Contingent Protection Rules in Regional Trade Agreements

doi:10.1017/CBO9780511976445.005

3 - Contingent Protection Rules in Regional Trade Agreements

Published online by Cambridge University Press: 03 May 2011

Thomas J. Prusa and

Robert Teh

Edited by

Kyle W. Bagwell and

Petros C. Mavroidis

Show author details

Kyle W. Bagwell: Affiliation:
Stanford University, California
Petros C. Mavroidis: Affiliation:
Columbia University School of Law

Book contents

Get access

Summary

Introduction

This chapter examines contingent protection provisions in seventy-four regional trade agreements (RTAs). Before we discuss any motivation or results, we will make two comments on our terminology. First, we use the term “regional trade agreements” in a broad sense. For purposes of this chapter we use the term to refer to customs unions (where tariffs are zero for intra-RTA trade and are set at a common level for external trade), free trade areas (where tariffs are zero for intra-RTA trade and each member is free to set its own tariffs for external trade), and preferential trade agreements (where tariffs are lowered but not necessarily zero for intra-RTA trade and each member is free to set its own tariffs for external trade). Whether member-states are in the same regional or geographical area does not matter for our purposes. As RTAs have proliferated many, perhaps even most, RTAs involve countries in geographically distinct areas.

Second, by “contingent” protection we mean antidumping (AD), countervailing duties (CVD), and emergency or safeguard measures. Because the World Trade Organization (WTO) agreement requires a link between trade volume and the imposition of trade protection for all of these trade remedies, they are referred to as contingent protection. Although other forms of protection often garner more attention (e.g., Super 301, TRIPs), the statutes mapped in this chapter account for most of the discretionary border protection beyond WTO-negotiated tariff rates.

Type: Chapter
Information: Preferential Trade Agreements
A Law and Economics Analysis
, pp. 60 - 100

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511976445.005 [Opens in a new window]

Publisher: Cambridge University Press

Print publication year: 2011

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Book purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Andriamananjara, Soamiely, and Maurice, Schiff, 1999. “Regional Groupings Among Microstates,” World Bank Policy Research Working Paper Series No. 1922. Washington, DC: The World Bank.

Bhagwati, Jagdish, 1992. “Regionalism versus multilateralism,” World Economy 15(5).CrossRef Google Scholar

Bhagwati, Jagdish, 1993. “Regionalism and Multilateralism: An Overview,” in Jaime, Melo and Panagariya, Arvind (eds.), New Dimensions in Regional Integration. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Bhagwati, Jagdish, and Panagariya, Arvind (eds.). 1996. The Economics of Preferential Trade Agreements. Washington, DC: AEI Press.Google Scholar

Blonigen, Bruce A., 2005. “The Effects of NAFTA on Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Activity,” World Bank Economic Review, 19 (December): 407–24.

Blonigen, Bruce A., 2006. “Evolving Discretionary Practices of U.S. Antidumping Activity,” Canadian Journal of Economics, 39 (August): 874–900.CrossRef Google Scholar

Blonigen, Bruce A., and Prusa, Thomas J., 2003. “Antidumping,” in Choi, E. K. and Harrigan, J. (eds.), Handbook of International Trade. Oxford, UK, and Cambridge, MA:Blackwell Publishers, pp. 251–84.CrossRef Google Scholar

Bown, Chad P., 2004. “How Different Are Safeguards from Antidumping? Evidence from U.S. Trade Policies Toward Steel.” Brandies University Working Paper.Google Scholar

Crawford, Jo-ann, and Fiorentino, Roberto V., 2005. “The Changing Landscape of Regional Trade Agreements.” WTO Discussion Paper No. 8. Geneva: WTO.

Araujo, Jose Tavares, Macario, Carla, and Steinfatt, Karsten, 2001. “Antidumping in the Americas,” Journal of World Trade, 35(4): 555–74.Google Scholar

Finger, J. M., Hall, Keith H., and Nelson, Douglas R., 1982. “The Political Economy of Administered Protection,” American Economic Review, 72(3): 452–66.Google Scholar

Fiorentino, Roberto V., Verdeja, Luis, and Toqueboeuf, Christelle, 2007. “The Changing Landscape of RTAs: 2006 Update,” WTO Discussion Paper No. 12. Geneva: WTO.

Gagné, Gilbert, 2000. “North American Free Trade, Canada, and U.S. Trade Remedies: An Assessment After Ten Years,” The World Economy, 23(1): 77–91.CrossRef Google Scholar

Goldstein, Judith, 1996. “International Law and Domestic Institutions: Reconciling North American “Unfair” Trade Laws,” International Organization, 50(4): 541–64.CrossRef Google Scholar

Hoekman, Bernard, 1998. “Free Trade and Deep Integration: Antidumping and Antitrust in RTAs,” World Bank Policy Research Working Paper No. 1950. Washington, DC: The World Bank.

Horlick, Gary, and Vermulst, Edwin, 2005. “The 10 Major Problems with the Anti-Dumping Instrument: An Attempt at Synthesis,” Journal of World Trade, 39(1): 67–73.Google Scholar

Jackson, John H., 1997. The World Trading System: Law and Policy of International Economic Relations. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar

Jones, Kent, 2000. “Does NAFTA Chapter 19 Make a Difference? Dispute Settlement and the Incentive Structure of U.S./Canada Unfair Trade Petitions,” Contemporary Economic Policy, 18(2): 145–58.CrossRef Google Scholar

Lawrence, Robert Z., 1996. Regionalism, Multilateralism, and Deeper Integration. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.Google Scholar

Marceau, Gabrielle (ed.). 1994. Anti-Dumping and Anti-Trust Issues in Free-Trade Areas. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar

Mastel, G., 1998. Antidumping Laws and the U.S. Economy. Armonk, NY: M. E. Sharpe.Google Scholar

Miranda, Jorge, Torres, Raul A., and Ruiz, Mario, 1998. “The International Use of Antidumping: 1987–1997,” Journal of World Trade, 32(5): 5–71.Google Scholar

Moore, Michael O., 2002. “Commerce Department Antidumping Sunset Reviews: A First Assessment,” Journal of World Trade, 36(2): 675–98.CrossRef Google Scholar

Moore, Michael O., 2006. “An Econometric Analysis of U.S. Antidumping Sunset Review Decisions,” Review of World Economics/Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv, 142(1).CrossRef Google Scholar

Moore, Michael O., and Zanardi, Maurizio, 2007. “Does Antidumping Use Contribute to Trade Liberalization in Developing Countries?” Unpublished manuscript.

Pauwelyn, Joost, 2004. “The Puzzle of WTO Safeguards and Regional Trade Agreements,” Journal of International Economic Law, 7(1): 109–42.CrossRef Google Scholar

Prusa, Thomas, 2005. “Antidumping: A Growing Problem in International Trade,” The World Economy, 28(5): 683–700.CrossRef Google Scholar

Rugman, Alan M., and Anderson, Andrew D. M., 1997. “NAFTA and the Dispute Settlement Mechanisms: A Transaction Costs Approach,” The World Economy, 20(7): 935–50.CrossRef Google Scholar

Viner, Jacob, 1950. The Theory of Customs Union Issue. New York: Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.Google Scholar

Wooton, Ian, and Zanardi, Maurizio, 2005. “Anti-Dumping versus Anti-Trust: Trade and Competition Policy,” with Wooton, Ian, in Choi, K. and Hartigan, J. (eds.), Handbook of International Trade, Volume II: Economic and Legal Analysis of Laws and Institutions. Oxford, UK, and Cambridge, MA: Blackwell Publishers.Google Scholar

,World Trade Organization, 2001. United States – Safeguard Measures on Imports of Fresh, Chilled, or Frozen Lamb Meat from New Zealand and Australia (U.S.–Lamb), Appellate Body Report WT/DS177/AB/R.

Zanardi, Maurizio, 2004. “Antidumping: What are the Numbers to Discuss at Doha?,” The World Economy 27(3): 403–33.CrossRef Google Scholar