IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/lic/licosd/12202.html

Does Antidumping Protection raise Market Power of Domestic Firms? Evidence from Firm Level Data

Author

Listed:
  • Jozef Konings
  • Hylke Vandenbussche

Abstract

This paper estimates how anti-dumping (AD) protection affects the market power of firms. To this end, we use a rich panel data set of 1,666 EU producers that were involved in AD cases initiated in 1996 to estimate markups of price over marginal cost. Our findings indicate that markups in most cases increase significantly in the period when firms enjoy AD protection compared to a period before protection. In industries where competition is very tough before protection, we fail to find an increase in markups, while in industries with some market power before protection, trade policy raises markups between 3% points and 15 % points, depending on the sector. Our results are robust to alternative specifications and estimation techniques. Our findings are also consistent with recent theoretical models that deal with the economic effects of firm behavior in response to AD protection

Suggested Citation

  • Jozef Konings & Hylke Vandenbussche, 2002. "Does Antidumping Protection raise Market Power of Domestic Firms? Evidence from Firm Level Data," LICOS Discussion Papers 12202, LICOS - Centre for Institutions and Economic Performance, KU Leuven.
    • Handle: RePEc:lic:licosd:12202
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.econ.kuleuven.be/licos/publications/dp/dp122.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Bernard, Andrew B. & Bradford Jensen, J., 1999. "Exceptional exporter performance: cause, effect, or both?," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 47(1), pages 1-25, February.
    2. Bottasso, Anna & Sembenelli, Alessandro, 2001. "Market power, productivity and the EU Single Market Program: Evidence from a panel of Italian firms," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 45(1), pages 167-186, January.
    3. Basu, Susanto & Fernald, John G, 1997. "Returns to Scale in U.S. Production: Estimates and Implications," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 105(2), pages 249-283, April.
    4. Harrison, Ann, 1991. "The new trade protection : price effects of antidumping and countervailing measures in the United States," Policy Research Working Paper Series 808, The World Bank.
    5. Markusen, James R. & Venables, Anthony J., 1988. "Trade policy with increasing returns and imperfect competition : Contradictory results from competing assumptions," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 24(3-4), pages 299-316, May.
    6. Fischer, Ronald D., 1992. "Endogenous probability of protection and firm behavior," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 32(1-2), pages 149-163, February.
    7. Roeger, Werner, 1995. "Can Imperfect Competition Explain the Difference between Primal and Dual Productivity Measures? Estimates for U.S. Manufacturing," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 103(2), pages 316-330, April.
    8. Bruce A. Blonigen & Thomas J. Prusa, 2001. "Antidumping," NBER Working Papers 8398, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    9. Robert C. Feenstra, 1997. "The Effects of US Trade Protection and Promotion Policies," NBER Books, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc, number feen97-1, August.
    10. Fisher, Franklin M & McGowan, John J, 1983. "On the Misuse of Accounting Rates of Return to Infer Monopoly Profits," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 73(1), pages 82-97, March.
    11. Robert C. Feenstra, 1997. "Introduction to "The Effects of U.S. Trade Protection and Promotion Policies"," NBER Chapters, in: The Effects of US Trade Protection and Promotion Policies, pages 1-7, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    12. Krishna, Pravin & Mitra, Devashish, 1998. "Trade liberalization, market discipline and productivity growth: new evidence from India," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 56(2), pages 447-462, August.
    13. Goldberg, Pinelopi Koujianou & Knetter, Michael M., 1999. "Measuring the intensity of competition in export markets," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 47(1), pages 27-60, February.
    14. Hall, Robert E, 1988. "The Relation between Price and Marginal Cost in U.S. Industry," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 96(5), pages 921-947, October.
    15. R. Schmalensee & R. Willig (ed.), 1989. "Handbook of Industrial Organization," Handbook of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, edition 1, volume 1, number 1.
    16. Manuel Arellano & Stephen Bond, 1991. "Some Tests of Specification for Panel Data: Monte Carlo Evidence and an Application to Employment Equations," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 58(2), pages 277-297.
    17. Feenstra, Robert C. (ed.), 1997. "The Effects of U.S. Trade Protection and Promotion Policies," National Bureau of Economic Research Books, University of Chicago Press, edition 1, number 9780226239514.
    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. Holger Görg & Frederic Warzynski, 2003. "Price Cost Margins and Exporting Behaviour: Evidence from Firm Level Data," Discussion Papers of DIW Berlin 365, DIW Berlin, German Institute for Economic Research.
    2. Jacques-Bernard Sauner-Leroy, 2003. "The impact of the implementation of the Single Market Programme on productive efficiency and on mark-ups in the European Union manufacturing industry," European Economy - Economic Papers 2008 - 2015 192, Directorate General Economic and Financial Affairs (DG ECFIN), European Commission.
    3. Bruce A. Blonigen & KaSaundra Tomlin & Wesley W. Wilson, 2019. "Tariff-Jumping FDI and Domestic Firms’ Profits," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Foreign Direct Investment, chapter 14, pages 473-500, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    4. Lundin, Nan Nan, 2004. "Import Competition, Product Differentiation and Mark-Ups - Microeconomic evidence from Swedish manufacturing in the 1990s," Working Paper Series 195, Trade Union Institute for Economic Research.
    5. Aldaba, Rafaelita M., 2005. "The Impact of Market Reforms on Competition, Structure and Performance of the Philippine Economy," Discussion Papers DP 2005-24, Philippine Institute for Development Studies.

    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. Vandenbussche, Hylke & Konings, Jozef, 2002. "Does Antidumping Protection Raise Market Power? Evidence from Firm Level Data," CEPR Discussion Papers 3571, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    2. Jozef Konings & Hylke Vandenbussche, 2004. "Antidumping Protection and Markups of Domestic Firms: Evidence from Firm Level Data," LICOS Discussion Papers 14104, LICOS - Centre for Institutions and Economic Performance, KU Leuven.
    3. 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.
    4. Chad Bown, 2013. "How Different Are Safeguards from Antidumping? Evidence from US Trade Policies Toward Steel," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 42(4), pages 449-481, June.
    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. Konings, Jozef & Vandenbussche, Hylke, 2005. "Antidumping protection and markups of domestic firms," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(1), pages 151-165, January.
    7. Hylke Vandenbussche & Ziga Zarnic, 2006. "Did US Safeguard Protection on Steel Affect Market Power of European Steel Producers?," LICOS Discussion Papers 17606, LICOS - Centre for Institutions and Economic Performance, KU Leuven.
    8. Borota Milicevic, Teodora & Carlsson, Mikael, 2016. "Markups from Inventory Data and Export Intensity," Working Paper Series 2016:9, Uppsala University, Department of Economics.
    9. Hylke Vandenbussche & Maurizio Zanardi, 2008. "What explains the proliferation of antidumping laws? [‘Antidumping Laws in the US; Use and Welfare Consequences’]," Economic Policy, CEPR, CESifo, Sciences Po;CES;MSH, vol. 23(53), pages 94-138.
    10. Harald Badinger & Fritz Breuss, 2004. "Has Austria's Accession to the EU Triggered an Increase in Competition? A Sectoral Markup Study," WIFO Working Papers 220, WIFO.
    11. Asaftei, Gabriel & Parmeter, Christopher F., 2010. "Market power, EU integration and privatization: The case of Romania," Journal of Comparative Economics, Elsevier, vol. 38(3), pages 340-356, September.
    12. Rosen Marinov, 2010. "Competitive Pressure in Transition: A Role for Trade and Competition Policies?," Journal of Industry, Competition and Trade, Springer, vol. 10(1), pages 1-31, March.
    13. Nobuaki Yamashita, 2010. "International Fragmentation of Production," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 13615, June.
    14. Cassiman, Bruno & ,, 2013. "Profiting from Innovation: Firm Level Evidence on Markups," CEPR Discussion Papers 9703, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    15. Co, Catherine Y., 2001. "Trade, foreign direct investment and industry performance," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 19(1-2), pages 163-183, January.
    16. 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.
    17. Massimo Del Gatto & Adriana Di Liberto & Carmelo Petraglia, 2011. "Measuring Productivity," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 25(5), pages 952-1008, December.
    18. Wilhelmsson Fredrik, 2006. "Market Power and European Competition in the Swedish Food Industry," Journal of Agricultural & Food Industrial Organization, De Gruyter, vol. 4(1), pages 1-26, October.
    19. Sumeet Gulati & Nisha Malhotra, 2006. "Estimating Export Response in Canadian Provinces to the Canada-US Softwood Lumber Agreement," Canadian Public Policy, University of Toronto Press, vol. 32(2), pages 157-172, June.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    JEL classification:

    • F13 - International Economics - - Trade - - - Trade Policy; International Trade Organizations
    • L13 - Industrial Organization - - Market Structure, Firm Strategy, and Market Performance - - - Oligopoly and Other Imperfect Markets
    • L41 - Industrial Organization - - Antitrust Issues and Policies - - - Monopolization; Horizontal Anticompetitive Practices

    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:lic:licosd:12202. 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: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/licosbe.html .

    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.