IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hal/wpcatt/hal-01880359.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Antidumping, Social Quality of Goods and Smear Campaign

Author

Listed:
  • Patrice Cassagnard

    (CATT - Centre d'Analyse Théorique et de Traitement des données économiques - UPPA - Université de Pau et des Pays de l'Adour)

Abstract

This article proposes to uncover another motivation behind the introduction of antidumping duties through the interaction between a Northern firm, a Southern one and an administering authority in charge of setting an antidumping procedure. The goods from the South are assumed to be ethically unsound while those from the North are ethically sound. Both firms compete on price in order to satisfy the demand of the North. We show that a smear campaign engaged by the domestic firm may influence the antidumping duty by reducing the credence of the consumers in the Southern good. Moreover it can discourage the foreign firm to actively cooperate in the antidumping investigation and this reaction of the Southern firm may increase the antidumping duty.

Suggested Citation

  • Patrice Cassagnard, 2009. "Antidumping, Social Quality of Goods and Smear Campaign," Working papers of CATT hal-01880359, HAL.
  • Handle: RePEc:hal:wpcatt:hal-01880359
    Note: View the original document on HAL open archive server: https://hal-univ-pau.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-01880359
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://hal-univ-pau.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-01880359/document
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Leonard K. Cheng & Larry D. Qiu & Kit Pong Wong, 2001. "Anti-dumping measures as a tool of protectionism: A mechanism design approach," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 34(3), pages 639-660, August.
    2. Bhagwati, Jagdish N, 1982. "Directly Unproductive, Profit-seeking (DUP) Activities," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 90(5), pages 988-1002, October.
    3. Thomas J. Prusa, 2021. "Why are so many antidumping petitions withdrawn?," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Thomas J Prusa (ed.), Economic Effects of Antidumping, chapter 2, pages 1-20, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    4. Rodrik, Dani, 1986. "Tariffs, subsidies, and welfare with endogenous policy," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 21(3-4), pages 285-299, November.
    5. Wendy L Hansen & Thomas J Prusa, 2021. "Cumulation and ITC decision-making: The sum of the parts is greater than the whole," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Thomas J Prusa (ed.), Economic Effects of Antidumping, chapter 9, pages 171-194, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    6. Giovanni Maggi & Pinelopi Koujianou Goldberg, 1999. "Protection for Sale: An Empirical Investigation," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 89(5), pages 1135-1155, December.
    7. 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.
    8. Michael P. Leidy & Bernard M. Hoekman, 1991. "Spurious Injury As Indirect Rent Seeking: Free Trade Under The Prospect Of Protection," Economics and Politics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 3(2), pages 111-137, July.
    9. Jean‐Marie Cardebat & Patrice Cassagnard, 2010. "North South Trade and Supervision of the Social Quality of Goods from the South," Review of International Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 18(1), pages 168-178, February.
    10. Subhayu Bandyopadhyay & Sajal Lahiri & Suryadipta Roy, 2011. "Political Asymmetry And Common External Tariffs In A Customs Union," Economics and Politics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 23(1), pages 88-106, March.
    11. Moore, Michael O. & Suranovic, Steven M., 1992. "Lobbying vs. administered protection : Endogenous industry choice and national welfare," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 32(3-4), pages 289-303, May.
    12. 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.
    13. Moore, Michael O., 2005. ""Facts available" dumping allegations: when will foreign firms cooperate in antidumping petitions?," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 21(1), pages 185-204, March.
    14. repec:hoo:wpaper:e-89-20 is not listed on IDEAS
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Patrice Cassagnard, 2009. "Antidumping, Social Quality of Goods and Smear Campaign," Working Papers hal-01880359, HAL.
    2. Patrice CASSAGNARD, 2009. "Antidumping, Social Quality of Goods and Smear Campaign," Working Papers 10, CATT - UPPA - Université de Pau et des Pays de l'Adour, revised Nov 2009.
    3. Nelson, Douglas, 2006. "The political economy of antidumping: A survey," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 22(3), pages 554-590, September.
    4. Maurizio Zanardi, 2004. "Antidumping law as a collusive device," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 37(1), pages 95-122, February.
    5. 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..
    6. Gasmi, Farid & Malin, Eric & Tandé, François, 2004. "Lobbying in Antidumping," IDEI Working Papers 320, Institut d'Économie Industrielle (IDEI), Toulouse.
    7. David Godsell & Michael Welker & Ning Zhang, 2017. "Earnings Management During Antidumping Investigations in Europe: Sample‐Wide and Cross‐Sectional Evidence," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 55(2), pages 407-457, May.
    8. Aradhna Aggrawal, 2003. "The WTO antidumping code: Issues for review in Post-Doha negotiations," Indian Council for Research on International Economic Relations, New Delhi Working Papers 99, Indian Council for Research on International Economic Relations, New Delhi, India.
    9. Colin A. Carter & Tina L. Saitone & K. Aleks Schaefer, 2019. "Managed trade: The USMexico sugar suspension agreements," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 52(3), pages 1195-1222, August.
    10. Kokko, Ari & Gustavsson Tingvall, Patrik & Videnord, Josefin, 2017. "Which Antidumping Cases Reach the WTO?," Ratio Working Papers 286, The Ratio Institute.
    11. Thomas J. Prusa, 2021. "The Trade Effects of U.S. Antidumping Actions," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Thomas J Prusa (ed.), Economic Effects of Antidumping, chapter 3, pages 21-43, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    12. Martin Theuringer & Pia Weiss, 2001. "Do Anti-Dumping Rules Facilitate the Abuse of Market Dominance?," International Trade 0108002, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    13. Bin, Sheng, 2000. "The Political Economy of Trade Policy in China," Working Papers 10/2000, Copenhagen Business School, Department of Management, Politics & Philosophy.
    14. Benjamin Liebman, 2004. "ITC voting behavior on sunset reviews," Review of World Economics (Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv), Springer;Institut für Weltwirtschaft (Kiel Institute for the World Economy), vol. 140(3), pages 446-475, September.
    15. Poonam Gupta & Arvind Panagariya, 2006. "Injury Investigations in Antidumping and the Super-Additivity Effect: A Theoretical Explanation," Review of World Economics (Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv), Springer;Institut für Weltwirtschaft (Kiel Institute for the World Economy), vol. 142(1), pages 151-164, April.
    16. 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.
    17. Blonigen, Bruce A. & Bown, Chad P., 2003. "Antidumping and retaliation threats," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 60(2), pages 249-273, August.
    18. 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.
    19. Devashish Mitra & Dimitrios D. Thomakos & Mehmet A. Ulubaşoĝlu, 2016. "Protection Versus Promotion: An Empirical Investigation," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: The Political Economy of Trade Policy Theory, Evidence and Applications, chapter 12, pages 221-236, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    20. Cassing, James H. & Long, Ngo Van, 2021. "Trade in trash: A political economy approach," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 67(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:hal:wpcatt:hal-01880359. 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: CATT - UPPA - Université de Pau et des Pays de l'Adour (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/ .

    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.