IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/poleco/v17y2001i2p421-444.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

How should "protection" be evaluated in Article III GATT disputes?

Author

Listed:
  • Neven, Damien J.

Abstract

No abstract is available for this item.

Suggested Citation

  • Neven, Damien J., 2001. "How should "protection" be evaluated in Article III GATT disputes?," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 17(2), pages 421-444, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:poleco:v:17:y:2001:i:2:p:421-444
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0176-2680(01)00035-0
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    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. Paul R. Krugman, 1991. "The move toward free trade zones," Proceedings - Economic Policy Symposium - Jackson Hole, Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City, pages 7-58.
    2. Horn, Henrik & Mavroidis, Petros C., 2001. "Economic and legal aspects of the Most-Favored-Nation clause," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 17(2), pages 233-279, June.
    3. Baldwin, Richard E. & Venables, Anthony J., 1995. "Regional economic integration," Handbook of International Economics, in: G. M. Grossman & K. Rogoff (ed.), Handbook of International Economics, edition 1, volume 3, chapter 31, pages 1597-1644, Elsevier.
    4. Mattoo, Aaditya & Subramanian, Arvind, 1998. "Regulatory Autonomy and Multilateral Disciplines: The Dilemma and a Possible Resolution," Journal of International Economic Law, Oxford University Press, vol. 1(2), pages 303-322, June.
    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. Tropeano, Jean-Philippe, 2020. "Ex ante or Ex post? When the timing of merger assessment is up to the merging firms," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(C).
    2. Petros C. Mavroidis & Damien J. Neven, 2019. "Greening the WTO. EGA, tariff concessions and policy likeness," RSCAS Working Papers 2019/07, European University Institute.
    3. Tomaso Duso & Damien J. Neven & Lars-Hendrik Röller, 2007. "The Political Economy of European Merger Control: Evidence using Stock Market Data," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 50(3), pages 455-489.
    4. Yu-Ter Wang, 2007. "The number of firms, international product differentiation and an import tariff," Applied Economics Letters, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 14(14), pages 1087-1089.
    5. Andreea Cosnita‐Langlais & Jean‐Philippe Tropeano, 2023. "Merger selection, evidence provision, and the timing of merger control," Bulletin of Economic Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 75(1), pages 209-222, January.
    6. Damien Neven, 2002. "Discrepancies Between Markets and Regulators: an Analysis of the First ten Years of EU Merger Control," IHEID Working Papers 10-2002, Economics Section, The Graduate Institute of International Studies.
    7. Petros C. Mavroidis & Damien Neven, 2018. "Things have changed (or Have they?) Tariff protection and environmental concerns in the WTO," IHEID Working Papers 04-2018, Economics Section, The Graduate Institute of International Studies.
    8. Damien Neven & Vilen Lipatov & Gregor Langus, 2014. "European champions and competition enforcement:Is DG COMP in ideological denial?," IHEID Working Papers 15-2014, Economics Section, The Graduate Institute of International Studies.
    9. Petros C. Mavroidis & Damien J. Neveny, 2018. "Things have changed (or Have they ?) Tariff protection and environmental concerns in the WTO," RSCAS Working Papers 2018/20, European University Institute.

    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. Bagwell,K. & Staiger,R.W., 2000. "GATT-think," Working papers 19, Wisconsin Madison - Social Systems.
    2. Horn, Henrik & Mavroidis, Petros C., 2001. "Economic and legal aspects of the Most-Favored-Nation clause," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 17(2), pages 233-279, June.
    3. Soegaard, Christain, 2013. "An Oligopolistic Theory of Regional Trade Agreements," Economic Research Papers 270542, University of Warwick - Department of Economics.
    4. Ludema, Rodney D., 2002. "Increasing returns, multinationals and geography of preferential trade agreements," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 56(2), pages 329-358, March.
    5. Wilhelm Kohler, 2000. "Die Osterweiterung der EU aus der Sicht bestehender Mitgliedsländer: Was lehrt uns die Theorie der ökonomischen Integration?," Economics working papers 2000-01, Department of Economics, Johannes Kepler University Linz, Austria.
    6. Dominik Naeher, 2015. "An Empirical Estimation of Asia's Untapped Regional Integration Potential Using Data Envelopment Analysis," Asian Development Review, MIT Press, vol. 32(2), pages 178-195, September.
    7. Baier, Scott L. & Bergstrand, Jeffrey H., 2004. "Economic determinants of free trade agreements," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 64(1), pages 29-63, October.
    8. Rodney D. Ludema, 1999. "Why are Preferential Trade Agreements Regional? Increasing Returns, Multinationals and the Geography of Free Trade Agreements," International Trade 9903002, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    9. Oleksandr Shepotylo, 2009. "EU Integration and Trade: a Look from the Outside of the EU Eastern Border?," Discussion Papers 22, Kyiv School of Economics.
    10. Greenaway, David & Torstensson, Johan, 2000. "Economic Geography, Comparative Advantage and Trade within Industries: Evidence from the OECD," Journal of Economic Integration, Center for Economic Integration, Sejong University, vol. 15, pages 260-280.
    11. Andreas P. Cornett, 1998. "The problem of transition and reintegration of East and Central Europe: conceptual remarks and empirical problems," ERSA conference papers ersa98p185, European Regional Science Association.
    12. Jeffrey D. Sachs & Xiaokai Yang & Dingsheng Zhang, 1999. "Trade Pattern and Economic Development when Endogenous and Exogenous Comparative Advantages Coexist," CID Working Papers 03A, Center for International Development at Harvard University.
    13. Chad P. Bown & Patricia Tovar, 2016. "Preferential Liberalization, Antidumping, and Safeguards: Stumbling Block Evidence from MERCOSUR," Economics and Politics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 28(3), pages 262-294, November.
    14. Saggi, Kamal & Wong, Woan Foong & Yildiz, Halis Murat, 2017. "Preferential Trade Agreements and Rules of the Multilateral Trading System," MPRA Paper 76330, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    15. Cyriac Guillaumin & Guillaume Vallet, 2012. "La Suisse et la zone euro : votre monnaie, notre problème ? La possibilité d'un ancrage de jure," Revue d'économie politique, Dalloz, vol. 122(5), pages 629-655.
    16. Joseph Francois & Ian Wooton, 2010. "Market Structure and Market Access," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 33(7), pages 873-893, July.
    17. Madani, Dorsati H., 2001. "South-South regional integration and industrial growth : the case of the Andean Pact," Policy Research Working Paper Series 2614, The World Bank.
    18. Panagariya, A., 1997. "Preferential trading and the myth of natural trading partners," Japan and the World Economy, Elsevier, vol. 9(4), pages 471-489, December.
    19. Haufler, Andreas & Pflüger, Michael, 2003. "Market structure and the taxation of international trade," Discussion Papers in Economics 106, University of Munich, Department of Economics.
    20. Baldwin, Richard E. & Forslid, Rikard, 2000. "Trade liberalisation and endogenous growth: A q-theory approach," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 50(2), pages 497-517, April.

    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:eee:poleco:v:17:y:2001:i:2:p:421-444. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/inca/505544 .

    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.