IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ewc/wpaper/wp69.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

The Reasons for and the Impact of Antidumping Protection: The Case of People's Republic of China

Author

Listed:
  • Tianshu Chu
  • Thomas J. Prusa

    (Economics Study Area, East-West Center)

Abstract

Over the past few decades, the liberalization in international trade has progressed at a rapid speed. While tariffs and quotas have been and continue to be reduced, another type of trade barrier, antidumping, is being used more and more frequently as a measure of protection. This paper focuses on the case of China, explores the characteristics, the reasons for and implications of antidumping. China is the largest targeting economy of antidumping (AD) trade disputes and there is evidence that China is more susceptible to antidumping than other economies, even after controlling for factors such as the non-market economy (NME) status. Our paper analyzes the reasons for China being so broadly and intensively targeted. In particular, the domestic characteristics of exports structure and industrial structures are examined. Our analysis also reveals that foreign direct investment (FDI) may be a significant factor explaining AD cases against China. There is also evidence that low concentration ratios in Chinese industries have contributed to the competitive price and low profit margins. An earlier draft of this paper was presented at the APEC Capacity-Building Workshop on Quantification of NTMs and Trade Facilitation, October 8-10, 2003, in Bangkok, Thailand.

Suggested Citation

  • Tianshu Chu & Thomas J. Prusa, 2004. "The Reasons for and the Impact of Antidumping Protection: The Case of People's Republic of China," Economics Study Area Working Papers 69, East-West Center, Economics Study Area.
    • Handle: RePEc:ewc:wpaper:wp69
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.eastwestcenter.org/fileadmin/stored/pdfs/ECONwp069.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of 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. Raphael Bergoeing & Timothy J. Kehoe, "undated". "Trade Theory and Trade Facts," ILADES-UAH Working Papers inv129, Universidad Alberto Hurtado/School of Economics and Business.
    3. Wendy L Hansen & Thomas J Prusa, 2021. "Cumulation and ITC decision-making: The sum of the parts is greater than the whole," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Thomas J Prusa (ed.), Economic Effects of Antidumping, chapter 9, pages 171-194, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    4. Thomas J. Prusa, 2021. "On the spread and impact of anti-dumping," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Thomas J Prusa (ed.), Economic Effects of Antidumping, chapter 4, pages 45-65, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    5. repec:lic:licosd:11902 is not listed on IDEAS
    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. Christopher Edmonds & Sumner J. La Croix & Yao Li, 2006. "The China's Rise as an International Trading Power," Economics Study Area Working Papers 88, East-West Center, Economics Study Area.
    2. Chandra, Piyush, 2016. "Impact of temporary trade barriers: Evidence from China," China Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 38(C), pages 24-48.
    3. Minsoo Lee & Donghyun Park & Antonio Saravia, 2017. "Trade Effects of US Antidumping Actions against China-super-," Asian Economic Journal, East Asian Economic Association, vol. 31(1), pages 3-16, March.

    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. Blonigen, Bruce A. & Bown, Chad P., 2003. "Antidumping and retaliation threats," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 60(2), pages 249-273, August.
    2. Nelson, Douglas, 2006. "The political economy of antidumping: A survey," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 22(3), pages 554-590, September.
    3. Kokko, Ari & Gustavsson Tingvall, Patrik & Videnord, Josefin, 2017. "Which Antidumping Cases Reach the WTO?," Ratio Working Papers 286, The Ratio Institute.
    4. Bruce Blonigen & Thomas Prusa, 2003. "The Cost of Antidumping: the Devil is in the Details," Journal of Economic Policy Reform, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 6(4), pages 233-245.
    5. Peter Egger & Douglas Nelson, 2011. "How Bad Is Antidumping? Evidence from Panel Data," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 93(4), pages 1374-1390, November.
    6. 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.
    7. 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.
    8. 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.
    9. 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.
    10. 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.
    11. 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.
    12. 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.
    13. Jan Baran, 2015. "The impact of antidumping on EU trade," IBS Working Papers 12/2015, Instytut Badan Strukturalnych.
    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. Avsar, Veysel, 2014. "Partisanship and antidumping," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 38(C), pages 190-195.
    16. 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.
    17. 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.
    18. Veysel Avsar, 2013. "Antidumping, Retaliation Threats, and Export Prices," The World Bank Economic Review, World Bank, vol. 27(1), pages 133-148.
    19. Ahmed Nawaz Hakro & Syed Hasanat Shah, 2007. "Economic Rationale, Trade Impact and Extent of Antidumping – A Case Study of Pakistan," Lahore Journal of Economics, Department of Economics, The Lahore School of Economics, vol. 12(1), pages 79-98, Jan-Jun.
    20. Bruce A. Blonigen, 2006. "Evolving discretionary practices of U.S. antidumping activity," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 39(3), pages 874-900, August.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • F0 - International Economics - - General
    • F1 - International Economics - - Trade

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:ewc:wpaper:wp69. 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: Brenda Higashimoto (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ewchius.html .

    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.