IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/prs/rfreco/rfeco_0769-0479_2001_num_15_4_1502.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Une révision souhaitable de la procédure antidumping à l'OMC

Author

Listed:
  • Vincent Aussilloux
  • Gilles Mourre

Abstract

[eng] From an economic point of view, the antidumping process included in the WTO legislation seems to contain numerous imperfections. Such imperfections drive the authorities to overestimate in a systematic way antidumping cases and the necessity for sanctions. Antidumping duties imply high costs for the domestic economy when not justified. Traditionally, the US and the European Union are the main users of such a trade policy instrument. In the last period, emerging countries have adopted similar process that threaten European exportation capacities. The purpose of the study is to stress the weakness of the present process, to give a geographical and sectorial view of the use of the antidumping instrument and to suggest some improvements of its present economic efficiency. In the first stage of a revised antidumping process, the WTO members States would have to economically justify the use of such an instrument. It would also be more efficient if the dumping margin evaluation, which is very sensitive to the calculation mode, came in a second step, once the letigimacy of sanctions has been established. [fre] Si on l'analyse d'un point de vue économique, la procédure antidumping entérinée par l'OMC apparaît entachée de nombreuses imperfections, qui aboutissent à surestimer de façon systématique les cas de dumping et la nécessité de mesures de rétorsion. Or, l'antidumping représente un coût important pour l'économie nationale lorsqu'il n'est pas économiquement justifié. Traditionnellement, les Etats-Unis et l'Union européenne constituent les principaux utilisateurs des procédures antidumping. Dans la période récente, les pays émergents se sont dotés de procédures similaires et font peser une réelle menace sur les capacités exportatrices des entreprises européennes les plus dynamiques ; l'objet de l'étude est d'analyser les faiblesses de la procédure antidumping, de dresser un panorama sectoriel et géographique de son utilisation et d'amorcer des pistes de réforme de la procédure actuelle. Une procédure antidumping révisée devrait porter comme étape préalable la démonstration par le pays qui y recourt du bien-fondé des mesures antidumping. Il serait également préférable que l'évaluation de la marge de dumping, très sensible au mode de calcul, n'intervienne que dans une seconde étape, lorsque la légitimité des mesures de rétorsions serait avérée.

Suggested Citation

  • Vincent Aussilloux & Gilles Mourre, 2001. "Une révision souhaitable de la procédure antidumping à l'OMC," Revue Française d'Économie, Programme National Persée, vol. 15(4), pages 19-53.
  • Handle: RePEc:prs:rfreco:rfeco_0769-0479_2001_num_15_4_1502
    Note: DOI:10.3406/rfeco.2001.1502
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.3406/rfeco.2001.1502
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.persee.fr/doc/rfeco_0769-0479_2001_num_15_4_1502
    Download Restriction: no

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Antoine Bouët, 2000. "La mesure des protections commerciales nationales," Working Papers 2000-15, CEPII research center.
    2. Mustapha Jallab & James Kobak, 2006. "Antidumping as Anticompetitive Practice Evidence from the United States and the European Union," Journal of Industry, Competition and Trade, Springer, vol. 6(3), pages 253-275, December.
    3. François Tandé, 2006. "Taxes antidumping et règle des faits disponibles," Revue économique, Presses de Sciences-Po, vol. 57(5), pages 1053-1063.

    More about this item

    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:prs:rfreco:rfeco_0769-0479_2001_num_15_4_1502. 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: (Equipe PERSEE). General contact details of provider: https://www.persee.fr/collection/rfeco .

    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.