IDEAS home Printed from
MyIDEAS: Login to save this article or follow this journal

How do exporters respond to antidumping investigations?

  • Lu, Yi
  • Tao, Zhigang
  • Zhang, Yan

Using monthly transaction data covering all Chinese exporters over the 2000–2006 period, we investigate how Chinese exporters respond to U.S. antidumping investigations. We find that antidumping investigations cause a substantial decrease in the total export volume at the HS-6 digit product level, and that this trade-dampening effect is due to a significant decrease in the number of exporters, yet a modest decrease in the export volume per surviving exporter. We also find that the bulk of the decrease in the number of exporters is exerted by less productive exporters, by direct exporters as opposed to trade intermediaries, and by single-product direct exporters as opposed to their multi-product counterparts. Combined with the existing studies on the effects that antidumping investigations have on protected firms, our study helps piece together a complete picture of the effects of antidumping investigations.

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:
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 Journal of International Economics.

Volume (Year): 91 (2013)
Issue (Month): 2 ()
Pages: 290-300

in new window

Handle: RePEc:eee:inecon:v:91:y:2013:i:2:p:290-300
Contact details of provider: Web page:

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. Pierce, Justin R. & Schott, Peter K., 2013. "The Surprisingly Swift Decline of U.S. Manufacturing Employment," Finance and Economics Discussion Series 2014-4, Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (U.S.).
  2. Maurizio Zanardi, 2006. "Antidumping: a problem in international trade," ULB Institutional Repository 2013/9821, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
  3. Peter Egger & Douglas Nelson, . "How Bad is Antidumping?: Evidence from Panel Data," Discussion Papers 07/17, University of Nottingham, GEP.
  4. Ahn, JaeBin & Khandelwal, Amit K. & Wei, Shang-Jin, 2011. "The role of intermediaries in facilitating trade," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 84(1), pages 73-85, May.
  5. David Weinstein & Christian Broda, 2004. "Globalization and the Gains from Variety," Econometric Society 2004 North American Summer Meetings 508, Econometric Society.
  6. Marc J. Melitz & Gianmarco I.P. Ottaviano, 2005. "Market Size, Trade, and Productivity," Development Working Papers 201, Centro Studi Luca d\'Agliano, University of Milano.
  7. Bruce A. Blonigen & Chad P. Bown, 2001. "Antidumping and Retaliation Threats," NBER Working Papers 8576, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  8. Konings, Jozef & Vandenbussche, Hylke, 2008. "Heterogeneous responses of firms to trade protection," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 76(2), pages 371-383, December.
  9. Bruce A. Blonigen & Thomas J. Prusa, 2001. "Antidumping," NBER Working Papers 8398, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  10. Staiger, R.W. & Wolak, F.A., 1994. "Measuring Industry Specific Protection: Antidumpting in the United States," Working papers 9413, Wisconsin Madison - Social Systems.
  11. Bruce A. Blonigen & Jee-Hyeong Park, 2000. "Dynamic Pricing in the Presence of Antidumping Policy: Theory and Evidence," University of Oregon Economics Department Working Papers 2001-1, University of Oregon Economics Department, revised 01 Jul 2001.
  12. Justin R. Pierce, 2011. "Plant-level responses to antidumping duties: evidence from U.S. manufacturers," Finance and Economics Discussion Series 2011-40, Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (U.S.).
  13. Guido W. Imbens & Jeffrey M. Wooldridge, 2009. "Recent Developments in the Econometrics of Program Evaluation," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 47(1), pages 5-86, March.
  14. 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.
  15. Costas Arkolakis, 2008. "Market Penetration Costs and the New Consumers Margin in International Trade," NBER Working Papers 14214, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  16. 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.
  17. Hylke Vandenbussche & Maurizio Zanardi, 2010. "The chilling trade effects of antidumping proliferation," ULB Institutional Repository 2013/136355, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
  18. David H. Autor & David Dorn & Gordon H. Hanson, 2013. "The China Syndrome: Local Labor Market Effects of Import Competition in the United States," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 103(6), pages 2121-68, October.
  19. Chad P. Bown & Meredith A. Crowley, 2004. "Policy externalities: how U.S. antidumping affects Japanese exports to the EU," Working Paper Series WP-04-12, Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago.
  20. Melitz, Marc J, 2002. "The Impact of Trade on Intra-Industry Reallocations and Aggregate Industry Productivity," CEPR Discussion Papers 3381, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
  21. Chad P. Bown & Meredith A. Crowley, 2003. "Trade deflection and trade depression," Working Paper Series WP-03-26, Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago.
  22. 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.
  23. Bruce A. Blonigen, 2000. "Tariff-Jumping Antidumping Duties," NBER Working Papers 7776, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  24. Marianne Bertrand & Esther Duflo & Sendhil Mullainathan, 2002. "How Much Should We Trust Differences-in-Differences Estimates?," NBER Working Papers 8841, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  25. Thomas Chaney, 2008. "Distorted Gravity: The Intensive and Extensive Margins of International Trade," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 98(4), pages 1707-21, September.
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:inecon:v:91:y:2013:i:2:p:290-300. 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.