No Access

THE EFFECTS OF THE EU ANTI-DUMPING MEASURES ON CHINESE-LISTED EXPORTERS — A MESOECONOMIC PERSPECTIVE

Department of Economics, Chongqing Technology and Business University, No. 19 Xuefu Avenue, Nanan District, Chongqing 400067, P. R. China

E-mail Address: sywang@ctbu.edu.cn

Corresponding author.

Search for more papers by this author

YILING YOU

https://orcid.org/0009-0004-4827-1296

Department of Economics, Chongqing Technology and Business University, No. 19 Xuefu Avenue, Nanan District, Chongqing 400067, P. R. China

E-mail Address: deborah1@ctbu.edu.cn

Search for more papers by this author

CHAO WANG

https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4389-6196

College of Aerospace and Civil Engineering, Harbin Engineering University, No. 145 Nantong Street, Nangang District, Harbin 150001, P. R. China

E-mail Address: dynasty444@163.com

Search for more papers by this author

, and

XIYA ZUO

https://orcid.org/0009-0004-2864-2061

Department of Economics, Jinan University, No. 601 West Huangpu Road, Guangzhou 510632, P. R. China

E-mail Address: 2207606256@qq.com

Search for more papers by this author

https://doi.org/10.1142/S0217590824420050Cited by:0 (Source: Crossref)

This article is part of the issue:

Special Issue in Honor of Professor Yew-Kwang NG
Guest Editors: Qu Feng, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore, Guang-Zhen Sun, University of Macau, P.R. China and Guiying Laura Wu, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore

Abstract

Based on outcomes derived from a mesoeconomic model, this study examines the impact of European Union (EU) anti-dumping (AD) measures on listed Chinese exporters using the Propensity Score Matching with Difference-in-Differences (PSM-DID) method. Using yearly transaction data covering all Chinese listed exporters over 2000–2015, our findings indicate that EU AD measures result in a reduction in export volume and an increase in export prices for Chinese listed exporters at the product level. This trade-dampening effect is attributed to a significant decrease in export volume per exporter rather than the exit of listed exporters from the EU market. Additionally, we find that the effects of AD measures on the export volume and price of Chinese-listed exporters do not persist beyond the first year of the imposition of AD duties.

Keywords:

JEL: F13, D58, F14

References

Aggarwal, A (2010). Trade effects of AD: Who benefits. The International Trade Journal, 25(1), 112–158. Crossref, Google Scholar
Bertrand, M, E Duflo and S Mullainathan (2004). How much should we trust differences-in-differences estimates? Quarterly Journal of Economics, 119(1), 249–275. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
Besedes, T and TJ Prusa (2017). The hazardous effects of antidumping. Economic Inquiry, 55(1), 9–30. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
Blonigen, BA and SE Haynes (2002). Antidumping investigations and the pass-through of antidumping duties and exchange rates. American Economic Review, 92(4), 1044–1061. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
Blonigen, BA and JH Park (2004). Dynamic pricing in the presence of antidumping policy: Theory and evidence. American Economic Review, 94(1), 134–154. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
Bown, CP (2015). Global Antidumping Database, The World Bank. http://econ.worldbank.org/ttbd/gad/. Google Scholar
Bown, CP and MA Crowley (2007). Trade deflection and trade depression. Journal of International Economics, 71(1), 176–201. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
Chandra, P (2016). Impact of temporary trade barriers: Evidence from China. China Economic Review, 38, 24–48. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
Chandra, P (2017). Trade destruction and trade diversion: Evidence from China. China and World Economy, 25(3), 31–59. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
Cheng, L, Z Mi, D Coffman, J Meng and D Chang (2021). Destruction and deflection: Evidence from American antidumping actions against China. Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, 57(6), 203–213. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
Fajgelbaum, PD, PK Goldberg, PJ Kennedy and AK Khandelwal (2020). The return to protectionism. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 135(1), 1–55. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
Felbermayr, G and A Sandkamp (2020). The trade effects of AD duties: Firm-level evidence from China. European Economic Review, 122, 103367. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
Hua, X, Y Jiang, Q Sun and X Xing (2019). Do antidumping measures affect Chinese export-related firms? Review of Quantitative Finance and Accounting, 52(3), 871–900. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
Jabbour, L, Z Tao, E Vanino and Y Zhang (2019). The good, the bad and the ugly: Chinese imports, European Union AD measures and firm performance. Journal of International Economics, 117, 1–20. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
Kee, HL, C Neagu and A Nicita (2013). Is protectionism on the rise? Assessing national trade policies during the crisis of 2008. The Review of Economics and Statistics, 95(1), 342–346. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
Konings, J, L Springael and H Vandenbussche (1999). Import diversion under European antidumping policy. NBER Working Paper No. 7340. Google Scholar
Lasagni, A (2000). Does country-targeted anti-dumping policy by the EU create trade diversion? Journal of World Trade, 34, 137–159. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
Lee, M, D Park and A Cui (2013). Invisible trade barriers: Trade effects of US antidumping actions against the People’s Republic of China. ADB Economics Working Paper Series No. 378. Google Scholar
Leuven, E and B Sianesi (2003). PSMATCH2: Stata module to perform full Mahalanobis and propensity score matching, common support graphing, and covariate imbalance testing. http://ideas.repec.org/c/boc/bocode/s432001.html. Google Scholar
Li, C and J Whalley (2015). Chinese firm and industry reactions to antidumping initiations and measures. NBER Working Paper Series. http://www.nber.org/papers/w16446. Google Scholar
Li, W, Y Li, G Jacoby and ZY Wu (2022). Antidumping, firm performance, and subsequent responses. Journal of International Financial Markets, Institutions and Money, 76, 101493. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
Lu, Y, Z Tao and Y Zhang (2013). How do exporters respond to antidumping investigations? Journal of International Economics, 91(2), 290–300. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
Lu, Y, Z Tao and Y Zhang (2018). How do exporters adjust export product scope and product mix to react to antidumping? China Economic Review, 51, 20–41. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
Ng, Y-K (1982). A micro-macroeconomic analysis based on a representative firm. Economica, 49(194), 121–139. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
Ng, Y-K (1986). Mesoeconomics: A Micro-Macro Analysis. Great Britain: Wheatsheaf Books. Google Scholar
Ng, Y-K (2014). Why is finance important? Some thoughts on post-crisis economics. The Singapore Economic Reviews, 59(5), 1450037. Link, Web of Science, Google Scholar
Niels, G (2003). Trade diversion and trade destruction effects of antidumping policy: Empirical evidence from Mexico. In Paper for the European Trade Study Group Annual Conference, Work in Progress. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/266403872. Google Scholar
Niels, G and AT Kate (2006). Antidumping policy in developing countries: Safety valve or obstacle to free trade? European Journal of Political Economy, 22(3), 618–638. Crossref, Google Scholar
Nizovtsev, D and A Skiba (2020). Non-equivalent pass-through of AD duties, countervailing duties and import tariffs. World Economy, 43(1), 170–190. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
Prusa, TJ (2001). On the spread and impact of AD. Canadian Journal of Economics-Revue Canadienne D Economique, 34(3), 591–611. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
Roodman, D, JG MacKinnon, MO Nielsen and MD Webb (2019). Fast and wild: Bootstrap inference in Stata using boottest. Stata Journal, 19(1), 4–60. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
Sandkamp, A (2020). The trade effects of antidumping duties: Evidence from the 2004 EU enlargement. Journal of International Economics, 123, 103307. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
Schiavo, S, C Tomasi and M Zhu (2021). Anti-dumping activities against China: Patterns and effects. Economia Politica, 38, 7–30. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
Shi, HL (1992). Continuum of equilibria and business cycles: A dynamic model of mesoeconomics. The American Economic Review, 82(2), 372–378. Web of Science, Google Scholar
Staiger, RW and FA Wolak (1994). Measuring industry specific protection: Antidumping in the United States. NBER Working Paper No. 4696. Google Scholar
Vandenbussche, H and M Zanardi (2010). The chilling trade effects of antidumping proliferation. European Economic Review, 54(6), 760–777. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
Wang, SY and Y-K Ng (2023). How antidumping measures affect US imports from China: A mesoeconomic perspective of the excess price changes. Pacific Economic Review, 29(1), 127–156. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
Wright, AL, K Sonin, J Driscoll and J Wilson (2020). Poverty and economic dislocation reduce compliance with COVID-19 shelter-in-place protocols. Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, 180, 544–554. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
WTO (2022). I-TIP Goods: Integrated analysis and retrieval of notified non-tariff measures. http://i-tip.wto.org/goods. Google Scholar
Xie, Y, D Wu and S Zhu (2021). Can new energy vehicles subsidy curb the urban air pollution? Empirical evidence from pilot cities in China. Science of the Total Environment, 754, 142232. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar