IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/apeclt/v14y2007i12p893-897.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Determinants of US antidumping decisions: four perspectives of international trade policymaking

Author

Listed:
  • Eunmi Kim
  • Minho Kim

Abstract

There are four theoretical perspectives that can be used to explain foreign trade policy tendencies: the international political view, the international economic view, the domestic statist view and the domestic societal view. By reflecting these four theoretical perspectives the determinants of US antidumping decisions are analysed. The findings indicate that the international political and domestic societal perspectives dominate the analysis. Specifically, international tension and the level of organization of interest group since 1980 appear to be highly relevant for understanding US antidumping decisions.

Suggested Citation

  • Eunmi Kim & Minho Kim, 2007. "Determinants of US antidumping decisions: four perspectives of international trade policymaking," Applied Economics Letters, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 14(12), pages 893-897.
  • Handle: RePEc:taf:apeclt:v:14:y:2007:i:12:p:893-897
    DOI: 10.1080/13504850600706313
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.informaworld.com/openurl?genre=article&doi=10.1080/13504850600706313&magic=repec&7C&7C8674ECAB8BB840C6AD35DC6213A474B5
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/13504850600706313?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. 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.
    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. 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.
    4. Gartzke, Erik & Li, Quan & Boehmer, Charles, 2001. "Investing in the Peace: Economic Interdependence and International Conflict," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 55(2), pages 391-438, April.
    5. Wilko Letterie & Otto Swank, 1997. "Electoral and partisan cycles between US economic performance and presidential popularity: a comment on Stephen E. Haynes," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 29(12), pages 1585-1592.
    6. Kishore Gawande & Usree Bandyopadhyay, 2000. "Is Protection for Sale? Evidence on the Grossman-Helpman Theory of Endogenous Protection," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 82(1), pages 139-152, February.
    7. Czinkota, Michael R. & Kotabe, Masaaki, 1997. "A marketing perspective of the U.S. International Trade Commission's antidumping actions--an empirical inquiry," Journal of World Business, Elsevier, vol. 32(2), pages 169-187, July.
    8. Jai Mah, 2000. "Antidumping decisions and macroeconomic variables in the USA," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 32(13), pages 1701-1709.
    9. Douglas A. Irwin, 2005. "The Rise of US Anti‐dumping Activity in Historical Perspective," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 28(5), pages 651-668, May.
    10. Snidal, Duncan, 1991. "Relative Gains and the Pattern of International Cooperation," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 85(3), pages 701-726, September.
    11. 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.
    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. Kokko, Ari & Gustavsson Tingvall, Patrik & Videnord, Josefin, 2017. "Which Antidumping Cases Reach the WTO?," Ratio Working Papers 286, The Ratio Institute.
    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. Rou Li, 2018. "The Research on Factors Which Affect Anti-dumping Investigation: Based on Probit Model," International Journal of Business and Management, Canadian Center of Science and Education, vol. 13(3), pages 252-252, February.
    4. Bown, Chad & Crowley, Meredith A., 2016. "The Empirical Landscape of Trade Policy," CEPR Discussion Papers 11216, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    5. Kuenzel, David J., 2020. "WTO tariff commitments and temporary protection: Complements or substitutes?," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 121(C).
    6. Georgios Georgiadis & Johannes Gräb, 2016. "Growth, Real Exchange Rates and Trade Protectionism since the Financial Crisis," Review of International Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 24(5), pages 1050-1080, November.
    7. Mustapha Sadni Jallab & Monnet Benoît Patrick Gbakou & René Sandretto, 2008. "L'influence des facteurs macroéconomiques sur les ouvertures d'enquêtes antidumping : le cas de l'Union Européenne et des États-Unis," Revue d'économie politique, Dalloz, vol. 118(4), pages 573-600.
    8. Li, Yue & Li, Wanli, 2022. "Are innovative exporters vulnerable to anti-dumping investigations?," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 112(C).
    9. Koichi Kagitani & Yasunobu Tomoda, 2022. "Foreign macroeconomic conditions and antidumping actions: evidence from the USA," International Economics and Economic Policy, Springer, vol. 19(4), pages 863-883, October.
    10. Oatley Thomas, 2010. "Real Exchange Rates and Trade Protectionism," Business and Politics, De Gruyter, vol. 12(2), pages 1-19, August.
    11. Bown, Chad P. & Crowley, Meredith A., 2013. "Import protection, business cycles, and exchange rates: Evidence from the Great Recession," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 90(1), pages 50-64.
    12. 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.
    13. Michael Moore, 2015. "Sanctuary markets and antidumping: an empirical analysis of U.S. exporters," Review of World Economics (Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv), Springer;Institut für Weltwirtschaft (Kiel Institute for the World Economy), vol. 151(2), pages 309-328, May.
    14. Nelson, Douglas, 2006. "The political economy of antidumping: A survey," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 22(3), pages 554-590, September.
    15. 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.
    16. 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.
    17. Neha Bhardwaj Upadhayay, 2020. "Uncovering the proliferation of contingent protection through channels of retaliation, gender and development assistance," Erudite Ph.D Dissertations, Erudite, number ph20-02 edited by Julie Lochard & Catherine Bros.
    18. Adam, Antonis & Moutos, Thomas, 2011. "A politico-economic analysis of minimum wages and wage subsidies," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 110(3), pages 171-173, March.
    19. 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.
    20. Deniz Igan & Prachi Mishra & Thierry Tressel, 2012. "A Fistful of Dollars: Lobbying and the Financial Crisis," NBER Macroeconomics Annual, University of Chicago Press, vol. 26(1), pages 195-230.

    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:taf:apeclt:v:14:y:2007:i:12:p:893-897. 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/RAEL20 .

    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.