 2003. "WTO Dispute Settlement: an Exercise in Trade Law Legislation?," Journal of International Economic Law, Oxford University Press, vol. 6(1), pages 113-124, March.
    15. Horn, Henrik & Mavroidis, Petros C & Nordström, Håkan, 1999. "Is The Use Of The WTO Dispute Settlement System Biased?," CEPR Discussion Papers 2340, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    16. Holmes, Peter & Rollo, Jim & Young, Alasdair R., 2003. "Emerging trends in WTO dispute settlement : back to the GATT?," Policy Research Working Paper Series 3133, The World Bank.
    17. Blonigen, Bruce A. & Bown, Chad P., 2003. "Antidumping and retaliation threats," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 60(2), pages 249-273, August.
    18. Thomas J. Prusa, 2021. "On the spread and impact of anti-dumping," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Thomas J Prusa (ed.), Economic Effects of Antidumping, chapter 4, pages 45-65, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    19. James P. Durling, 2003. "Deference, But Only When Due: WTO Review of Anti-Dumping Measures," Journal of International Economic Law, Oxford University Press, vol. 6(1), pages 125-153, March.
    20. Chad P. Bown, 2004. "On the Economic Success of GATT/WTO Dispute Settlement," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 86(3), pages 811-823, August.
    21. Van de Ven, Wynand P. M. M. & Van Praag, Bernard M. S., 1981. "The demand for deductibles in private health insurance : A probit model with sample selection," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 17(2), pages 229-252, November.
    22. World Bank, 2005. "World Development Indicators 2005," World Bank Publications - Books, The World Bank Group, number 12426, December.
    23. Chad P. Bown, 2005. "Participation in," The World Bank Economic Review, World Bank, vol. 19(2), pages 287-310.
    24. Bruce A. Blonigen & Thomas J. Prusa, 2001. "Antidumping," NBER Working Papers 8398, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    25. Martin, Alberto & Vergote, Wouter, 2004. "Antidumping: Welfare Enhancing Retaliation?," MPRA Paper 5416, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    26. Sykes, Alan O., 2003. "The safeguards mess: a critique of WTO jurisprudence," World Trade Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 2(3), pages 261-295, November.
    27. Kyle Bagwell & Robert W. Staiger, 2004. "Enforcement, Private Political Pressure and the GATT/WTO Escape Clause," NBER Working Papers 10987, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    28. Bown, Chad P. & Hoekman, Bernard & Ozden, Caglar, 2003. "The pattern of US antidumping: the path from initial filing to WTO dispute settlement," World Trade Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 2(3), pages 349-371, November.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Kokko, Ari & Gustavsson Tingvall, Patrik & Videnord, Josefin, 2017. "Which Antidumping Cases Reach the WTO?," Ratio Working Papers 286, The Ratio Institute.
    2. 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.
    3. Ostry, Jonathan D. & Furceri, Davide & Papageorgiou, Chris & Wibaux, Pauline, 2023. "Retaliation through Temporary Trade Barriers," CEPR Discussion Papers 17853, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    4. Kyle Bagwell & Chad P. Bown & Robert W. Staiger, 2016. "Is the WTO Passé?," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 54(4), pages 1125-1231, December.
    5. Martin, Alberto & Vergote, Wouter, 2008. "On the role of retaliation in trade agreements," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 76(1), pages 61-77, September.
    6. Robert W. Staiger & Alan O. Sykes, 2017. "How Important Can the Non-violation Clause Be for the GATT/WTO?," American Economic Journal: Microeconomics, American Economic Association, vol. 9(2), pages 149-187, May.
    7. Bown, Chad P. & Crowley, Meredith A., 2006. "Policy externalities: How US antidumping affects Japanese exports to the EU," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 22(3), pages 696-714, September.
    8. Fouad Pervez, 2015. "Waiting for election season," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 10(2), pages 265-303, June.
    9. Kara Reynolds & Tatiana Yanguas, 2018. "China – Cellulose Pulp: China’s Quest to Satisfy WTO Panels and the Appellate Body," RSCAS Working Papers 2018/59, European University Institute.
    10. Chad Bown & Kara Reynolds, 2015. "Trade flows and trade disputes," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 10(2), pages 145-177, June.
    11. Jason S. Davis, 2022. "Screening for losers: Trade institutions and information," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 17(1), pages 1-37, January.
    12. Hyo Won Lee, 2019. "Legalization and dispute settlement benefits: The case of the GATT/WTO," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 14(3), pages 479-509, September.
    13. Timothy Meyer, 2017. "Explaining energy disputes at the World Trade Organization," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 17(3), pages 391-410, June.
    14. Bown, Chad P., 2005. "Global antidumping database version 1.0," Policy Research Working Paper Series 3737, The World Bank.
    15. Bown, Chad, 2007. "Developing Countries and Enforcement of Trade Agreements: Why Dispute Settlement Is Not Enough," CEPR Discussion Papers 6459, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    16. Staiger, Robert & Bagwell, Kyle & Bown, Chad, 2015. "Is the WTO Passé?," CEPR Discussion Papers 10672, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    17. Klimenko, Mikhail & Ramey, Garey & Watson, Joel, 2008. "Recurrent trade agreements and the value of external enforcement," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 74(2), pages 475-499, March.
    18. Chad P. Bown & Thomas J. Prusa, 2021. "U.S. Anti-dumping: Much Ado about Zeroing," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Thomas J Prusa (ed.), Economic Effects of Antidumping, chapter 10, pages 195-232, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    19. Buzard, Kristy, 2017. "Self-enforcing trade agreements and lobbying," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 108(C), pages 226-242.
    20. James C. Hartigan & Hylke Vandenbussche, 2010. "Why does the WTO have an Antidumping Agreement?," LICOS Discussion Papers 25310, LICOS - Centre for Institutions and Economic Performance, KU Leuven.
    21. Bown, Chad P., 2006. "The World Trade Organization and antidumping in developing countries," Policy Research Working Paper Series 4014, The World Bank.
    22. Julian Schumacher & Christoph Trebesch & Henrik Enderlein, 2015. "What Explains Sovereign Debt Litigation?," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 58(3).
    23. Kara M. Reynolds & Chad P. Bown, 2014. "Trade Flows and Trade Disputes," Working Papers 2014-05, American University, Department of Economics.
    24. Bernauer, Thomas & Sattler, Thomas, 2010. "Gravitation or Discrimination? Determinants of Litigation in the World Trade Organization," Papers 116, World Trade Institute.
    25. 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.

    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. 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.
    2. Kokko, Ari & Gustavsson Tingvall, Patrik & Videnord, Josefin, 2017. "Which Antidumping Cases Reach the WTO?," Ratio Working Papers 286, The Ratio Institute.
    3. Hylke Vandenbussche & Maurizio Zanardi, 2008. "What explains the proliferation of antidumping laws? [‘Antidumping Laws in the US; Use and Welfare Consequences’]," Economic Policy, CEPR, CESifo, Sciences Po;CES;MSH, vol. 23(53), pages 94-138.
    4. Bown, Chad P., 2006. "The World Trade Organization and antidumping in developing countries," Policy Research Working Paper Series 4014, The World Bank.
    5. Bown, Chad P. & Crowley, Meredith A., 2006. "Policy externalities: How US antidumping affects Japanese exports to the EU," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 22(3), pages 696-714, September.
    6. 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.
    7. Bown, Chad, 2007. "Developing Countries and Enforcement of Trade Agreements: Why Dispute Settlement Is Not Enough," CEPR Discussion Papers 6459, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    8. 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.
    9. Chisik, Richard, 2012. "Trade disputes, quality choice, and economic integration," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 88(1), pages 47-61.
    10. Bown, Chad P., 2005. "Global antidumping database version 1.0," Policy Research Working Paper Series 3737, The World Bank.
    11. Nelson, Douglas, 2006. "The political economy of antidumping: A survey," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 22(3), pages 554-590, September.
    12. Meredith A. Crowley, 2001. "Antidumping policy under imperfect competition," Working Paper Series WP-01-21, Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago.
    13. Vandenbussche, Hylke & Zanardi, Maurizio, 2010. "The chilling trade effects of antidumping proliferation," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 54(6), pages 760-777, August.
    14. Chad P. Bown & Meredith A. Crowley, 2004. "China's export growth and U.S. trade policy," Working Paper Series WP-04-28, Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago.
    15. Brambilla, Irene & Porto, Guido & Tarozzi, Alessandro, 2009. "Adjusting to trade-policy changes in export markets : evidence from U.S. antidumping duties on Vietnamese catfish," Policy Research Working Paper Series 4990, The World Bank.
    16. 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.
    17. 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.
    18. Meredith A. Crowley, 2004. "Antidumping Policy Under Imperfect Competition: Theory and Evidence," Econometric Society 2004 North American Summer Meetings 443, Econometric Society.
    19. Martin, Alberto & Vergote, Wouter, 2008. "On the role of retaliation in trade agreements," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 76(1), pages 61-77, September.
    20. Avsar, Veysel, 2014. "Partisanship and antidumping," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 38(C), pages 190-195.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    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:ucp:jlstud:v:34:y:2005:p:515-555. 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: Journals Division (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.journals.uchicago.edu/JLS .

    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.