IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/wbk/wbrwps/397.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Antidumping regulations or procartel law? : the European Community chemical cases

Author

Listed:
  • Messerlin, Patrick A.

Abstract

This paper addresses the issues of antidumping actions. It surveys all the anticartel cases preceded or followed by related antidumping cases existing in the recent European Community (EC) experience. The paper focuses on the major twin cases which have occurred in two predominant petrochemical products. It assesses the extent of the capture of the antidumping procedures by the cartels in these two main twin cases and estimates the costs of the antidumping protection and the deterrent power of the anticartel actions.

Suggested Citation

  • Messerlin, Patrick A., 1990. "Antidumping regulations or procartel law? : the European Community chemical cases," Policy Research Working Paper Series 397, The World Bank.
    • Handle: RePEc:wbk:wbrwps:397
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www-wds.worldbank.org/external/default/WDSContentServer/WDSP/IB/1990/04/01/000009265_3960929174031/Rendered/PDF/multi0page.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Block, Michael Kent & Nold, Frederick Carl, 1981. "The Deterrent Effect of Antitrust Enforcement," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 89(3), pages 429-445, June.
    2. Smith, W James & Vaughan, Michael B, 1986. "Economic Welfare, Price and Profit: The Deterrent Effect of Alternative Antitrust Regimes," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 24(4), pages 615-629, October.
    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. Angelika Eymann & Ludger Schuknecht, 1996. "Antidumping Policy In The European Community: Political Discretion Or Technical Determination," Economics and Politics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 8(2), pages 111-131, July.
    2. Hughes Hallett,Andrew J., 1992. "The impact of EC-92 on developing countries'trade : a dissenting view," Policy Research Working Paper Series 885, The World Bank.

    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. Flavia Roldán, 2012. "Collusive Networks in Market‐Sharing Agreements in the Presence of an Antitrust Authority," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 21(4), pages 965-987, December.
    2. Verena Hahn, 2000. "Antitrust Enforcement: Abuse Control or Notification?," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 10(1), pages 69-91, July.
    3. Joseph E. Harrington, Jr., 2004. "Cartel Pricing Dynamics in the Presence of an Antitrust Authority," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 35(4), pages 651-673, Winter.
    4. Emons, Winand, 2020. "The effectiveness of leniency programs when firms choose the degree of collusion," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 70(C).
    5. Jo Seldeslachts & Joseph A. Clougherty & Pedro Pita Barros, 2009. "Settle for Now but Block for Tomorrow: The Deterrence Effects of Merger Policy Tools," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 52(3), pages 607-634, August.
    6. Ajay Bhaskarabhatla & Enrico Pennings, 2012. "Defensive Disclosure under Antitrust Enforcement," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 12-010/2, Tinbergen Institute.
    7. Bos, Iwan & Davies, Stephen & Harrington, Joseph E. & Ormosi, Peter L., 2018. "Does enforcement deter cartels? A tale of two tails," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 59(C), pages 372-405.
    8. Isaac Ehrlich, 1996. "Crime, Punishment, and the Market for Offenses," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 10(1), pages 43-67, Winter.
    9. Joseph E. Harrington, 2005. "Optimal Cartel Pricing In The Presence Of An Antitrust Authority," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 46(1), pages 145-169, February.
    10. Kalyn Coatney & Jesse Tack, 2014. "The Impacts of an Antitrust Investigation: A Case Study in Agriculture," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 44(4), pages 423-441, June.
    11. Michael R. Baye & Joshua D. Wright, 2011. "Is Antitrust Too Complicated for Generalist Judges? The Impact of Economic Complexity and Judicial Training on Appeals," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 54(1), pages 1-24.
    12. Bos Iwan & Letterie Wilko & Vermeulen Dries, 2015. "Antitrust as Facilitating Factor for Collusion," The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 15(2), pages 797-814, April.
    13. Carlos Ponce & Flavia Roldán, 2016. "Antitrust policies in network environments," Documentos de Investigación 112, Universidad ORT Uruguay. Facultad de Administración y Ciencias Sociales.
    14. Katsoulacos, Yannis & Motchenkova, Evgenia & Ulph, David, 2015. "Penalizing cartels: The case for basing penalties on price overcharge," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 42(C), pages 70-80.
    15. Marie-Laure Allain & Marcel Boyer & Jean-Pierre Ponssard & Rachidi Kotchoni, 2011. "The Determination of Optimal Fines in Cartel Cases - The Myth of Underdeterrence," CIRANO Working Papers 2011s-34, CIRANO.
    16. Cronert, Axel, 2019. "Is regulatory compliance by employers possible without enforcement? Evidence from the Swedish labor market," Working Paper Series 2019:23, IFAU - Institute for Evaluation of Labour Market and Education Policy.
    17. Lars Helge Haß & Sofia Johan & Maximilian André Müller, 2016. "The Effectiveness of Public Enforcement: Evidence from the Resolution of Tunneling in China," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 134(4), pages 649-668, April.
    18. Carsten J. Crede & Liang Lu, 2016. "The effects of endogenous enforcement on strategic uncertainty and cartel deterrence," Working Paper series, University of East Anglia, Centre for Behavioural and Experimental Social Science (CBESS) 16-08, School of Economics, University of East Anglia, Norwich, UK..
    19. Gerlach, Heiko & Li, Junqian, 2024. "Collusion in the presence of antitrust prosecution: Experimental evidence," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 222(C), pages 427-445.
    20. Andreea Cosnita-Langlais & Jean-Philippe Tropeano, 2018. "How procedures shape substance: institutional design and antitrust evidentiary standards," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 46(1), pages 143-164, August.

    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:wbk:wbrwps:397. 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: Roula I. Yazigi (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/dvewbus.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.