IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/kap/revind/v14y1999i1p65-84.html

The Effect of U.S. Antidumping Law on Firms' Market Power: An Empirical Test

Author

Listed:
  • James Nieberding

Abstract

No abstract is available for this item.

Suggested Citation

  • James Nieberding, 1999. "The Effect of U.S. Antidumping Law on Firms' Market Power: An Empirical Test," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 14(1), pages 65-84, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:kap:revind:v:14:y:1999:i:1:p:65-84
    DOI: 10.1023/A:1007719609300
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1023/A:1007719609300
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1023/A:1007719609300?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

    for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Robert W. Staiger & Frank A. Wolak, 1994. "Measuring Industry-Specific Protection: Antidumping in the United States," Brookings Papers on Economic Activity, Economic Studies Program, The Brookings Institution, vol. 25(1994 Micr), pages 51-118.
    2. Kenneth Flamm, 1993. "Semiconductor Dependency and Strategic Trade Policy," Brookings Papers on Economic Activity, Economic Studies Program, The Brookings Institution, vol. 24(1 Microec), pages 249-333.
    3. Thomas J. Prusa, 1991. "The Selection of Antidumping Cases for ITC Determination," NBER Chapters, in: Empirical Studies of Commercial Policy, pages 47-74, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    4. Geroski, P. A. & Masson, R. T. & Shaanan, S., 1987. "The dynamics of market structure," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 5(1), pages 93-100, March.
    5. Jeffrey J. Schott, 1994. "Uruguay Round: An Assessment," Peterson Institute Press: All Books, Peterson Institute for International Economics, number 64, January.
    6. Jean Tirole, 1988. "The Theory of Industrial Organization," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262200716, December.
    7. Robert W. Staiger & Frank A. Wolak, 1989. "Strategic Use of Antidumping Law to Enforce Tacit International Collusion," NBER Working Papers 3016, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    8. Thomas J. Prusa, 2021. "Why are so many antidumping petitions withdrawn?," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Thomas J Prusa (ed.), Economic Effects of Antidumping, chapter 2, pages 1-20, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    9. Martin, Stephen, 1988. "The measurement of profitability and the diagnosis of market power," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 6(3), pages 301-321.
    10. Fischer, Ronald D., 1992. "Endogenous probability of protection and firm behavior," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 32(1-2), pages 149-163, February.
    11. Bruce A. Blonigen & Thomas J. Prusa, 2001. "Antidumping," NBER Working Papers 8398, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    12. James Devault, 1990. "The Administration of US Antidumping Duties: Some Empirical Observations," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 13(1), pages 75-88, March.
    13. Hulten, Charles R. & Wykoff, Frank C., 1981. "The estimation of economic depreciation using vintage asset prices : An application of the Box-Cox power transformation," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 15(3), pages 367-396, April.
    14. Stefanie Ann Lenway & Douglas A. Schuler, 1991. "The Determinants of Corporate Political Involvement in Trade Protection: The Case of the Steel Industry," NBER Chapters, in: Empirical Studies of Commercial Policy, pages 75-112, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    15. Marvel, Howard P, 1980. "Foreign Trade and Domestic Competition," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 18(1), pages 103-122, January.
    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


    Cited by:

    1. Bruce A. Blonigen & Benjamin H. Liebman & Wesley W. Wilson, 2007. "Trade Policy and Market Power: The Case of the US Steel Industry," NBER Working Papers 13671, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    2. Arevik Gnutzmann-Mkrtchyan & Hoffstadt, 2020. "Use and Abuse of Antidumping by Global Cartels," CESifo Working Paper Series 8729, CESifo.
    3. Blonigen, Bruce A. & Liebman, Benjamin H. & Pierce, Justin R. & Wilson, Wesley W., 2013. "Are all trade protection policies created equal? Empirical evidence for nonequivalent market power effects of tariffs and quotas," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 89(2), pages 369-378.
    4. Kara Reynolds, 2013. "Under the Cover of Antidumping: Does Administered Protection Facilitate Domestic Collusion?," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 42(4), pages 415-434, June.
    5. Ashley Beeler & K. Aleks Schaefer & Jacob Sestak & Glenn Conover, 2024. "Impacts of U.S. countervailing duties on phosphate fertilizers," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 106(2), pages 620-636, March.
    6. Laura Rovegno, 2013. "Trade protection and market power: evidence from US antidumping and countervailing duties," Review of World Economics (Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv), Springer;Institut für Weltwirtschaft (Kiel Institute for the World Economy), vol. 149(3), pages 443-476, September.
    7. Simon P. Anderson & Nicolas Schmitt, 2003. "Nontariff Barriers and Trade Liberalization," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 41(1), pages 80-97, January.

    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. Thomas J. Prusa, 2021. "The Trade Effects of U.S. Antidumping Actions," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Thomas J Prusa (ed.), Economic Effects of Antidumping, chapter 3, pages 21-43, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    2. Nelson, Douglas, 2006. "The political economy of antidumping: A survey," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 22(3), pages 554-590, September.
    3. Kokko, Ari & Gustavsson Tingvall, Patrik & Videnord, Josefin, 2017. "Which Antidumping Cases Reach the WTO?," Ratio Working Papers 286, The Ratio Institute.
    4. Jozef Konings & Hylke Vandenbussche & Linda Springael, 2001. "Import Diversion under European Antidumping Policy," Journal of Industry, Competition and Trade, Springer, vol. 1(3), pages 283-299, September.
    5. Martin Theuringer & Pia Weiß, 2001. "Do Anti-Dumping Rules Facilitate the Abuse of Market Dominance?," IWP Discussion Paper Series 03/2001, Institute for Economic Policy, Cologne, Germany.
    6. Patrice CASSAGNARD, 2009. "Antidumping, Social Quality of Goods and Smear Campaign," Working Papers 10, CATT - UPPA - Université de Pau et des Pays de l'Adour, revised Nov 2009.
    7. Maurizio Zanardi, 2004. "Antidumping law as a collusive device," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 37(1), pages 95-122, February.
    8. Robert W. Staiger & Frank A. Wolak, 1994. "Measuring Industry-Specific Protection: Antidumping in the United States," Brookings Papers on Economic Activity, Economic Studies Program, The Brookings Institution, vol. 25(1994 Micr), pages 51-118.
    9. Aradhna Aggrawal, 2003. "The WTO antidumping code: Issues for review in Post-Doha negotiations," Indian Council for Research on International Economic Relations, New Delhi Working Papers 99, Indian Council for Research on International Economic Relations, New Delhi, India.
    10. Kara Reynolds, 2013. "Under the Cover of Antidumping: Does Administered Protection Facilitate Domestic Collusion?," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 42(4), pages 415-434, June.
    11. Anderson, Simon P. & Schmitt, Nicolas & Thisse, Jacques-Francois, 1995. "Who benefits from antidumping legislation?," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 38(3-4), pages 321-337, May.
    12. Meredith A. Crowley, 2001. "Antidumping policy under imperfect competition," Working Paper Series WP-01-21, Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago.
    13. Jose Luis Moraga-Gonzalez & Jean-Marie Viaene, 2004. "Anti-dumping, Intra-industry Trade and Quality Reversals," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 04-124/2, Tinbergen Institute.
    14. Gnutzmann-Mkrtchyan, Arevik & Hoffstadt, Martin, 2020. "Use and Abuse of Antidumping by Global Cartels," Hannover Economic Papers (HEP) dp-677, Leibniz Universität Hannover, Wirtschaftswissenschaftliche Fakultät.
    15. Wilfried Pauwels & Hylke Vandenbussche & Marcel Weverbergh, 2001. "Strategic Behaviour under European Antidumping Duties," International Journal of the Economics of Business, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 8(1), pages 75-99.
    16. José L. Moraga‐González & Jean‐Marie Viaene, 2015. "Antidumping, Intra‐Industry Trade, And Quality Reversals," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 56(3), pages 777-803, August.
    17. 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.
    18. Blonigen, Bruce A. & Bown, Chad P., 2003. "Antidumping and retaliation threats," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 60(2), pages 249-273, August.
    19. 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.
    20. Alfonso Mendieta, 2005. "Alternative Effects of Antidumping Policy: Should Mexican Authorities be Worried?," Economía Mexicana NUEVA ÉPOCA, CIDE, División de Economía, vol. 0(1), pages 41-69, January-J.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    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:kap:revind:v:14:y:1999:i:1:p:65-84. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.