IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/pra/mprapa/38790.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

How exporters respond to antidumping investigations?

Author

Listed:
  • Lu, Yi
  • Tao, Zhigang
  • Zhang, Yan

Abstract

Using China Customs data that cover monthly transactions of all Chinese exporters, we investigate how Chinese exporters respond to U.S. antidumping investigations during the 2000-2006 period. Our difference-in-differences analysis uncovers a number of findings: (1) the substantial trade-dampening effect at the product level operates mostly at the extensive margin (i.e., a decrease in the number of exporters) rather than the intensive margin (i.e., a decrease in the export volume per exporter); (2) direct exporters are more likely to exit the U.S. market than trade intermediaries upon both the affirmative preliminary and final ITC determinations; (3) multi-product direct exporters are more likely to exit the U.S. market than single-product direct exporters upon the affirmative preliminary ITC determination, but the opposite holds upon the affirmative final ITC determination; and (4) little price adjustment to antidumping investigations are found at either the product level or firm-product level. We then provide a coherent explanation to the aforementioned findings based on recent developments in trade theories.

Suggested Citation

  • Lu, Yi & Tao, Zhigang & Zhang, Yan, 2012. "How exporters respond to antidumping investigations?," MPRA Paper 38790, University Library of Munich, Germany.
  • Handle: RePEc:pra:mprapa:38790
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/38790/1/MPRA_paper_38790.pdf
    File Function: original version
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. 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.
    2. Thierry Mayer & Marc J. Melitz & Gianmarco I. P. Ottaviano, 2014. "Market Size, Competition, and the Product Mix of Exporters," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 104(2), pages 495-536, February.
    3. Marc J. Melitz & Gianmarco I. P. Ottaviano, 2008. "Market Size, Trade, and Productivity," Review of Economic Studies, Oxford University Press, vol. 75(1), pages 295-316.
    4. Bruce A. Blonigen & Jee-Hyeong Park, 2004. "Dynamic Pricing in the Presence of Antidumping Policy: Theory and Evidence," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 94(1), pages 134-154, March.
    5. Konings, Jozef & Vandenbussche, Hylke, 2008. "Heterogeneous responses of firms to trade protection," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 76(2), pages 371-383, December.
    6. 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.
    7. Peter Egger & Douglas Nelson, 2011. "How Bad Is Antidumping? Evidence from Panel Data," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 93(4), pages 1374-1390, November.
    8. Bown, Chad P. & Crowley, Meredith A., 2007. "Trade deflection and trade depression," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 72(1), pages 176-201, May.
    9. 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.
    10. Thierry Mayer & Marc J. Melitz & Gianmarco I. P. Ottaviano, 2014. "Market Size, Competition, and the Product Mix of Exporters," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 104(2), pages 495-536, February.
    11. Guido W. Imbens & Jeffrey M. Wooldridge, 2009. "Recent Developments in the Econometrics of Program Evaluation," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 47(1), pages 5-86, March.
    12. Marianne Bertrand & Esther Duflo & Sendhil Mullainathan, 2004. "How Much Should We Trust Differences-In-Differences Estimates?," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 119(1), pages 249-275.
    13. Ahn, JaeBin & Khandelwal, Amit K. & Wei, Shang-Jin, 2011. "The role of intermediaries in facilitating trade," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 84(1), pages 73-85, May.
    14. Thierry Mayer & Marc J. Melitz & Gianmarco I. P. Ottaviano, 2014. "Market Size, Competition, and the Product Mix of Exporters," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 104(2), pages 495-536, February.
    15. Zanardi, Maurizio, 2006. "Antidumping: A problem in international trade," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 22(3), pages 591-617, September.
    16. Blonigen, Bruce A., 2002. "Tariff-jumping antidumping duties," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 57(1), pages 31-49, June.
    17. Pierce, Justin R., 2011. "Plant-level responses to antidumping duties: Evidence from U.S. manufacturers," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 85(2), pages 222-233.
    18. Thierry Mayer & Marc J. Melitz & Gianmarco I. P. Ottaviano, 2014. "Market Size, Competition, and the Product Mix of Exporters," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 104(2), pages 495-536, February.
    19. 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.
    20. repec:spo:wpecon:info:hdl:2441/c8dmi8nm4pdjkuc9g8m210prh is not listed on IDEAS
    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. Chandra, Piyush & Long, Cheryl, 2013. "Anti-dumping Duties and their Impact on Exporters: Firm Level Evidence from China," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 169-186.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Antidumping investigations; Difference-in-differences estimation; Extensive and intensive margins; Trade intermediaries; Single- versus multi-product exporters;

    JEL classification:

    • D21 - Microeconomics - - Production and Organizations - - - Firm Behavior: Theory
    • L25 - Industrial Organization - - Firm Objectives, Organization, and Behavior - - - Firm Performance
    • F13 - International Economics - - Trade - - - Trade Policy; International Trade Organizations
    • F14 - International Economics - - Trade - - - Empirical Studies of Trade

    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:pra:mprapa:38790. 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: (Joachim Winter). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/vfmunde.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.