IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/agribz/v12y1996i3p219-230.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

How red are the roses? A case study of US antidumping procedures

Author

Listed:
  • Anita Ogden

    (Dept. of Agricultural and Applied Economics, 315 Conner Hall, University of Georgia, Athens, GA 30602-7509)

  • Glenn C.W. Ames

    (Dept. of Agricultural and Applied Economics, 315 Conner Hall, University of Georgia, Athens, GA 30602-7509)

Abstract

On February 14, 1994, the Floral Trade Council of Haslett, MI, filed an antidumping petition with the International Trade Commission (ITC) alleging that Colombian and Ecuadorian producers were dumping fresh cut roses on the US market. Three criteria-volume of imports, price effects, and health of the domestic industry-were the basis of the petitioner's injury allegation. Preliminary findings indicated a loss of market share for US rose producers, declining production, employment, and underselling in the US market. While the Department of Commerce's final determination concluded that Colombian roses were sold at less than fair value, the ITC ruled that the US rose industry was not materially injured by imports of roses from Colombia and Ecuador and the case was terminated. © 1996 John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

Suggested Citation

  • Anita Ogden & Glenn C.W. Ames, 1996. "How red are the roses? A case study of US antidumping procedures," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 12(3), pages 219-230.
    • Handle: RePEc:wly:agribz:v:12:y:1996:i:3:p:219-230
    DOI: 10.1002/(SICI)1520-6297(199605/06)12:3<219::AID-AGR3>3.0.CO;2-3
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
    1. Check below whether another version of this item is available online.
    2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
    3. Perform a search for a similarly titled item that would be available.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Morris E. Morkre & Harold E. Kruth, 1989. "Determining Whether Dumped Or Subsidized Imports Injure Domestic Industries: International Trade Commission Approach," Contemporary Economic Policy, Western Economic Association International, vol. 7(3), pages 78-95, July.
    2. Moore, Michael O, 1992. "Rules or Politics? An Empirical Analysis of ITC Anti-dumping Decisions," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 30(3), pages 449-466, July.
    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. Jae W. Chung, 1998. "Effects of U.S. Trade Remedy Law Enforcement under Uncertainty: The Case of Steel," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 65(1), pages 151-159, July.
    2. Kara M. Reynolds, 2009. "From Agreement to Application: An Analysis of Determinations under the WTO Antidumping Agreement," Review of International Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 17(5), pages 969-985, November.
    3. Tobias D. Ketterer, 2016. "EU Anti-dumping and Tariff Cuts: Trade Policy Substitution?," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 39(5), pages 576-596, May.
    4. Meredith A. Crowley, 2004. "Antidumping Policy Under Imperfect Competition: Theory and Evidence," Econometric Society 2004 North American Summer Meetings 443, Econometric Society.
    5. 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.
    6. Michel DE VROEY, 2013. "What can civil society expect from academic macroeconomics?," LIDAM Discussion Papers IRES 2013022, Université catholique de Louvain, Institut de Recherches Economiques et Sociales (IRES).
    7. 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.
    8. Martin, Alberto & Vergote, Wouter, 2008. "On the role of retaliation in trade agreements," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 76(1), pages 61-77, September.
    9. Hansen, Wendy L & Prusa, Thomas J, 1997. "The Economics and Politics of Trade Policy: An Empirical Analysis of ITC Decision Making," Review of International Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 5(2), pages 230-245, May.
    10. Randall W. Bennett & Christine Loucks, 1996. "Politics And Length Of Time To Bank Failure: 1986–1990," Contemporary Economic Policy, Western Economic Association International, vol. 14(4), pages 29-41, October.
    11. Mustapha SADNI JALLAB, 2007. "The Political Influence Of European And American Antidumping Decisions: Some Empirical Evidence," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 6(18), pages 1-8.
    12. 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.
    13. repec:ebl:ecbull:v:6:y:2007:i:18:p:1-8 is not listed on IDEAS
    14. 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.
    15. Blonigen, Bruce A. & Bown, Chad P., 2003. "Antidumping and retaliation threats," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 60(2), pages 249-273, August.
    16. Lorenzo Trimarchi, 2020. "Trade Policy and the China Syndrome," Working Papers ECARES 2020-15, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
    17. Jozef Konings & Hylke Vandenbussche & Linda Springael, 2001. "Import Diversion under European Antidumping Policy," Journal of Industry, Competition and Trade, Springer, vol. 1(3), pages 283-299, September.
    18. Huang, Kenneth G. & Jia, Nan & Ge, Yeyanran, 2024. "Forced to innovate? Consequences of United States' anti-dumping sanctions on innovations of Chinese exporters," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 53(1).
    19. Bruce A. Blonigen & Robert C. Feenstra, 1997. "Protectionist Threats and Foreign Direct Investment," NBER Chapters, in: The Effects of US Trade Protection and Promotion Policies, pages 55-80, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    20. Ian Wooton & Maurizio Zanardi, 2002. "Trade and Competition Policy: Anti-Dumping versus Anti-trust," Working Papers 2002_6, Business School - Economics, University of Glasgow, revised Oct 2002.
    21. Laura Rovegno, 2013. "Trade protection and market power: evidence from US antidumping and countervailing duties," Review of World Economics (Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv), Springer;Institut für Weltwirtschaft (Kiel Institute for the World Economy), vol. 149(3), pages 443-476, September.

    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:wly:agribz:v:12:y:1996:i:3:p:219-230. 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://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/journal/10.1002/(ISSN)1520-6297 .

    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.