IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cje/issued/v42y2009i2p469-495.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Does antidumping use contribute to trade liberalization in developing countries?

Author

Listed:
  • Michael O. Moore
  • Maurizio Zanardi

Abstract

Some supporters of antidumping have argued that this procedure serves as a kind of `safety valve' for protectionist pressure. In this paper, we investigate whether there is empirical evidence that the use of antidumping actions has contributed to ongoing tariff reductions over the period 1988 to 2004 in a sample of 23 developing countries, some of which have become aggressive users of antidumping in recent years. The evidence is not supportive of the safety valve argument for these countries. Instead, evidence suggests that past use of antidumping may have led to less rather than more trade liberalization.

Suggested Citation

  • Michael O. Moore & Maurizio Zanardi, 2009. "Does antidumping use contribute to trade liberalization in developing countries?," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 42(2), pages 469-495, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:cje:issued:v:42:y:2009:i:2:p:469-495
    DOI: 10.1111/j.1540-5982.2009.01516.x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5982.2009.01516.x
    Download Restriction: access restricted to subscribers
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/j.1540-5982.2009.01516.x?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. Joseph Francois & Will Martin, 2003. "Formula Approaches for Market Access Negotiations," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 26(1), pages 1-28, January.
    2. Reinhart, Carmen, 2002. "A Modern History of Exchange Rate Arrangements: The Country Histories, 1946-2001," MPRA Paper 13191, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    3. 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.
    4. Vandenbussche, H. & Zanardi, M., 2006. "The Global Chilling Effects of Antidumping Proliferation," Other publications TiSEM 862b5259-3d37-48e6-b645-c, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    5. Carmen M. Reinhart & Kenneth S. Rogoff, 2004. "The Modern History of Exchange Rate Arrangements: A Reinterpretation," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 119(1), pages 1-48.
    6. Chad P. Bown, 2008. "The Wto And Antidumping In Developing Countries," Economics and Politics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 20(2), pages 255-288, June.
    7. Moore, Michael O. & Suranovic, Steven M., 1992. "Lobbying vs. administered protection : Endogenous industry choice and national welfare," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 32(3-4), pages 289-303, May.
    8. Gwartney, James & Lawson, Robert, 2003. "The concept and measurement of economic freedom," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 19(3), pages 405-430, September.
    9. Mary Amiti & Jozef Konings, 2007. "Trade Liberalization, Intermediate Inputs, and Productivity: Evidence from Indonesia," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 97(5), pages 1611-1638, December.
    10. 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..
    11. Liu, Meng-chun, 2002. "Determinants of Taiwan's Trade Liberalization: The Case of a Newly Industrialized Country," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 30(6), pages 975-989, June.
    12. Zanardi, Maurizio, 2006. "Antidumping: A problem in international trade," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 22(3), pages 591-617, September.
    13. 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..
    14. Finger, J. Michael & Nogues, Julio J., 2008. "Safeguards and antidumping in Latin American trade liberalization," Policy Research Working Paper Series 4680, The World Bank.
    15. 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.
    16. Vinaye D. Ancharaz, 2003. "Determinants of Trade Policy Reform in Sub-Saharan Africa," Journal of African Economies, Centre for the Study of African Economies, vol. 12(3), pages 417-443, September.
    17. Bruce A. Blonigen & Thomas J. Prusa, 2001. "Antidumping," NBER Working Papers 8398, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    18. Gunnar Niels & Joseph Francois, 2006. "Business Cycles, the Exchange Rate, and Demand for Antidumping Protection in Mexico," Review of Development Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 10(3), pages 388-399, August.
    19. Swagel, Phillip & Mankiw, N, 2005. "Antidumping: The Third Rail of Trade Policy," Scholarly Articles 2961701, Harvard University Department of Economics.
    20. 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.
    21. Robert M. Feinberg, 2005. "U.S. Antidumping Enforcement and Macroeconomic Indicators Revisited: Do Petitioners Learn?," Review of World Economics (Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv), Springer;Institut für Weltwirtschaft (Kiel Institute for the World Economy), vol. 141(4), pages 612-622, December.
    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. Moore, M.O. & Zanardi, M., 2006. "Does Antidumping Use Contribute to Trade Liberalization? An Empirical Analysis," Other publications TiSEM c0a19bf2-9849-4620-b109-e, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    2. 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.
    3. Miyagiwa, Kaz & Song, Huasheng & Vandenbussche, Hylke, 2016. "Size matters! Who is bashing whom in trade war?," International Review of Economics & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 45(C), pages 33-45.
    4. Avsar, Veysel, 2014. "Partisanship and antidumping," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 38(C), pages 190-195.
    5. Chad P. Bown, 2011. "Taking Stock of Antidumping, Safeguards and Countervailing Duties, 1990–2009," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 34(12), pages 1955-1998, December.
    6. 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.
    7. Kuenzel, David J., 2020. "WTO tariff commitments and temporary protection: Complements or substitutes?," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 121(C).
    8. Min Zhu & Thomas J. Prusa, 2023. "The impact of preferential trade agreements on the duration of antidumping protection," Canadian Journal of Economics/Revue canadienne d'économique, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 56(2), pages 553-592, May.
    9. Feinberg Robert M., 2011. "Antidumping as a Development Issue," Global Economy Journal, De Gruyter, vol. 11(3), pages 1-17, September.
    10. Vandenbussche, Hylke & Zanardi, Maurizio, 2010. "The chilling trade effects of antidumping proliferation," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 54(6), pages 760-777, August.
    11. Michael O. Moore, 2013. "Sanctuary Markets and Antidumping: An Empirical Analysis of U.S. Exporters," Working Papers 2013-3, The George Washington University, Institute for International Economic Policy.
    12. Ning Meng & Chris Milner & Huasheng Song, 2016. "Differences in the determinants and targeting of antidumping: China and India compared," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 48(43), pages 4083-4097, September.
    13. 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.
    14. Nelson, Douglas, 2006. "The political economy of antidumping: A survey," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 22(3), pages 554-590, September.
    15. Magdalene Silberberger & Anja Slany & Christian Soegaard & Frederik Stender, 2022. "The Aftermath of Anti-Dumping: Are Temporary Trade Barriers Really Temporary?," Open Economies Review, Springer, vol. 33(4), pages 677-704, September.
    16. 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.
    17. Peter Egger & Douglas Nelson, 2011. "How Bad Is Antidumping? Evidence from Panel Data," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 93(4), pages 1374-1390, November.
    18. 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.
    19. 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.
    20. Hylke Vandenbussche & Maurizio Zanardi, 2008. "What explains the proliferation of antidumping laws? [‘Antidumping Laws in the US; Use and Welfare Consequences’]," Economic Policy, CEPR;CES;MSH, vol. 23(53), pages 94-138.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • F13 - International Economics - - Trade - - - Trade Policy; International Trade Organizations
    • F14 - International Economics - - Trade - - - Empirical Studies of Trade
    • O19 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Economic Development - - - International Linkages to Development; Role of International Organizations

    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:cje:issued:v:42:y:2009:i:2:p:469-495. 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: Prof. Werner Antweiler (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ceaaaea.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.