Advanced Search
MyIDEAS: Login

What explains the proliferation of antidumping laws

Contents:

Author Info

  • Hylke Vandenbussche
  • Maurizio Zanardi

Abstract

A recent phenomenon is the rapid spread of Antidumping (AD) laws mainly amongst developing countries ‘i.e. China, India, Mexico). Between 1980 and 2003 the number of countries in the world with an AD law more than doubled going from 36 to 97 countries. This proliferation of trade protection laws amongst developing countries is likely to have substantial implications for trade as recently shown by Vandenbussche and Zanardi (2007). The purpose of this paper is to use a duration analysis to investigate the determinants leading a country to adopt an AD law. We also analyze the related question of what explains the heterogeneity between countries that can be observed in terms of the time between adoption and their first use of the AD law. We find strong evidence that retaliatory motives are at the heart of the proliferation decision as countries that were targeted by AD actions of traditioal users in the past (i.e., US, EU) are much more likely to adopt an AD law. Also, our evidence suggests that past trade liberalization substantially increases the probability of a country to adopt an AD law. In addition, we find that the size of the chemicals sector and the extent of steel imports are positively correlated with the probability to adopt. The amount of inward FDI on the other hand has a clear negative effect on the probability to adopt. While short term macroeconomic factors like GDP growth and exchange rate volatility seem to matter less for adoption, asymmetric regional shocks and the development level of a country seem to raise the probability of starting to use an AD law. Our results are robust to several specifications of duration models.

(This abstract was borrowed from another version of this item.)

Download Info

To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
1. Check below under "Related research" whether another version of this item is available online.
2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
3. Perform a search for a similarly titled item that would be available.

Bibliographic Info

Paper provided by ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles in its series ULB Institutional Repository with number 2013/9819.

as in new window
Length:
Date of creation: 2008
Date of revision:
Publication status: Published in: Economic Policy (2008) v.23 n° 53,p.93-138
Handle: RePEc:ulb:ulbeco:2013/9819

Contact details of provider:
Postal: CP135, 50, avenue F.D. Roosevelt, 1050 Bruxelles
Web page: http://difusion.ulb.ac.be
More information through EDIRC

Related research

Keywords:

Other versions of this item:

Find related papers by JEL classification:

References

References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
as in new window
  1. Prusa, Thomas J., 1992. "Why are so many antidumping petitions withdrawn?," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 33(1-2), pages 1-20, August.
  2. Bruce A. Blonigen & Chad P. Bown, 2001. "Antidumping and Retaliation Threats," NBER Working Papers 8576, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  3. André Sapir & Joel Trachtman, 2008. "Subsidization, price suppression, and expertise: causation and precision in upland cotton," ULB Institutional Repository 2013/8092, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
  4. repec:cup:jechis:v:60:y:2008:i:02:p:335-360_00 is not listed on IDEAS
  5. Moore, M.O. & Zanardi, M., 2006. "Does Antidumping Use Contribute to Trade Liberalization? An Empirical Analysis," Discussion Paper 2006-61, Tilburg University, Center for Economic Research.
  6. Konings, Jozef & Springael, Linda & Vandenbussche, Hylke, 2001. "Import Diversion under European Antidumping Policy," CEPR Discussion Papers 2785, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
  7. Grossman, Gene M & Helpman, Elhanan, 1994. "Protection for Sale," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 84(4), pages 833-50, September.
  8. James Devault, 1996. "The welfare effects of U.S. antidumping duties," Open Economies Review, Springer, vol. 7(1), pages 19-33, January.
  9. Robert M. Feinberg & Kara M. Olson, 2004. "The Spread of Antidumping Regimes and the Role of Retaliation in Filings," International Trade 0411003, EconWPA.
  10. Thomas J. Prusa, 2001. "On the spread and impact of anti-dumping," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 34(3), pages 591-611, August.
  11. Maurizio Zanardi, 2004. "Anti-dumping: What are the Numbers to Discuss at Doha?," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 27(3), pages 403-433, 03.
  12. repec:att:wimass:9413 is not listed on IDEAS
  13. Thomas J. Prusa, 1996. "The Trade Effects of U.S. Antidumping Actions," Departmental Working Papers 199603, Rutgers University, Department of Economics.
  14. Bruce A. Blonigen & Thomas J. Prusa, 2001. "Antidumping," NBER Working Papers 8398, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  15. Michael M. Knetter & Thomas J. Prusa, 2000. "Macroeconomic Factors and Antidumping Filings: Evidence from Four Countries," NBER Working Papers 8010, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  16. Hillman, Arye L, 1982. "Declining Industries and Political-Support Protectionist Motives," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 72(5), pages 1180-87, December.
  17. Irwin, Douglas A., 2000. "Did Late-Nineteenth-Century U S. Tarriffs Promote Infant Industries? Evidence From the Tinplate Industry," The Journal of Economic History, Cambridge University Press, vol. 60(02), pages 335-360, June.
  18. Gallaway, Michael P. & Blonigen, Bruce A. & Flynn, Joseph E., 1999. "Welfare costs of the U.S. antidumping and countervailing duty laws," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 49(2), pages 211-244, December.
  19. Niels, Gunnar & ten Kate, Adriaan, 2006. "Antidumping policy in developing countries: Safety valve or obstacle to free trade?," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 22(3), pages 618-638, September.
  20. Michael O. Moore, 2007. "Antidumping Reform In The Wto: A Pessimistic Appraisal," Pacific Economic Review, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 12(3), pages 357-379, 08.
  21. Robert Staiger & Frank Wolak, 1994. "Measuring Industry Specific Protection: Antidumping in the United States," International Trade 9410004, EconWPA.
  22. Veugelers, Reinhilde & Vandenbussche, Hylke, 1999. "European anti-dumping policy and the profitability of national and international collusion," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 43(1), pages 1-28, January.
  23. Sarosh Kuruvilla & Subesh Das & Hyunji Kwon & Soonwon Kwon, 2002. "Trade Union Growth and Decline in Asia," British Journal of Industrial Relations, London School of Economics, vol. 40(3), pages 431-461, 09.
  24. Thomas Prusa & Susan Skeath, 2002. "The economic and strategic motives for antidumping filings," Review of World Economics (Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv), Springer, vol. 138(3), pages 389-413, September.
  25. Finger,J. Michael & Francis Ng & Wangchuk, Sonam, 2001. "Antidumping as safeguard policy," Policy Research Working Paper Series 2730, The World Bank.
  26. James E. Rauch, 1996. "Networks versus Markets in International Trade," NBER Working Papers 5617, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  27. Dougas A. Irwin, 1998. "Did Late Nineteenth Century U.S. Tariffs Promote Infant Industries? Evidence from the Tinplate Industry," NBER Working Papers 6835, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  28. Chad P. Bown, 2008. "The Wto And Antidumping In Developing Countries," Economics and Politics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 20(2), pages 255-288, 06.
  29. kishore gawande & pravin krishna, 2005. "The Political Economy of Trade Policy: Empirical Approaches," International Trade 0503003, EconWPA.
  30. Mario Cleves & William W. Gould & Roberto G. Gutierrez & Yulia Marchenko, 2010. "An Introduction to Survival Analysis Using Stata," Stata Press books, StataCorp LP, edition 3, number saus3, July.
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 in new window

Cited by:
  1. VANDENBUSSCHE, Hylke & ZANARDI, Maurizio, . "The chilling trade effects of antidumping proliferation," CORE Discussion Papers RP -2355, Université catholique de Louvain, Center for Operations Research and Econometrics (CORE).
  2. Alberto Martin & Wouter Vergote, 2005. "On the role of retaliation in trade agreements," Economics Working Papers 914, Department of Economics and Business, Universitat Pompeu Fabra, revised Apr 2008.
  3. Jozef Konings & Hylke Vandenbussche, 2009. "Antidumping Protection hurts Exporters:Firm-level evidence from France," LICOS Discussion Papers 24109, LICOS - Centre for Institutions and Economic Performance, KU Leuven.
  4. Christian Gormsen, 2011. "Antidumping with heterogeneous firms," Université Paris1 Panthéon-Sorbonne (Post-Print and Working Papers) hal-00663024, HAL.
  5. Jozef Konings & Hylke Vandenbussche, 2013. "Antidumping protection hurts exporters: firm-level evidence," Review of World Economics (Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv), Springer, vol. 149(2), pages 295-320, June.
  6. Bown, Chad P. & Tovar, Patricia, 2011. "Trade liberalization, antidumping, and safeguards: Evidence from India's tariff reform," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 96(1), pages 115-125, September.
  7. Dinlersoz, Emin & Dogan, Can, 2010. "Tariffs versus anti-dumping duties," International Review of Economics & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 19(3), pages 436-451, June.
  8. Kaz Miyagiwa & Aminata Sissoko, 2013. "The free-rider problem and the optimal duration of research joint ventures: theory and evidence from the Eureka program," Working Papers 1302, Florida International University, Department of Economics.

Lists

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

Statistics

Access and download statistics

Corrections

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ulb:ulbeco:2013/9819. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Benoit Pauwels).

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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

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