IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/uitjxx/v28y2014i3p195-228.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Does Antidumping Address "Unfair" Trade?

Author

Listed:
  • Derk Bienen
  • Dan Ciuriak
  • Timoth�e Picarello

Abstract

While antidumping laws were originally developed as the international trade analogue of domestic competition or antitrust policies, most vestiges of competition policy disappeared early in their evolution. Nonetheless, the formal justification for modern antidumping practice remains founded on countering "unfair" trading practices and preserving competitive markets. We update and consolidate a relatively thin literature that has examined this issue formally. Applying a "likelihood of predatory practice" index to the European Union's use of antidumping proceedings over the period 2001 to 2010, we find more antidumping cases that suggest competition policy concerns than do previous studies, although these are still a minority.

Suggested Citation

  • Derk Bienen & Dan Ciuriak & Timoth�e Picarello, 2014. "Does Antidumping Address "Unfair" Trade?," The International Trade Journal, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 28(3), pages 195-228, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:taf:uitjxx:v:28:y:2014:i:3:p:195-228
    DOI: 10.1080/08853908.2013.878233
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/08853908.2013.878233
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/08853908.2013.878233?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. Bruce A. Blonigen, 2006. "Evolving discretionary practices of U.S. antidumping activity," Canadian Journal of Economics/Revue canadienne d'économique, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 39(3), pages 874-900, August.
    2. Dan Ciuriak, 2005. "Anti‐dumping at 100 Years and Counting: A Canadian Perspective," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 28(5), pages 641-649, May.
    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. 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.
    2. Chad P. Bown, 2010. "China's WTO Entry: Antidumping, Safeguards, and Dispute Settlement," NBER Chapters, in: China's Growing Role in World Trade, pages 281-337, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    3. Arastou Khatibi & Wouter Vergote, 2018. "Antidumping as a signaling device under the WTO’s ADA non-disclosure clause," Review of World Economics (Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv), Springer;Institut für Weltwirtschaft (Kiel Institute for the World Economy), vol. 154(4), pages 649-673, November.
    4. Froese, Marc D., 2006. "Contingent Protection Measures and the Management of the Softwood Lumber Trade in North America," Estey Centre Journal of International Law and Trade Policy, Estey Centre for Law and Economics in International Trade, vol. 7(2), pages 1-26.
    5. Douglas Irwin, 2004. "The Rise of U.S. Antidumping Actions in Historical Perspective," NBER Working Papers 10582, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    6. Aradhna Aggarwal, 2008. "Anti-dumping Protection: Who Gets It? An Exploratory Analysis of Anti-dumping Use in the Most Active User Countries," Working Papers id:1374, eSocialSciences.
    7. Christian Gormsen, 2011. "Antidumping with heterogeneous firms," Post-Print hal-00663024, HAL.
    8. Wang, Xiaojin & Reed, Michael, 2015. "Trade Deflection arising from U.S. Antidumping Duties on Imported Shrimp," 2015 Annual Meeting, January 31-February 3, 2015, Atlanta, Georgia 196978, Southern Agricultural Economics Association.
    9. Mr. Douglas A. Irwin, 2005. "The Rise of U.S. Antidumping Activity in Historical Perspective," IMF Working Papers 2005/031, International Monetary Fund.
    10. Christian Gormsen, 2011. "Antidumping with heterogeneous firms," PSE-Ecole d'économie de Paris (Postprint) hal-00663024, HAL.
    11. Michael Moore & Alan Fox, 2010. "Why don’t foreign firms cooperate in US antidumping investigations? An empirical analysis," Review of World Economics (Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv), Springer;Institut für Weltwirtschaft (Kiel Institute for the World Economy), vol. 145(4), pages 597-613, January.
    12. 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.
    13. 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).
    14. Cassing, James & To, Ted, 2008. "Antidumping, signaling and cheap talk," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 75(2), pages 373-382, July.
    15. Chrysostomos Tabakis, 2015. "Free-trade areas and special protection," The Journal of International Trade & Economic Development, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 24(8), pages 1054-1076, December.
    16. Carolyn L. Evans & Shane M. Sherlund, 2011. "Are Antidumping Duties for Sale? Case-Level Evidence on the Grossman-Helpman Protection for Sale Model," Southern Economic Journal, Southern Economic Association, vol. 78(2), pages 330-357, October.
    17. Carolyn L. Evans & Shane M. Sherlund, 2011. "Are Antidumping Duties for Sale? Case‐Level Evidence on the Grossman‐Helpman Protection for Sale Model," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 78(2), pages 330-357, October.
    18. Blonigen, Bruce A., 2006. "Working the system: Firm learning and the antidumping process," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 22(3), pages 715-731, September.
    19. Christian Gormsen, 2011. "Anti-dumping with heterogeneous firms," International Economics, CEPII research center, issue 125, pages 41-64.
    20. Jozef Konings & Hylke Vandenbussche, 2013. "Antidumping protection hurts exporters: firm-level evidence," Review of World Economics (Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv), Springer;Institut für Weltwirtschaft (Kiel Institute for the World Economy), vol. 149(2), pages 295-320, June.

    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:uitjxx:v:28:y:2014:i:3:p:195-228. 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/uitj20 .

    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.