IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/ijecbs/v8y2001i1p75-99.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Strategic Behaviour under European Antidumping Duties

Author

Listed:
  • Wilfried Pauwels
  • Hylke Vandenbussche
  • Marcel Weverbergh

Abstract

In this paper we develop a dynamic two-period model of imperfect competition to analyse the effects of European antidumping duties on firm behaviour and domestic welfare. Our model is one of the first to complement the European empirical literature on antidumping policy and can usefully be compared with papers dealing with the effects of US antidumping policy. We arrive at three important conclusions: (a) the strategic behaviour of European firms under European antidumping rules may run in the opposite direction compared to the incentives for US firms provided under the US antidumping rules; (b) US antidumping rules perform better than European rules in terms of domestic welfare and in terms of protecting domestic value added and employment; (c) the Strategic Trade Policy argument for protection need not apply for antidumping duties because the level of protection is endogenously determined by the firms involved.

Suggested Citation

  • Wilfried Pauwels & Hylke Vandenbussche & Marcel Weverbergh, 2001. "Strategic Behaviour under European Antidumping Duties," International Journal of the Economics of Business, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 8(1), pages 75-99.
    • Handle: RePEc:taf:ijecbs:v:8:y:2001:i:1:p:75-99
    DOI: 10.1080/13571510151075297
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.tandfonline.com/10.1080/13571510151075297
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/13571510151075297?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. repec:hoo:wpaper:e-90-8 is not listed on IDEAS
    2. Anderson, Simon P. & Schmitt, Nicolas & Thisse, Jacques-Francois, 1995. "Who benefits from antidumping legislation?," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 38(3-4), pages 321-337, May.
    3. Jonathan Eaton & Gene M. Grossman, 1986. "Optimal Trade and Industrial Policy Under Oligopoly," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 101(2), pages 383-406.
    4. David R. Collie & Vo Phuong Mai Le, 2010. "Antidumping Regulations: Anti‐Competitive and Anti‐Export," Review of International Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 18(5), pages 796-806, November.
    5. 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.
    6. 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.
    7. Roberts, John & Sonnenschein, Hugo, 1976. "On the existence of Cournot equilbrium without concave profit functions," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 13(1), pages 112-117, August.
    8. Robert W. Staiger & Frank A. Wolak, 1989. "Strategic Use of Antidumping Law to Enforce Tacit International Collusion," NBER Working Papers 3016, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    9. Nirvikar Singh & Xavier Vives, 1984. "Price and Quantity Competition in a Differentiated Duopoly," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 15(4), pages 546-554, Winter.
    10. Fischer, Ronald D., 1992. "Endogenous probability of protection and firm behavior," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 32(1-2), pages 149-163, February.
    11. Bruce A. Blonigen & Thomas J. Prusa, 2001. "Antidumping," NBER Working Papers 8398, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    12. Brander, James A. & Spencer, Barbara J., 1985. "Export subsidies and international market share rivalry," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 18(1-2), pages 83-100, February.
    13. Martin J. Osborne & Ariel Rubinstein, 1994. "A Course in Game Theory," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262650401, December.
    14. Hylke Vandenbussche, 1996. "Is European antidumping protection against Central Europe too high?," Review of World Economics (Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv), Springer;Institut für Weltwirtschaft (Kiel Institute for the World Economy), vol. 132(1), pages 116-138, March.
    15. 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.
    16. Patrick Messerlin, 1989. "The ec antidumping regulations: A first economic appraisal, 1980–85," Review of World Economics (Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv), Springer;Institut für Weltwirtschaft (Kiel Institute for the World Economy), vol. 125(3), pages 563-587, September.
    17. René Belderbos, 1997. "Antidumping and tariff Jumping: Japanese firms’ DFI in the European union and the United States," Review of World Economics (Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv), Springer;Institut für Weltwirtschaft (Kiel Institute for the World Economy), vol. 133(3), pages 419-457, September.
    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. Bruce Blonigen & Thomas Prusa, 2003. "The Cost of Antidumping: the Devil is in the Details," Journal of Economic Policy Reform, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 6(4), pages 233-245.
    2. David R. Collie & Vo Phuong Mai Le, 2010. "Antidumping Regulations: Anti‐Competitive and Anti‐Export," Review of International Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 18(5), pages 796-806, November.
    3. Park, Soonchan, 2009. "The trade depressing and trade diversion effects of antidumping actions: The case of China," China Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 20(3), pages 542-548, September.
    4. Christian Gormsen, 2011. "Antidumping with heterogeneous firms," Post-Print hal-00663024, HAL.
    5. Joseph, Siny & Lavoie, Nathalie, 2008. "Effectiveness of COOL in the U.S. Seafood Industry," 2008 Annual Meeting, July 27-29, 2008, Orlando, Florida 6260, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    6. Christian Gormsen, 2011. "Anti-dumping with heterogeneous firms," International Economics, CEPII research center, issue 125, pages 41-64.
    7. Martin Theuringer & Pia Weiss, 2001. "Do Anti-Dumping Rules Facilitate the Abuse of Market Dominance?," International Trade 0108002, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    8. 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.
    9. Ray-Yun Chang & Hong Hwang & Cheng-Hau Peng, 2020. "Antidumping protection and welfare in a differentiated duopoly," The Japanese Economic Review, Springer, vol. 71(3), pages 421-446, July.
    10. 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.
    11. Laura ROVEGNO, 2013. "Endogenous trade restrictions and exporters’ pricing," LIDAM Discussion Papers IRES 2013023, Université catholique de Louvain, Institut de Recherches Economiques et Sociales (IRES).
    12. 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.
    13. Crowley Meredith A., 2010. "Split Decisions in Antidumping Cases," The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 10(1), pages 1-26, July.
    14. Michel DE VROEY, 2013. "What can civil society expect from academic macroeconomics?," LIDAM Discussion Papers IRES 2013022, Université catholique de Louvain, Institut de Recherches Economiques et Sociales (IRES).
    15. Christian Gormsen, 2011. "Antidumping with heterogeneous firms," PSE-Ecole d'économie de Paris (Postprint) hal-00663024, HAL.
    16. Nelson, Douglas, 2006. "The political economy of antidumping: A survey," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 22(3), pages 554-590, September.
    17. Evenett, Simon J., 2006. "The simple analytics of U.S. antidumping orders: Bureaucratic discretion, anti-importer bias, and the Byrd amendment," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 22(3), pages 732-749, September.
    18. 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).
    19. Laura Rovegno, 2013. "Endogenous trade restrictions and exporters’ pricing behaviour," LICOS Discussion Papers 34213, LICOS - Centre for Institutions and Economic Performance, KU Leuven.
    20. Bruce A. Blonigen & Thomas J. Prusa, 2001. "Antidumping," NBER Working Papers 8398, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    21. Falvey, Rod & Wittayarungruangsri, Sarut, 2006. "Market size and antidumping in duopolistic competition," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 22(3), pages 771-786, September.

    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. 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.
    2. 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.
    3. Belderbos, R. & Vandenbussche, H. & Veugelers, R., 2004. "Antidumping duties, undertakings, and foreign direct investment in the EU," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 48(2), pages 429-453, April.
    4. Nelson, Douglas, 2006. "The political economy of antidumping: A survey," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 22(3), pages 554-590, September.
    5. Qiu, Larry D., 1995. "Why can't countervailing duties deter export subsidization?," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 39(3-4), pages 249-272, November.
    6. Martin Theuringer & Pia Weiss, 2001. "Do Anti-Dumping Rules Facilitate the Abuse of Market Dominance?," International Trade 0108002, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    7. José Luis Moraga-González & Jean-Marie Viaene, 2004. "Anti-Dumping, Intra-Industry Trade and Quality Reversals," CESifo Working Paper Series 1365, CESifo.
    8. Yoshitomo Ogawa & Yoshiyasu Ono, 2011. "The Byrd Amendment as Facilitating a Tacit International Business Collusion," Review of International Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 19(5), pages 877-893, November.
    9. Bruce Blonigen & Thomas Prusa, 2003. "The Cost of Antidumping: the Devil is in the Details," Journal of Economic Policy Reform, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 6(4), pages 233-245.
    10. Jan Haaland & Ian Wooton, 1998. "Antidumping jumping: Reciprocal antidumping and industrial location," Review of World Economics (Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv), Springer;Institut für Weltwirtschaft (Kiel Institute for the World Economy), vol. 134(2), pages 340-362, June.
    11. 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.
    12. Xenia Matschke & Anja Schöttner, 2013. "Antidumping as Strategic Trade Policy under Asymmetric Information," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 80(1), pages 81-105, July.
    13. Meredith A. Crowley, 2004. "Antidumping Policy Under Imperfect Competition: Theory and Evidence," Econometric Society 2004 North American Summer Meetings 443, Econometric Society.
    14. Haufler, Andreas & Pflüger, Michael, 2003. "Market structure and the taxation of international trade," Discussion Papers in Economics 106, University of Munich, Department of Economics.
    15. Krishna, Kala & Roy, Suddhasatwa & Thursby, Marie, 1998. "Implementing Market Access," Review of International Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 6(4), pages 529-544, November.
      • Krishna, K & Roy, S & Thursby, M, 1996. "Implementaing Market Access," Papers 96-003, Purdue University, Krannert School of Management - Center for International Business Education and Research (CIBER).
      • Krishna, K & Thursby, M & Roy, S, 1996. "Implementing Market Access," Papers 96-011, Purdue University, Krannert School of Management - Center for International Business Education and Research (CIBER).
      • Kala Krishna & Suddhasatwa Roy & Marie Thursby, 1996. "Implementing Market Access," NBER Working Papers 5593, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    16. Dobrin R. Kolev & Thomas J. Prusa, 2021. "Dumping and double crossing: The (in)effectiveness of cost-based trade policy under incomplete information," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Thomas J Prusa (ed.), Economic Effects of Antidumping, chapter 7, pages 129-152, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    17. Elizabeth Schroeder & Victor Tremblay, 2015. "A Reappraisal of Strategic Trade Policy," Journal of Industry, Competition and Trade, Springer, vol. 15(4), pages 435-442, December.
    18. Ma, Jie & Ulph, Alistair, 2004. "Advertising in a differentiated duopoly and its policy implications for an open economy," Discussion Paper Series In Economics And Econometrics 0406, Economics Division, School of Social Sciences, University of Southampton.
    19. Robert W. Staiger & Frank A. Wolak, 1994. "Measuring Industry-Specific Protection: Antidumping in the United States," Brookings Papers on Economic Activity, Economic Studies Program, The Brookings Institution, vol. 25(1994 Micr), pages 51-118.
    20. Bourreau, Marc & Manenti, Fabio M., 2023. "Selling cross-border in online markets: The impact of the ban on geoblocking strategies," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 86(C).

    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:taf:ijecbs:v:8:y:2001:i:1:p:75-99. 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: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/CIJB20 .

    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.