IDEAS home Printed from
   My bibliography  Save this article

Antidumping Cases in the U.S. Chemical Industry: A Panel Data Approach


  • Krupp, Corinne


Factors motivating the decision to file an antidumping petition are analyzed with data from 1976-88 for the U.S. chemical industry. The incidence of antidumping filings is related to disaggregate levels of, and changes in, macroeconomic variables in a count model framework. Import penetration, number of employees, price-cost margins, the chemical production index, and dumping margins all significantly influence the filing decision, while average wages, the capital-to-shipments ratio, and the new capital expenditures-to-shipments ratio do not. There is also evidence that antidumping filings increased significantly following implementation of the Trade Agreements Act of 1979. Copyright 1994 by Blackwell Publishing Ltd.

Suggested Citation

  • Krupp, Corinne, 1994. "Antidumping Cases in the U.S. Chemical Industry: A Panel Data Approach," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 42(3), pages 299-311, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:bla:jindec:v:42:y:1994:i:3:p:299-311

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL:
    File Function: full text
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to JSTOR subscribers. See for details.

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

    References listed on IDEAS

    1. Jean Tirole, 1988. "The Theory of Industrial Organization," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262200716, January.
    2. Bolton, Patrick & Scharfstein, David S, 1990. "A Theory of Predation Based on Agency Problems in Financial Contracting," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 80(1), pages 93-106, March.
    3. Paul Beaudry & Michel Poitevin, 1994. "The Commitment Value of Contracts under Dynamic Renegotiation," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 25(4), pages 501-517, Winter.
    4. Mathias Dewatripont, 1988. "Commitment Through Renegotiation-Proof Contracts with Third Parties," Review of Economic Studies, Oxford University Press, vol. 55(3), pages 377-390.
    5. Mitchell A. Petersen & Raghuram G. Rajan, 1995. "The Effect of Credit Market Competition on Lending Relationships," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 110(2), pages 407-443.
    6. Bensaid, B. & Gary-Bobo, J., 1991. "On the commitment value of contracts under renegotiation constraints," CORE Discussion Papers 1991002, Université catholique de Louvain, Center for Operations Research and Econometrics (CORE).
    7. Mathias Dewatripont, 1988. "Commitment through renegotiation-proof contacts with third parties," ULB Institutional Repository 2013/9569, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
    8. Michael L. Katz, 1991. "Game-Playing Agents: Unobservable Contracts as Precommitments," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 22(3), pages 307-328, Autumn.
    9. Maskin, Eric & Tirole, Jean, 1992. "The Principal-Agent Relationship with an Informed Principal, II: Common Values," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 60(1), pages 1-42, January.
    10. Bolton, Patrick, 1990. "Renegotiation and the dynamics of contract design," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 34(2-3), pages 303-310, May.
    11. Caillaud, Bernard & Jullien, B & Picard, P, 1995. "Competing Vertical Structures: Precommitment and Renegotiation," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 63(3), pages 621-646, May.
    12. Bensaid, Bernard & Gary-Bobo, Robert J, 1993. "Commitment Value of Contracts under Renegotiation Constraints," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 61(6), pages 1423-1429, November.
    13. Douglas Gale & Martin Hellwig, 1985. "Incentive-Compatible Debt Contracts: The One-Period Problem," Review of Economic Studies, Oxford University Press, vol. 52(4), pages 647-663.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)


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

    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. Bruce A. Blonigen & Jee-Hyeong Park, 2004. "Dynamic Pricing in the Presence of Antidumping Policy: Theory and Evidence," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 94(1), pages 134-154, March.
    3. Hongjin Xiang & Feng Zongxian & Liu Xuyuan, 2011. "Research on early warning system for antidumping petition: based on panel data logit model," Journal of Chinese Economic and Foreign Trade Studies, Emerald Group Publishing, vol. 4(3), pages 158-172, October.
    4. 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.
    5. Nelson, Douglas, 2006. "The political economy of antidumping: A survey," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 22(3), pages 554-590, September.
    6. Jozef Konings & Hylke Vandenbussche, 2004. "Antidumping Protection and Markups of Domestic Firms: Evidence from Firm Level Data," LICOS Discussion Papers 14104, LICOS - Centre for Institutions and Economic Performance, KU Leuven.
    7. 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.
    8. Aradhna Aggarwal, 2003. "Patterns and determinants of anti-dumping: A worldwide perspective," Indian Council for Research on International Economic Relations, New Delhi Working Papers 113, Indian Council for Research on International Economic Relations, New Delhi, India.
    9. Chung, Jae W., 1999. "Insights Into Trade Protection under U.S. Trade Remedy Laws," Journal of Policy Modeling, Elsevier, vol. 21(3), pages 375-387, May.
    10. Donald Feaver & Kenneth Wilson, 2004. "The 'Market' for contingent protection," International Review of Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 18(4), pages 497-509.

    More about this item


    Access and download statistics


    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:bla:jindec:v:42:y:1994:i:3:p:299-311. 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: (Wiley-Blackwell Digital Licensing) or (Christopher F. Baum). General contact details of provider: .

    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.

    We have no references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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.

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.