IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/worlde/v30y2007i7p1170-1191.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

An Analysis of Factors Influencing the Anti‐dumping Behaviour in India

Author

Listed:
  • Nandana Baruah

Abstract

The use of anti‐dumping measures as a trade protection tool, has increased phenomenally during the last decade. One significant aspect of this new trend is the increasing involvement of developing countries. India is one such country which has emerged as a very frequent user of anti‐dumping measures, surpassing even the traditional users. It had initiated more than 300 anti‐dumping cases by the end of 2002–03. Many of these cases are against developing countries. Most of the cases are concentrated in narrow range product groups, like chemicals and petrochemicals, iron and steel, pharmaceuticals and textiles. This study examines India's experience with anti‐dumping measures. The main objective of the study is to identify the factors which might have influenced the anti‐dumping behaviour in India. Discussion of these factors shows that imports have increased considerably. This is particularly true for a number of developing countries facing dumping charges in India. At the same time, many of the domestic producers of the like products have performed poorly during the last decade. Such trends may instigate the import‐competing industries to seek anti‐dumping protection and may also influence the authority to provide that. However, the results of our statistical exercise show that, although imports and performance of the domestic industry might have influenced the initiation of anti‐dumping cases, these factors did not seem to significantly influence the final decision of the authority. The results rather indicated a tendency on the part of the authority to provide anti‐dumping protection to industries, which are characterised by a large number of firms.

Suggested Citation

  • Nandana Baruah, 2007. "An Analysis of Factors Influencing the Anti‐dumping Behaviour in India," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 30(7), pages 1170-1191, July.
  • Handle: RePEc:bla:worlde:v:30:y:2007:i:7:p:1170-1191
    DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-9701.2007.01031.x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9701.2007.01031.x
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/j.1467-9701.2007.01031.x?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Thomas J. Prusa & Susan Skeath, 2021. "The Economic and Strategic Motives for Antidumping Filings," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Thomas J Prusa (ed.), Economic Effects of Antidumping, chapter 11, pages 233-257, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    2. Michael M. Knetter & Thomas J. Prusa, 2021. "Macroeconomic factors and antidumping filings: evidence from four countries," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Thomas J Prusa (ed.), Economic Effects of Antidumping, chapter 8, pages 153-169, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    3. Michael P. Leidy, 1997. "Macroeconomic Conditions and Pressures for Protection under Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Laws: Empirical Evidence from the United States," IMF Staff Papers, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 44(1), pages 132-144, March.
    4. Robert E. Baldwin & Jeffrey W. Steagall, 1993. "An Analysis of Factors Influencing ITC Decisions in Antidumoing, Countervailing Duty and Safeguard Cases," NBER Working Papers 4282, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    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. Andreea Corina Nita & Maurizio Zanardi, 2013. "The First Review of EU Antidumping Reviews," Working Papers ECARES ECARES 2013-02, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.

    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. 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.
    2. Yi Liu & Ning Zhang, 2015. "Sustainability of Trade Liberalization and Antidumping: Evidence from Mexico’s Trade Liberalization toward China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(9), pages 1-20, August.
    3. Ning Meng & Chris Milner & Huasheng Song, 2016. "Differences in the determinants and targeting of antidumping: China and India compared," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 48(43), pages 4083-4097, September.
    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. Kokko, Ari & Gustavsson Tingvall, Patrik & Videnord, Josefin, 2017. "Which Antidumping Cases Reach the WTO?," Ratio Working Papers 286, The Ratio Institute.
    6. Niels, Gunnar & ten Kate, Adriaan, 2006. "Antidumping policy in developing countries: Safety valve or obstacle to free trade?," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 22(3), pages 618-638, September.
    7. Gunnar Niels & Adriaan Ten Kate, 2004. "Anti‐dumping Protection in a Liberalising Country: Mexico's Anti‐dumping Policy and Practice," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 27(7), pages 967-983, July.
    8. Aggarwal, Aradhna, 2004. "Macro Economic Determinants of Antidumping: A Comparative Analysis of Developed and Developing Countries," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 32(6), pages 1043-1057, June.
    9. Meredith A. Crowley, 2004. "Antidumping Policy Under Imperfect Competition: Theory and Evidence," Econometric Society 2004 North American Summer Meetings 443, Econometric Society.
    10. Jacobo, Alejandro D. & Jalile, Ileana R., 2020. "The Great Recession and the Determinants of Tariff and Antidumping Restrictions in Argentina, Brazil and Mexico: A Retrospective Study," Economia Internazionale / International Economics, Camera di Commercio Industria Artigianato Agricoltura di Genova, vol. 73(1), pages 107-130.
    11. Aradhna Aggarwal, 2003. "Patterns and determinants of anti-dumping: A worldwide perspective," Indian Council for Research on International Economic Relations, New Delhi Working Papers 113, Indian Council for Research on International Economic Relations, New Delhi, India.
    12. 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.
    13. Robert M. Feinberg & Kara M. Reynolds, 2006. "The Spread of Antidumping Regimes and the Role of Retaliation in Filings," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 72(4), pages 877-890, April.
    14. Moore, M.O. & Zanardi, M., 2006. "Does Antidumping Use Contribute to Trade Liberalization? An Empirical Analysis," Other publications TiSEM c0a19bf2-9849-4620-b109-e, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    15. Xingzheng Hou & Rongming Ren, 2006. "Cooperate or Antagonize: The EU's Dilemma on Anti‐dumping and Safeguard Measures against China," China & World Economy, Institute of World Economics and Politics, Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, vol. 14(6), pages 70-84, November.
    16. Kuenzel, David J., 2020. "WTO tariff commitments and temporary protection: Complements or substitutes?," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 121(C).
    17. Oatley Thomas, 2010. "Real Exchange Rates and Trade Protectionism," Business and Politics, De Gruyter, vol. 12(2), pages 1-19, August.
    18. Avsar, Veysel, 2014. "Partisanship and antidumping," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 38(C), pages 190-195.
    19. Michael M. Knetter & Thomas J. Prusa, 2021. "Macroeconomic factors and antidumping filings: evidence from four countries," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Thomas J Prusa (ed.), Economic Effects of Antidumping, chapter 8, pages 153-169, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    20. Joseph F. Francois & Gunnar Niels, 2004. "Political Influence in a New Antidumping Regime: Evidence from Mexico," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 04-011/2, Tinbergen Institute.

    More about this item

    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:bla:worlde:v:30:y:2007:i:7:p:1170-1191. 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/journal.asp?ref=0378-5920 .

    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.