IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hhs/ratioi/0286.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Which Antidumping Cases Reach the WTO?

Author

Listed:

Abstract

This article examines the distribution of antidumping (AD) disputes across countries and industries, and examines which AD cases reach the dispute settlement system of the WTO. Our general finding is that neither the country nor the industry distribution of AD cases remains constant across the different levels of disputes, as cases proceed from notifications to requests for consultations and third party adjudication at the WTO. The US is the main user of AD measures, as well as the main target for complaints at the WTO’s Dispute Settlement Body. However, emerging markets have increasingly started using AD law to protect their domestic firms. We find that the typical AD notification is submitted by an upper middle-income country, and it focuses on a medium low-technology industry with differentiated products, but low relationship-specificity. The most typical complainant at the WTO is also an upper middle-income country, challenging a high-income country (most likely the US) that is allegedly giving unfair protection to an industry producing differentiated goods that are not very relationship-specific, using medium-low technologies. The analysis also reveals that when lower middle-income countries are challenged at the WTO, disputes are often resolved before third party adjudication is needed.

Suggested Citation

  • Kokko, Ari & Gustavsson Tingvall, Patrik & Videnord, Josefin, 2017. "Which Antidumping Cases Reach the WTO?," Ratio Working Papers 286, The Ratio Institute.
  • Handle: RePEc:hhs:ratioi:0286
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://ratio.se/app/uploads/2017/03/ak_pt_jv_which_antidumping_cases_reach_the_wto_286.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Chad P. Bown, 2005. "Trade Remedies and World Trade Organization Dispute Settlement: Why Are So Few Challenged?," The Journal of Legal Studies, University of Chicago Press, vol. 34(2), pages 515-555, June.
    2. repec:ecr:col896:28855 is not listed on IDEAS
    3. Thomas J. Prusa, 2005. "Anti‐dumping: A Growing Problem in International Trade," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 28(5), pages 683-700, May.
    4. Maurizio Zanardi, 2004. "Anti‐dumping: What are the Numbers to Discuss at Doha?," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 27(3), pages 403-433, March.
    5. Bown, Chad P. & Crowley, Meredith A., 2006. "Policy externalities: How US antidumping affects Japanese exports to the EU," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 22(3), pages 696-714, September.
    6. Feinberg, Robert M. & Hirsch, Barry T., 1989. "Industry rent seeking and the filing of unfair trade complaints," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 7(3), pages 325-340.
    7. Nathan Nunn, 2007. "Relationship-Specificity, Incomplete Contracts, and the Pattern of Trade," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 122(2), pages 569-600.
    8. Thomas Prusa & Susan Skeath, 2002. "The economic and strategic motives for antidumping filings," Review of World Economics (Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv), Springer;Institut für Weltwirtschaft (Kiel Institute for the World Economy), vol. 138(3), pages 389-413, September.
    9. Veugelers, Reinhilde & Vandenbussche, Hylke, 1999. "European anti-dumping policy and the profitability of national and international collusion," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 43(1), pages 1-28, January.
    10. Chad P. Bown, 2008. "The Wto And Antidumping In Developing Countries," Economics and Politics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 20(2), pages 255-288, June.
    11. Niels, Gunnar, 2000. "What Is Antidumping Policy Really About?," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 14(4), pages 467-492, September.
    12. Mari Pangestu, 2000. "Special and Differential Treatment in the Millennium: Special for Whom and How Different?," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 23(9), pages 1285-1302, September.
    13. J. M. Finger, 1981. "The Industry-Country Incidence of "Less than Fair Value" Cases in US Import Trade," NBER Chapters, in: Export Diversification and the New Protectionism: The Experiences of Latin America, pages 260-279, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    14. Vandenbussche, Hylke & Zanardi, Maurizio, 2010. "The chilling trade effects of antidumping proliferation," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 54(6), pages 760-777, August.
    15. Robert Rowthorn & Ken Coutts, 2004. "De-industrialisation and the balance of payments in advanced economies," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 28(5), pages 767-790, September.
    16. Thomas J. Prusa, 1997. "The Trade Effects of U.S. Antidumping Actions," NBER Chapters, in: The Effects of U.S. Trade Protection and Promotion Policies, pages 191-214, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    17. Coughlin, Cletus C & Terza, Joseph V & Khalifah, Noor Aini, 1989. "The Determinants of Escape Clause Petitions," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 71(2), pages 341-347, May.
    18. Bown, Chad P. & McCulloch, Rachel, 2009. "U.S.-Japan and U.S.-China trade conflict: Export growth, reciprocity, and the international trading system," Journal of Asian Economics, Elsevier, vol. 20(6), pages 669-687, November.
    19. Blonigen, Bruce A., 2006. "Working the system: Firm learning and the antidumping process," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 22(3), pages 715-731, September.
    20. Durling, James P. & Prusa, Thomas J., 2006. "The trade effects associated with an antidumping epidemic: The hot-rolled steel market, 1996-2001," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 22(3), pages 675-695, September.
    21. David Kucera & William Milberg, 2003. "Deindustrialization and changes in manufacturing trade: Factor content calculations for 1978–1995," Review of World Economics (Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv), Springer;Institut für Weltwirtschaft (Kiel Institute for the World Economy), vol. 139(4), pages 601-624, December.
    22. 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.
    23. Blonigen, Bruce A. & Bown, Chad P., 2003. "Antidumping and retaliation threats," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 60(2), pages 249-273, August.
    24. James Devault, 1996. "The welfare effects of U.S. antidumping duties," Open Economies Review, Springer, vol. 7(1), pages 19-33, January.
    25. Moore, Michael O, 1992. "Rules or Politics? An Empirical Analysis of ITC Anti-dumping Decisions," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 30(3), pages 449-466, July.
    26. Hansen, Wendy L & Prusa, Thomas J, 1996. "Cumulation and ITC Decision-Making: The Sum of the Parts Is Greater Than the Whole," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 34(4), pages 746-769, October.
    27. Yuanchen Chang & Mao-Wei Hung & Chiuling Lu, 2005. "Trade, R&D spending and financial development," Applied Financial Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 15(11), pages 809-819.
    28. Thomas J. Prusa, 2001. "On the spread and impact of anti‐dumping," Canadian Journal of Economics/Revue canadienne d'économique, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 34(3), pages 591-611, August.
    29. Oecd, 2005. "Trade Policy: Promoting Investment for Development," OECD Trade Policy Papers 19, OECD Publishing.
    30. Bettina Becker & Martin Theuringer, 2000. "Macroeconomic Determinants of Contingent Protection: The Case of the European Union," IWP Discussion Paper Series 02/2000, Institute for Economic Policy, Cologne, Germany.
    31. Finger, J M & Hall, H Keith & Nelson, Douglas R, 1982. "The Political Economy of Administered Protection," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 72(3), pages 452-466, June.
    32. Hylke Vandenbussche & Maurizio Zanardi, 2008. "What explains the proliferation of antidumping laws?," Economic Policy, CEPR;CES;MSH, vol. 23, pages 93-138, January.
    33. Murray, Tracy & Rousslang, Donald J., 1989. "A method for estimating injury caused by unfair trade practices," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 9(2), pages 149-164, December.
    34. Sadni Jallab Mustapha & Sandretto René & Gbakou Monnet Benoît Patrick, 2006. "Antidumping Procedures and Macroeconomic Factors: A Comparison between the United States and the European Union," Global Economy Journal, De Gruyter, vol. 6(3), pages 1-22, September.
    35. Chad P. Bown, 2002. "The Economics of Trade Disputes, the GATT’s Article XXIII, and the WTO’s Dispute Settlement Understanding," Economics and Politics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 14(3), pages 283-323, November.
    36. Becker Bettina & Theuringer Martin, 2001. "Macroeconomic Determinants of Contingent Protection: The Case of the European Union," Zeitschrift für Wirtschaftspolitik, De Gruyter, vol. 50(3), pages 350-374, December.
    37. Corinne M. Krupp & Patricia S. Pollard, 1996. "Market Responses to Antidumping Laws: Some Evidence from the U.S. Chemical Industry," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 29(1), pages 199-227, February.
    38. Sourafel Girma & David Greenaway & Katherine Wakelin, 2002. "Does antidumping stimulate FDI? Evidence from Japanese firms in the UK," Review of World Economics (Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv), Springer;Institut für Weltwirtschaft (Kiel Institute for the World Economy), vol. 138(3), pages 414-436, September.
    39. Bart Los, 2004. "Identification of strategic industries: A dynamic perspective," Papers in Regional Science, Springer;Regional Science Association International, vol. 83(4), pages 669-698, October.
    40. Nelson, Douglas, 2006. "The political economy of antidumping: A survey," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 22(3), pages 554-590, September.
    41. Torres, Raúl A., 2012. "Use of the WTO trade dispute settlement mechanism by the Latin American countries: Dispelling myths and breaking down barriers," WTO Staff Working Papers ERSD-2012-03, World Trade Organization (WTO), Economic Research and Statistics Division.
    42. Staiger, Robert W. & Wolak, Frank A., 1992. "The effect of domestic antidumping law in the presence of foreign monopoly," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 32(3-4), pages 265-287, May.
    43. Reitzes, James D, 1993. "Antidumping Policy," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 34(4), pages 745-763, November.
    44. Bown, Chad P. & Crowley, Meredith A., 2007. "Trade deflection and trade depression," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 72(1), pages 176-201, May.
    45. Rosendorff, B Peter, 1996. "Voluntary Export Restraints, Antidumping Procedure, and Domestic Politics," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 86(3), pages 544-561, June.
    46. 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.
    47. Kelly, Kenneth H & Morkre, Morris E, 1998. "Do Unfairly Traded Imports Injure Domestic Industries?," Review of International Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 6(2), pages 321-332, May.
    48. John Whalley, 1999. "Special and Differential Treatment in the Millennium Round," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 22(8), pages 1065-1093, November.
    49. 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.
    50. Özgür Kýbrýs & Serkan Küçükþenel, 2005. "Trade rules for uncleared markets," Microeconomics 0508002, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    51. Chad Bown & Kara Reynolds, 2015. "Trade flows and trade disputes," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 10(2), pages 145-177, June.
    52. Chad P. Bown & Bernard M. Hoekman, 2005. "WTO Dispute Settlement and the Missing Developing Country Cases: Engaging the Private Sector," Journal of International Economic Law, Oxford University Press, vol. 8(4), pages 861-890, December.
    53. Aggarwal, Aradhna, 2004. "Macro Economic Determinants of Antidumping: A Comparative Analysis of Developed and Developing Countries," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 32(6), pages 1043-1057, June.
    54. Bown, Chad P., 2004. "Trade disputes and the implementation of protection under the GATT: an empirical assessment," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 62(2), pages 263-294, March.
    55. Mah, Jai S., 2000. "An empirical examination of the disaggregated import demand of Korea--the case of information technology products," Journal of Asian Economics, Elsevier, vol. 11(2), pages 237-244.
    56. Patrick A. Messerlin, 1990. "Anti-Dumping Regulations or Pro-Cartel Law? The EC Chemical Cases," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 13(4), pages 465-492, December.
    57. Knetter, Michael M. & Prusa, Thomas J., 2003. "Macroeconomic factors and antidumping filings: evidence from four countries," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 61(1), pages 1-17, October.
    58. Anonymous, 2005. "Agreement On South Asian Free Trade Area (SAFTA)," Working Papers id:94, eSocialSciences.
    59. Kaz Miyagiwa & Huasheng Song & Hylke Vandenbussche, 2016. "Accounting for Stylised Facts about Recent Anti-dumping: Retaliation and Innovation," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 39(2), pages 221-235, February.
    60. Prusa, Thomas J., 1992. "Why are so many antidumping petitions withdrawn?," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 33(1-2), pages 1-20, August.
    61. Jai Mah, 2000. "Antidumping decisions and macroeconomic variables in the USA," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 32(13), pages 1701-1709.
    62. Chad P. Bown, 2004. "On the Economic Success of GATT/WTO Dispute Settlement," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 86(3), pages 811-823, August.
    63. Rauch, James E., 1999. "Networks versus markets in international trade," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 48(1), pages 7-35, June.
    64. Bernard M. Hoekman & Petros C. Mavroidis, 2000. "WTO Dispute Settlement, Transparency and Surveillance," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 23(04), pages 527-542, April.
    65. Hansen, Wendy L & Prusa, Thomas J, 1997. "The Economics and Politics of Trade Policy: An Empirical Analysis of ITC Decision Making," Review of International Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 5(2), pages 230-245, May.
    66. Chung, Jae W., 1999. "Insights Into Trade Protection under U.S. Trade Remedy Laws," Journal of Policy Modeling, Elsevier, vol. 21(3), pages 375-387, May.
    67. Bruce A. Blonigen, 2019. "Tariff-Jumping Antidumping Duties," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Foreign Direct Investment, chapter 5, pages 179-203, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    68. Chad P. Bown, 2010. "China's WTO Entry: Antidumping, Safeguards, and Dispute Settlement," NBER Chapters, in: China's Growing Role in World Trade, pages 281-337, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    69. Steven Saeger, 1997. "Globalization and deindustrialization: Myth and reality in the OECD," Review of World Economics (Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv), Springer;Institut für Weltwirtschaft (Kiel Institute for the World Economy), vol. 133(4), pages 579-608, December.
    70. Douglas A. Irwin, 2005. "The Rise of US Anti‐dumping Activity in Historical Perspective," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 28(5), pages 651-668, May.
    71. Angelika Eymann & Ludger Schuknecht, 1996. "Antidumping Policy In The European Community: Political Discretion Or Technical Determination," Economics and Politics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 8(2), pages 111-131, July.
    72. Brenton, Paul, 2001. "Anti-dumping policies in the EU and trade diversion," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 17(3), pages 593-607, September.
    73. Krupp, Corinne, 1994. "Antidumping Cases in the U.S. Chemical Industry: A Panel Data Approach," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 42(3), pages 299-311, September.
    74. Chang, Juin-jen & Shaw, Ming-fu & Lai, Ching-chong, 2007. "A "Managerial" trade union and economic growth," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 51(2), pages 365-384, February.
    75. 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.
    76. 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.
    77. Tharakan, P. K. M. & Waelbroeck, J., 1994. "Antidumping and countervailing duty decisions in the E.C. and in the U.S.: An experiment in comparative political economy," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 38(1), pages 171-193, January.
    78. Michael P. Leidy, 1997. "Macroeconomic Conditions and Pressures for Protection under Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Laws: Empirical Evidence from the United States," IMF Staff Papers, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 44(1), pages 132-144, March.
    79. Bown, Chad P. & Hoekman, Bernard & Ozden, Caglar, 2003. "The pattern of US antidumping: the path from initial filing to WTO dispute settlement," World Trade Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 2(3), pages 349-371, November.
    80. Takacs, Wendy E, 1981. "Pressures for Protectionism: An Empirical Analysis," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 19(4), pages 687-693, October.
    81. Morck, Randall & Sepanski, Jungsywan & Yeung, Bernard, 2001. "Habitual and Occasional Lobbyers in the U.S. Steel Industry: An EM Algorithm Pooling Approach," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 39(3), pages 365-378, July.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Trade conflict; Antidumping; WTO; Dispute settlement;

    JEL classification:

    • D74 - Microeconomics - - Analysis of Collective Decision-Making - - - Conflict; Conflict Resolution; Alliances; Revolutions
    • F51 - International Economics - - International Relations, National Security, and International Political Economy - - - International Conflicts; Negotiations; Sanctions
    • F53 - International Economics - - International Relations, National Security, and International Political Economy - - - International Agreements and Observance; International Organizations
    • H73 - Public Economics - - State and Local Government; Intergovernmental Relations - - - Interjurisdictional Differentials and Their Effects
    • O24 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Development Planning and Policy - - - Trade Policy; Factor Movement; Foreign Exchange Policy

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:hhs:ratioi:0286. 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: (Martin Korpi). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/ratiose.html .

    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 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.

    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.