IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/canjec/v56y2023i2p553-592.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The impact of preferential trade agreements on the duration of antidumping protection

Author

Listed:
  • Min Zhu
  • Thomas J. Prusa

Abstract

This paper examines the impact of preferential trade agreements on the duration of antidumping protection. We employ a two‐step selection model where the first step accounts for the impact of membership in a preferential trade agreement on the original antidumping determination and the second step estimates the impact of membership in a preferential trade agreement on the duration of the measures. We find the duration of antidumping protection is about 17% shorter for preferential trade agreement members compared with targeted countries that are not preferential trade agreement members. The impact on duration depends largely on whether preferential trade agreements have rules related specifically to antidumping. Preferential trade agreements with rules are associated with a 28% reduction in the duration of protection, whereas the duration for preferential trade agreements without rules is not statistically different from the duration for non‐preferential trade agreement countries. While the duration of antidumping measures against China is longer than for other countries, the impact of preferential trade agreement rules is robust to controlling for China. L'effet des accords commerciaux préférentiels (ACP) sur la durée des mesures de protection antidumping. Cet article examine l'effet des accords commerciaux préférentiels (ACP) sur la durée des mesures de protection antidumping. Nous utilisons un modèle de sélection en deux étapes, où la première étape tient compte de l'effet de l'adhésion à un ACP sur la détermination initiale des mesures antidumping et où la deuxième estime l'effet de l'adhésion à un ACP sur la durée de ces mesures. Nous constatons que la durée des mesures de protection antidumping est environ 17% plus courte pour les membres d'un ACP comparativement aux pays cibles qui ne sont pas membres de tels accords. L'effet sur la durée dépend grandement du fait que les ACP disposent ou non de règles visant particulièrement les mesures antidumping. Les ACP ayant des règles sont associés à une réduction de 28% de la durée de mesures de protection, tandis que la durée pour les ACP sans règles n'est pas statistiquement différente de la durée pour les pays non membres d'ACP. Même si la durée des mesures antidumping appliquées à la Chine est plus longue que pour les autres pays, les répercussions des règles des ACP sont robustes pour contrôler la Chine.

Suggested Citation

  • 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.
    • Handle: RePEc:wly:canjec:v:56:y:2023:i:2:p:553-592
    DOI: 10.1111/caje.12652
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/caje.12652
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/caje.12652?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Susan Ariel Aaronson, 2016. "Working by Design: New Ideas to Empower U.S. and European Workers in TTIP," Working Papers 2016-8, The George Washington University, Institute for International Economic Policy.
    2. Chad P. Bown & Patricia Tovar, 2016. "Preferential Liberalization, Antidumping, and Safeguards: Stumbling Block Evidence from MERCOSUR," Economics and Politics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 28(3), pages 262-294, November.
    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. Chad P. Bown, 2008. "The Wto And Antidumping In Developing Countries," Economics and Politics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 20(2), pages 255-288, June.
    5. Prusa, Thomas J. & Teh, Robert & Zhu, Min, 2022. "PTAs and the incidence of antidumping disputes," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 138(C).
    6. Tovar, Patricia, 2019. "Preferential and multilateral liberalization: Evidence from Latin America’s use of tariffs, antidumping and safeguards," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 141(C).
    7. Tabakis, Chrysostomos & Zanardi, Maurizio, 2019. "Preferential trade agreements and antidumping protection," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 121(C).
    8. Michael O. Moore & Maurizio Zanardi, 2009. "Does antidumping use contribute to trade liberalization in developing countries?," Canadian Journal of Economics/Revue canadienne d'économique, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 42(2), pages 469-495, May.
    9. Bown, Chad P. & Erbahar, Aksel & Zanardi, Maurizio, 2021. "Global value chains and the removal of trade protection," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 140(C).
    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. Magee, Christopher S.P., 2008. "New measures of trade creation and trade diversion," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 75(2), pages 349-362, July.
    12. 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.
    13. 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.
    14. 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..
    15. Richard Baldwin & Masahiro Kawai, 2013. "Multilateralizing Asian Regionalism," Trade Working Papers 23553, East Asian Bureau of Economic Research.
    16. 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.
    17. Tibor Besedeš & Thomas J. Prusa, 2017. "The Hazardous Effects Of Antidumping," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 55(1), pages 9-30, January.
    18. Hofmann,Claudia & Osnago,Alberto & Ruta,Michele, 2017. "Horizontal depth : a new database on the content of preferential trade agreements," Policy Research Working Paper Series 7981, The World Bank.
    19. Andreea C. Nita & Maurizio Zanardi, 2013. "The First Review of European Union Antidumping Reviews," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 36(12), pages 1455-1477, December.
    20. Magdalene Silberberger & Frederik Stender, 2018. "False friends? Empirical evidence on trade policy substitution in regional trade agreements," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 41(8), pages 2175-2199, August.
    21. Ali Arbia, 2013. "Templates for Trade: Change, Persistence and Path Dependence in U. S. and EU Preferential Trade Agreements," KFG Working Papers p0051, Free University Berlin.
    22. Bhagwati, Jagdish & Panagariya, Arvind, 1996. "The Theory of Preferential Trade Agreements: Historical Evolution and Current Trends," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 86(2), pages 82-87, May.
    23. 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.
    24. Michael O. Moore, 2006. "An Econometric Analysis of U.S. Antidumping Sunset Review Decisions," Review of World Economics (Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv), Springer;Institut für Weltwirtschaft (Kiel Institute for the World Economy), vol. 142(1), pages 122-150, April.
    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. 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.
    2. Kuenzel, David J., 2020. "WTO tariff commitments and temporary protection: Complements or substitutes?," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 121(C).
    3. Prusa, Thomas J. & Teh, Robert & Zhu, Min, 2022. "PTAs and the incidence of antidumping disputes," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 138(C).
    4. 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.
    5. Yi Liu & Ning Zhang, 2015. "Sustainability of Trade Liberalization and Antidumping: Evidence from Mexico’s Trade Liberalization toward China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(9), pages 1-20, August.
    6. 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.
    7. Feinberg Robert M., 2011. "Antidumping as a Development Issue," Global Economy Journal, De Gruyter, vol. 11(3), pages 1-17, September.
    8. Michael O. Moore & Maurizio Zanardi, 2009. "Does antidumping use contribute to trade liberalization in developing countries?," Canadian Journal of Economics/Revue canadienne d'économique, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 42(2), pages 469-495, May.
    9. Vandenbussche, Hylke & Zanardi, Maurizio, 2010. "The chilling trade effects of antidumping proliferation," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 54(6), pages 760-777, August.
    10. Bown, Chad P. & Erbahar, Aksel & Zanardi, Maurizio, 2021. "Global value chains and the removal of trade protection," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 140(C).
    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. 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.
    13. 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.
    14. Chrysostomos Tabakis & Maurizio Zanardi, 2017. "Antidumping Echoing," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 55(2), pages 655-681, April.
    15. Avsar, Veysel, 2014. "Partisanship and antidumping," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 38(C), pages 190-195.
    16. 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.
    17. 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.
    18. Kokko, Ari & Gustavsson Tingvall, Patrik & Videnord, Josefin, 2017. "Which Antidumping Cases Reach the WTO?," Ratio Working Papers 286, The Ratio Institute.
    19. Hylke VANDENBUSSCHE & Christian VIEGELAHN, 2011. "No Protectionist Surprises: EU Antidumping Policy Before and During the Great Recession," LIDAM Discussion Papers IRES 2011021, Université catholique de Louvain, Institut de Recherches Economiques et Sociales (IRES).
    20. Neha Bhardwaj Upadhayay, 2020. "Uncovering the proliferation of contingent protection through channels of retaliation, gender and development assistance," Erudite Ph.D Dissertations, Erudite, number ph20-02 edited by Julie Lochard & Catherine Bros, December.

    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:wly:canjec:v:56:y:2023:i:2:p:553-592. 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://doi.org/10.1111/(ISSN)1540-5982 .

    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.