archive of the former site EconWPA.wustl.edu

Please do not link or reference this page. Use one of the following URLs:
ideas.repec.org as http://ideas.repec.org/p/wpa/wuwpit/9411001.html
econpapers.repec.org as http://econpapers.repec.org/paper/wpawuwpit/9411001.htm

Differences in The Uses and Effects of Antidumping Law Across Import Sources

Paper:ewp-it/9411001
From:    (Ann Teeters Lewis) 
Date: Thu, 17 Nov 1994 13:44:58 -0600

Abstract:
This paper studies the differences in the uses and effects of U.S. antidumping law on imports and domestic output across the major regions exporting to the United States. Building on previous work (Staiger and Wolak, 1994), we extend our attempt to characterize the implications of the use of antidumping law for the behavior of U.S. imports and domestic output, and to distinguish between "outcome filers" (firms for which the prospect of an antidumping duty is an important ingredient in the decision to file) and "process filers" (firms for which filing is driven largely by a desire to secure the trade-restricting effects of the investigation process itself). In this paper we abstract from cross-industry heterogeneity in antidumping filing strategies and explore instead the heterogeneity of filing strategies against different import-source countries, allowing for the possibility that domestic firms may pursue independent filing strategies with respect to imports from different countries. We argue that the most likely target countries for process filers are those whose export production is primarily destined for the U.S. market and accounts for a relatively large and stable U.S. market share. These characteristics point to Canada and Mexico as countries against which process filing by U.S. firms is likely to occur. Analyzing the filing behavior against Canada and Mexico as well as four other regions, we find evidence in the filing behavior and in the nature of the trade impacts which accompany filing to suggest that Mexico and Canada are indeed the most likely targets of antidumping petitions filed by process filers in the United States.

Postscript files:(viewing .ps)
      archive: 9411001.ps  or 9411001.ps.gz  is 638335 bytes, 8-23-97.
Acrobat pdf files:(viewing .pdf)
      archive: 9411001.pdf  is 209608 bytes, 9-12-96, or 9411001.pdf.gz 
Access statistics for this paper at LogEc which is a part of the RePEc project as was/is EconWPA.
Translate to another language with babel.altavista.com EconWPA reference ewp-it/9411001
RePEc reference RePEc:wpa:wuwpit:9411001
send e-mail to

EconWPA began as a conversation between Bob Parks and Larry Blume on January 28, 1993. I located Paul Ginsparg's archive (then xxx.lanl.gov) and he graciously installed his software on a Sun Sparc system which was supporting the department of economics email and computation. EconWPA began accepting papers July 1, 1993 and had ftp, email, gopher and web interfaces. The web interface for submissions was engineered into existence in July 1995. A complete and catastrophic machine failure in 1999 caused the loss of EconWPA's email new paper announcment service at which time there were over 15,000 subscriptions with over 8,000 unique email addresses.

In 2005, Arts and Sciences commandeered the computing services that I had provided to the Department of Economics since 1987. Some might say that the department was sold out, others would (erroneously) claim that centralization is efficient, and still others would claim that I have few marketing skills.

I was told that I could keep operating EconWPA (as well as many other services including rfe.wustl.edu, barnett.wustl.edu, and three RePEc servers) but I would receive no support (hardware, software, or anthing else) and (as had been the case) no compensation. At that point, given the apparent low valuation of my activities by the department, and university, it made no sense for me to continue operating EconWPA or other services.

Thanks to all who have supported EconWPA in the past.

A Chinese curse states May you live in intersting times. I have. Bob Parks - Jan 2006