IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/
MyIDEAS: Login to save this article or follow this journal

The chilling trade effects of antidumping proliferation

  • Vandenbussche, Hylke
  • Zanardi, Maurizio

Advocates of antidumping (AD) laws downplay their negative effects by arguing that the trade flows that are subject to AD are small and their distortions negligible. But while the adverse effect of AD on product-level trade has long been established, the question remains whether there are trade effects at the aggregate level. The recent proliferation wave of AD laws and their use provides us with a unique policy change to estimate the true trade effects of adopting and enforcing AD laws. For this purpose, we estimate the effect of AD on bilateral trade flows between the "new adopters" of AD laws and their trade partners. Using a gravity model of annual observations (1980-2000) our estimates show that AD has trade chilling effects on aggregate import volumes but the impacts are heterogeneous across sectors. We find that new tough users experience a chilling of their aggregate imports of 14 billion US$ a year (or 5.9%) as a result of AD measures. For some countries like Mexico and India, the dampening effects of AD laws on trade flows are found to substantially offset the increase in trade volumes derived from trade liberalization.

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/B6V64-4Y6S7PM-3/2/acc7bcdb415537362a7bc982fce8a1b1
Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.

Article provided by Elsevier in its journal European Economic Review.

Volume (Year): 54 (2010)
Issue (Month): 6 (August)
Pages: 760-777

as
in new window

Handle: RePEc:eee:eecrev:v:54:y:2010:i:6:p:760-777
Contact details of provider: Web page: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/eer

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. Anne-Célia Disdier & Keith Head, 2008. "The Puzzling Persistence of the Distance Effect on Bilateral Trade," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 90(1), pages 37-48, February.
  2. André Sapir & Henrik H. Horn & Petros Mavroidis, 2009. "Beyond the WTO ?An Anatomy of EU and US Preferential Trade Agreements," ULB Institutional Repository 2013/174283, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
  3. Maurizio Zanardi, 2004. "Antidumping law as a collusive device," ULB Institutional Repository 2013/9833, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
  4. Haaland, Jan I. & Wooton, Ian, 1995. "Reciprocal Anti-Dumping and the Location of Firms," CEPR Discussion Papers 1272, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
  5. Prusa, Thomas J., 1992. "Why are so many antidumping petitions withdrawn?," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 33(1-2), pages 1-20, August.
  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. Hylke Vandenbussche & Maurizio Zanardi, 2008. "What explains the proliferation of antidumping laws?," ULB Institutional Repository 2013/169679, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
  8. Thomas J. Prusa, 1996. "The Trade Effects of U.S. Antidumping Actions," Departmental Working Papers 199603, Rutgers University, Department of Economics.
  9. Joao Santos Silva & Silvana Tenreyro, 2005. "The Log of Gravity," CEP Discussion Papers dp0701, Centre for Economic Performance, LSE.
  10. Chad Bown & Meredith Crowley, 2003. "Trade deflection and trade depression," Working Paper Series WP-03-26, Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago.
  11. Blonigen, Bruce A. & Bown, Chad P., 2003. "Antidumping and retaliation threats," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 60(2), pages 249-273, August.
  12. Vandenbussche, Hylke & Veugelers, Reinhilde, 1996. "European Anti-dumping Policy and the Profitability of National and International Collusion," CEPR Discussion Papers 1469, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
  13. 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.
  14. Bown, Chad P., 2005. "Global antidumping database version 1.0," Policy Research Working Paper Series 3737, The World Bank.
  15. 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.
  16. 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.
  17. 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.
  18. Baier, Scott L. & Bergstrand, Jeffrey H., 2004. "Economic determinants of free trade agreements," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 64(1), pages 29-63, October.
  19. Blonigen, Bruce A. & Ohno, Yuka, 1998. "Endogenous protection, foreign direct investment and protection-building trade," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 46(2), pages 205-227, December.
  20. Bruce A. Blonigen, 2000. "Tariff-Jumping Antidumping Duties," NBER Working Papers 7776, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  21. 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, 06.
  22. Andrew K. Rose, 2002. "Do We Really Know that the WTO Increases Trade?," NBER Working Papers 9273, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  23. Axel Dreher, 2005. "Does Globalization Affect Growth? Evidence from a new Index of Globalization," TWI Research Paper Series 6, Thurgauer Wirtschaftsinstitut, Universit�t Konstanz.
  24. Elhanan Helpman & Marc Melitz & Yona Rubinstein, 2007. "Estimating Trade Flows: Trading Partners and Trading Volumes," NBER Working Papers 12927, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  25. Robert W. Staiger & Frank A. Wolak, 1990. "The Effect of Domestic Antidumping Law in the Presence of Foreign Monopoly," NBER Working Papers 3254, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  26. 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.
  27. Bagwell, Kyle & Staiger, Robert W, 1990. "A Theory of Managed Trade," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 80(4), pages 779-95, September.
  28. 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.
  29. Robert M. Feinberg & Seth Kaplan, 1993. "Fishing Downstream: The Political Economy of Effective Administered Protection," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 26(1), pages 150-58, February.
  30. Kara Reynolds, 2006. "Dumping on U.S. Farmers: Are There Biases in Global Antidumping Regulations?," Working Papers 2006-03, American University, Department of Economics.
  31. Subramanian, Arvind & Wei, Shang-Jin, 2005. "The WTO Promotes Trade, Strongly But Unevenly," CEPR Discussion Papers 5122, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
  32. Douglas Staiger & James H. Stock, 1994. "Instrumental Variables Regression with Weak Instruments," NBER Technical Working Papers 0151, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  33. Arvind Subramanian & Gunnar Jonsson, 2000. "Dynamic Gains From Trade; Evidence From South Africa," IMF Working Papers 00/45, International Monetary Fund.
  34. Robert Staiger & Frank Wolak, 1994. "Measuring Industry Specific Protection: Antidumping in the United States," International Trade 9410004, EconWPA.
  35. Bagwell,K. & Staiger,R.W., 1998. "An economic theory of GATT," Working papers 15, Wisconsin Madison - Social Systems.
  36. 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.
  37. Bruce A. Blonigen, 2004. "Working the System: Firm Learning and the Antidumping Process," NBER Working Papers 10783, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  38. Baier, Scott L. & Bergstrand, Jeffrey H., 2007. "Do free trade agreements actually increase members' international trade?," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 71(1), pages 72-95, March.
  39. Anderson, James E, 1979. "A Theoretical Foundation for the Gravity Equation," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 69(1), pages 106-16, March.
  40. Bergstrand, Jeffrey H, 1985. "The Gravity Equation in International Trade: Some Microeconomic Foundations and Empirical Evidence," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 67(3), pages 474-81, August.
  41. James E. Anderson & Eric van Wincoop, 2003. "Gravity with Gravitas: A Solution to the Border Puzzle," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 93(1), pages 170-192, March.
  42. James Devault, 1996. "The welfare effects of U.S. antidumping duties," Open Economies Review, Springer, vol. 7(1), pages 19-33, January.
  43. Maurizio Zanardi, 2004. "Antidumping: what are the numbers to discuss at Doha?," ULB Institutional Repository 2013/9831, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
  44. Barry Eichengreen & Douglas A. Irwin, 1998. "The Role of History in Bilateral Trade Flows," NBER Chapters, in: The Regionalization of the World Economy, pages 33-62 National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  45. Sourafel Girma & David Greenaway & Katherine Wakelin, 2002. "Does antidumping stimulate FDI? Evidence from Japanese firms in the UK," Review of World Economics (Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv), Springer, vol. 138(3), pages 414-436, September.
  46. 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.
  47. 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.
  48. Krupp, Corinne M. & Skeath, Susan, 2002. "Evidence on the upstream and downstream impacts of antidumping cases," The North American Journal of Economics and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 13(2), pages 163-178, August.
  49. Xiangming Li, 2004. "Trade Liberalization and Real Exchange Rate Movement," IMF Staff Papers, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 51(3), pages 553-584, November.
  50. Reitzes, James D, 1993. "Antidumping Policy," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 34(4), pages 745-63, November.
Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

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

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:eecrev:v:54:y:2010:i:6:p:760-777. 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: (Zhang, Lei)

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.

This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.