IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/not/notgep/16-16.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

The good, the bad and the ugly: Chinese imports, EU anti-dumping measures and firm performance

Author

Listed:
  • Liza Jabbour
  • Enrico Vanino
  • Zhigang Tao
  • Yan Zhang

Abstract

Despite growing international trade flows, the last decades have been characterized by an increasing recurrence to protectionist measures, especially through the adoption of anti-dumping (AD) measures. Dumping strategies might reduce international competition although the literature has frequently questioned to what extent AD measures have to do with unfair trade. Increasing concerns have been raised about the possible protectionist abuse of this trade defence instrument, especially in developed countries which may use AD actions to defend their mature industries from the price-competition of emerging economies. This paper provides a comprehensive analysis of the European Union (EU) AD measures against Chinese imports, looking at the contrasting effect on the performance of Chinese exporters, European producers and European importers. Our results suggest that EU AD measures successfully reduced the number of Chinese exporters although this results in an increase in the productivity of those remaining. The same EU AD measures have a mixed impact on the performance of European firms, bringing temporary benefits for domestic producers, but negatively affecting importers, with a perverse long-run effect of a reduced productivity gap between Chinese exporters and European firms.

Suggested Citation

  • Liza Jabbour & Enrico Vanino & Zhigang Tao & Yan Zhang, 2016. "The good, the bad and the ugly: Chinese imports, EU anti-dumping measures and firm performance," Discussion Papers 2016-16, University of Nottingham, GEP.
    • Handle: RePEc:not:notgep:16/16
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.nottingham.ac.uk/gep/documents/papers/2016/2016-16.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Mayda, Anna Maria & Rodrik, Dani, 2005. "Why are some people (and countries) more protectionist than others?," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 49(6), pages 1393-1430, August.
    2. Thierry Mayer & Gianmarco Ottaviano, 2008. "The Happy Few: The Internationalisation of European Firms," Intereconomics: Review of European Economic Policy, Springer;ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics;Centre for European Policy Studies (CEPS), vol. 43(3), pages 135-148, May.
    3. Lu, Yi & Tao, Zhigang & Zhang, Yan, 2013. "How do exporters respond to antidumping investigations?," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 91(2), pages 290-300.
    4. Seung-Hyun Lee & Yoon-Suk Baik, 2010. "Corporate Lobbying in Antidumping Cases: Looking into the Continued Dumping and Subsidy Offset Act," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 96(3), pages 467-478, October.
    5. 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.
    6. Wu, Shih-Jye & Chang, Yang-Ming & Chen, Hung-Yi, 2014. "Antidumping duties and price undertakings: A welfare analysis," International Review of Economics & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 29(C), pages 97-107.
    7. Zanardi, Maurizio, 2006. "Antidumping: A problem in international trade," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 22(3), pages 591-617, September.
    8. 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.
    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. 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.
    11. Laura ROVEGNO & Hylke VANDENBUSSCHE, 2011. "A comparative analysis of EU Antidumping rules and application," LIDAM Discussion Papers IRES 2011023, Université catholique de Louvain, Institut de Recherches Economiques et Sociales (IRES).
    12. repec:hal:spmain:info:hdl:2441/10147 is not listed on IDEAS
    13. Nelson, Douglas, 2006. "The political economy of antidumping: A survey," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 22(3), pages 554-590, September.
    14. 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.
    15. repec:lic:licosd:28511 is not listed on IDEAS
    16. 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).
    17. 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.
    18. repec:hal:wpspec:info:hdl:2441/10147 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. Huang, Kenneth G. & Jia, Nan & Ge, Yeyanran, 2024. "Forced to innovate? Consequences of United States' anti-dumping sanctions on innovations of Chinese exporters," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 53(1).
    2. Felbermayr, Gabriel & Sandkamp, Alexander, 2020. "The trade effects of anti-dumping duties: Firm-level evidence from China," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 122(C).

    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. Jabbour, Liza & Tao, Zhigang & Vanino, Enrico & Zhang, Yan, 2019. "The good, the bad and the ugly: Chinese imports, European Union anti-dumping measures and firm performance," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 117(C), pages 1-20.
    2. Yan Zhang, 2017. "Impact of Latin-American and Caribbean Antidumping Measures on Chinese Exports," IDB Publications (Working Papers) 97857, Inter-American Development Bank.
    3. Dmitri Nizovtsev & Alexandre Skiba, 2016. "Import Demand Elasticity and Exporter Response to Anti-Dumping Duties," The International Trade Journal, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 30(2), pages 83-114, March.
    4. Sandkamp, Alexander, 2020. "The trade effects of antidumping duties: Evidence from the 2004 EU enlargement," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 123(C).
    5. Felbermayr, Gabriel & Sandkamp, Alexander, 2020. "The trade effects of anti-dumping duties: Firm-level evidence from China," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 122(C).
    6. 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.
    7. Chang, Yang-Ming & Raza, Mian F., 2023. "Dumping, antidumping duties, and price undertakings," Research in Economics, Elsevier, vol. 77(1), pages 131-151.
    8. Tibor Besedeš & Thomas J. Prusa, 2017. "The Hazardous Effects Of Antidumping," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 55(1), pages 9-30, January.
    9. Chrysostomos Tabakis & Maurizio Zanardi, 2017. "Antidumping Echoing," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 55(2), pages 655-681, April.
    10. Bruno Mazzucco & Mauricio Bittencourt, 2022. "Does antidumping drive exporters out of the market? Some evidence from Brazil," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 45(12), pages 3833-3857, December.
    11. Lu, Yi & Tao, Zhigang & Zhang, Yan, 2013. "How do exporters respond to antidumping investigations?," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 91(2), pages 290-300.
    12. Meng, Ning & Milner, Chris & Song, Huasheng, 2020. "Antidumping and heterogeneous quality adjustment of multi-product firms: Evidence from Chinese exporters," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 92(C), pages 147-161.
    13. Chad P. Bown & Paola Conconi & Aksel Erbahar & Lorenzo Trimarchi, 2020. "Trade Protection along Supply Chains," CESifo Working Paper Series 8812, CESifo.
    14. Xiuping Hua & Ying Jiang & Qian Sun & Xinyi Xing, 2019. "Do antidumping measures affect Chinese export-related firms?," Review of Quantitative Finance and Accounting, Springer, vol. 52(3), pages 871-900, April.
    15. Veysel Avsar & Gultekin Gollu & Nurgul Sevinc, 2022. "Strict trade measures, flexible financing," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 88(4), pages 1431-1452, April.
    16. 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.
    17. Tibor Besedeš & Thomas J. Prusa, 2013. "Antidumping and the Death of Trade," NBER Working Papers 19555, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    18. Aquilante, Tommaso, 2015. "Bureaucrats or Politicians? Political Parties and Antidumping in the US," MPRA Paper 70359, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    19. Laura Rovegno, 2013. "Trade protection and market power: evidence from US antidumping and countervailing duties," Review of World Economics (Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv), Springer;Institut für Weltwirtschaft (Kiel Institute for the World Economy), vol. 149(3), pages 443-476, September.
    20. Avsar Veysel, 2017. "The Anatomy of Trade Deflection," Global Economy Journal, De Gruyter, vol. 17(4), pages 1-11, December.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    anti-dumping; difference-in-differences; China; European Union; trade policy; lobbying;
    All these keywords.

    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:not:notgep:16/16. 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: Hilary Hughes (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/cgnotuk.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.