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

Anti-Dumping Sunset Reviews: The Uneven Reach of WTO Disciplines

  • Cadot, Olivier
  • de Melo, Jaime
  • Tumurchudur, Bolormaa

The paper uses a new database on Anti-Dumping measures worldwide to assess whether the 1995 Uruguay Round Agreement on AD sunset reviews had any effect. Estimates from a count of revocations for a panel of AD-using countries over 1979-2005 show that a five-year cycle is more apparent after the WTO agreement than before, with the marginal propensity to revoke AD measures at five years jumping from 0-2% to 45%. A survival analysis of AD measures confirms that those covered by the agreement stick on average for shorter periods, but a semi-parametric difference-in-difference approach suggests that compliance was at least partly voluntary rather than forced by the agreement’s discipline. Moreover, much of the adjustment to the WTO’s new rules on sunset reviews came from small and new users of Anti-Dumping rules rather than the traditional and large ones.

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.cepr.org/active/publications/discussion_papers/dp.php?dpno=6502
Download Restriction: CEPR Discussion Papers are free to download for our researchers, subscribers and members. If you fall into one of these categories but have trouble downloading our papers, please contact us at subscribers@cepr.org

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.

Paper provided by C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers in its series CEPR Discussion Papers with number 6502.

as
in new window

Length:
Date of creation: Sep 2007
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:cpr:ceprdp:6502
Contact details of provider: Postal: Centre for Economic Policy Research, 77 Bastwick Street, London EC1V 3PZ.
Phone: 44 - 20 - 7183 8801
Fax: 44 - 20 - 7183 8820

Order Information: Email:


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. David B. Hertz, 1972. "Discussion," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 19(4-Part-2), pages P35-P36, December.
  2. Bruce A. Blonigen & Jee-Hyeong Park, 2001. "Dynamic Pricing in the Presence of Antidumping Policy: Theory and Evidence," NBER Working Papers 8477, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  3. Bruce E. Hansen, 1996. "Sample Splitting and Threshold Estimation," Boston College Working Papers in Economics 319., Boston College Department of Economics, revised 12 May 1998.
  4. Bown, Chad P., 2005. "Global antidumping database version 1.0," Policy Research Working Paper Series 3737, The World Bank.
  5. Hausman, Jerry & Hall, Bronwyn H & Griliches, Zvi, 1984. "Econometric Models for Count Data with an Application to the Patents-R&D Relationship," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 52(4), pages 909-38, July.
  6. Maddala, G S & Wu, Shaowen, 1999. " A Comparative Study of Unit Root Tests with Panel Data and a New Simple Test," Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, Department of Economics, University of Oxford, vol. 61(0), pages 631-52, Special I.
  7. Benjamin Liebman, 2004. "ITC voting behavior on sunset reviews," Review of World Economics (Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv), Springer, vol. 140(3), pages 446-475, 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:cpr:ceprdp:6502. 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: ()

The email address of this maintainer does not seem to be valid anymore. Please ask to update the entry or send us the correct address

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.