IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/r/aea/aecrev/v92y2002i5p1702-1710.html
   My bibliography  Save this item

Protection for Sale: An Empirical Investigation: Comment

Citations

Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
as


Cited by:

  1. Giovanni Facchini & Johannes Van Biesebroeck & Gerald Willmann, 2006. "Protection for sale with imperfect rent capturing," Canadian Journal of Economics/Revue canadienne d'économique, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 39(3), pages 845-873, August.
  2. Tomaso Duso & Astrid Jung, 2012. "Product Market Competition and Lobbying Coordination in the U.S. Mobile Telecommunications Industry," Journal of Industry, Competition and Trade, Springer, vol. 12(2), pages 177-201, June.
  3. Per G. Fredriksson & Xenia Matschke & Jenny Minier, 2011. "Trade policy in majoritarian systems: the case of the U.S," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 44(2), pages 607-626, May.
  4. Facchini, Giovanni & Mayda, Anna Maria & Mishra, Prachi, 2011. "Do interest groups affect US immigration policy?," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 85(1), pages 114-128, September.
  5. Gawande, Kishore & Krishna, Pravin & Olarreaga, Marcelo, 2009. "What Governments Maximize and Why: The View from Trade," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 63(3), pages 491-532, July.
  6. Facchini, Giovanni & Mayda, Anna Maria & Mishra, Prachi, 2007. "Do Interest Groups Affect Immigration?," IZA Discussion Papers 3183, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
  7. Per G. Fredriksson & Xenia Matschke & Jenny Minier, 2008. "For Sale: Trade Policy in Majoritarian Systems," Working papers 2008-20, University of Connecticut, Department of Economics.
  8. Ludema, Rodney D & Mayda, Anna Maria & Mishra, Prachi, 2010. "Protection for Free? The Political Economy of U.S. Tariff Suspensions," CEPR Discussion Papers 7926, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
  9. Eicher, Theo & Kang, Jong Woo, 2005. "Trade, foreign direct investment or acquisition: Optimal entry modes for multinationals," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 77(1), pages 207-228, June.
  10. Xenia Matschke & Shane M. Sherlund, 2006. "Do Labor Issues Matter in the Determination of U.S. Trade Policy? An Empirical Reevaluation," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 96(1), pages 405-421, March.
  11. 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.
  12. Lai, Edwin L.-C. & Yan, Isabel K.M., 2013. "Would global patent protection be too weak without international coordination?," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 89(1), pages 42-54.
  13. Gawande, Kishore & Hoekman, Bernard, 2006. "Lobbying and Agricultural Trade Policy in the United States," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 60(3), pages 527-561, July.
  14. John A. List & Daniel M. Sturm, 2006. "How Elections Matter: Theory and Evidence from Environmental Policy," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 121(4), pages 1249-1281.
  15. Domenico Scalera, 2012. "Skilled Migration And Education Policies: Is There Still Scope For A Bhagwati Tax?," Manchester School, University of Manchester, vol. 80(4), pages 447-467, July.
  16. Pao-Li Chang & Myoung-Jae Lee, 2006. "Protection for Sale Under Monopolistic Competition : An Empirical Investigation," Microeconomics Working Papers 22061, East Asian Bureau of Economic Research.
  17. Giacomo A. M. Ponzetto & Maria Petrova & Ruben Enikolopov, 2008. "The Dracula effect: voter information and trade policy," Economics Working Papers 1296, Department of Economics and Business, Universitat Pompeu Fabra, revised Oct 2020.
  18. Matschke, Xenia, 2008. "Costly revenue-raising and the case for favoring import-competing industries," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 74(1), pages 143-157, January.
  19. Tomaso Duso & Astrid Jung, 2012. "Product Market Competition and Lobbying Coordination in the U.S. Mobile Telecommunications Industry," Journal of Industry, Competition and Trade, Springer, vol. 12(2), pages 177-201, June.
  20. Kishore Gawande & Hui Li, 2006. "Trade Barriers as Bargaining Outcomes," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 29(4), pages 437-457, April.
  21. Franck Viroleau, 2017. "A Model of Influence on Trade Policy in a Computable General Equilibrium Model," Working Papers hal-04141646, HAL.
  22. By Kishore Gawande & Pravin Krishna & Marcelo Olarreaga, 2012. "Lobbying Competition Over Trade Policy," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 53(1), pages 115-132, February.
  23. Mirabelle Muûls & Dimitra Petropoulou, 2013. "A swing state theory of trade protection in the Electoral College," Canadian Journal of Economics/Revue canadienne d'économique, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 46(2), pages 705-724, May.
  24. Bombardini, Matilde, 2008. "Firm heterogeneity and lobby participation," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 75(2), pages 329-348, July.
  25. Imai, Susumu & Katayama, Hajime & Krishna, Kala, 2009. "Is protection really for sale? A survey and directions for future research," International Review of Economics & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 18(2), pages 181-191, March.
  26. Ms. Giorgia Albertin, 2007. "Will a Regional Bloc Enlarge?," IMF Working Papers 2007/069, International Monetary Fund.
  27. Cavalcanti Ferreira, Pedro & Facchini, Giovanni, 2005. "Trade liberalization and industrial concentration: Evidence from Brazil," The Quarterly Review of Economics and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 45(2-3), pages 432-446, May.
  28. Kee, Hiau Looi & Olarreaga, Marcelo & Silva, Peri, 2007. "Market access for sale," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 82(1), pages 79-94, January.
  29. Saha, Amrita, 2019. "Trade policy & lobbying effectiveness: Theory and evidence for India," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 56(C), pages 165-192.
  30. Samuel K. ALLEN, 2015. "Struggle for Regulatory Power between States and the US Federal Government: The Case of Workers’ Compensation Insurance 1930-2000," Journal of Economics and Political Economy, KSP Journals, vol. 2(3), pages 351-373, September.
  31. Chang, Pao-Li, 2005. "Protection for sale under monopolistic competition," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 66(2), pages 509-526, July.
  32. Astrid Jung & Tomaso Duso, 2004. "Product Market Competition and Lobbying Coordination in the U.S. Mobile Telecommunications Industry," Vienna Economics Papers vie0402, University of Vienna, Department of Economics.
  33. Etienne Farvaque & Gael Lagadec, 2009. "Electoral Control when Policies are for Sale," CESifo Working Paper Series 2522, CESifo.
  34. Sonia Naccache, 2008. "The Political Economy of Trade Policy in Tunisia," Working Papers 438, Economic Research Forum, revised 09 Jan 2008.
  35. Fattore, Christina, 2013. "Exploring Aviation Rivalries within the Legal Context of the WTO," Estey Centre Journal of International Law and Trade Policy, Estey Centre for Law and Economics in International Trade, vol. 14(2), pages 1-17.
  36. Josh Ederington & Jenny Minier, 2008. "Reconsidering the empirical evidence on the Grossman-Helpman model of endogenous protection," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 41(2), pages 501-516, May.
  37. Imai, Susumu & Katayama, Hajime & Krishna, Kala, 2009. "Protection for sale or surge protection?," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 53(6), pages 675-688, August.
  38. William Hauk, 2012. "U.S. import and export elasticities: a panel data approach," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 43(1), pages 73-96, August.
  39. Ram C. Acharya, 2018. "Endogenous trade policy in general equilibrium: An interaction of redistribution rule, trade openness, and labor market condition," Economics and Politics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 30(3), pages 423-443, November.
  40. Wilfred J. Ethier, 2013. "The Trade Agreement Embarrassment, Second Version," PIER Working Paper Archive 13-049, Penn Institute for Economic Research, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania, revised 02 Sep 2013.
  41. Giacomo Ponzetto, 2008. "Asymmetric information and trade policy," Economics Working Papers 1253, Department of Economics and Business, Universitat Pompeu Fabra, revised Oct 2010.
  42. Enrico Marvasi, 2013. "Protection for Sale, Monopolistic Competition and Variable Markups," Working Papers - Economics wp2013_11.rdf, Universita' degli Studi di Firenze, Dipartimento di Scienze per l'Economia e l'Impresa.
  43. Matschke Xenia, 2010. "Do Labor Market Imperfections Increase Trade Protection? A Theoretical Investigation," The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 10(1), pages 1-36, June.
  44. 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.
  45. Andrew Jonelis & Wisarut Suwanprasert, 2022. "Protection for sale: evidence from around the world," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 191(1), pages 237-267, April.
  46. kishore gawande & pravin krishna, 2005. "The Political Economy of Trade Policy: Empirical Approaches," International Trade 0503003, University Library of Munich, Germany.
  47. Giacomo A. M. Ponzetto, 2011. "Heterogeneous Information and Trade Policy," 2011 Meeting Papers 189, Society for Economic Dynamics.
  48. Carolyn L. Evans & Shane M. Sherlund, 2006. "Are antidumping duties for sale? case-level evidence on the Grossman-Helpman protection for sale model," International Finance Discussion Papers 888, Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (U.S.).
  49. 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.
IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.