Ad hoc shrimp trade action committee là gì
|
Despite worldwide decline in the use of tariffs since World War II, the use of Anti-dumping (AD) policy, has risen in absolute and relative importance in recent times (Webb, 1992; Cuyvers and Weifeng, 2008). Defined as a nontariff barrier used by countries to impose penalties on unusually low-priced imports and to safeguard domestic industries from unfair competition, it is by far, one of the most topical protectionist tools that has attracted considerable concerns in international trade discourses. Historically a favourite industrial policy weapon among advanced economies such as the United States, Canada, New Zealand, Australia and the European Union, the use of anti-dumping legislations by most developing economies such as India, Brazil, Mexico, and Argentina among others, is rather a recent phenomenon (Niels, 2000; Finger, Francis and Wangchuk, 2001; Prusa and Skeath, 2002; Baruah, 2007). Recent estimates by the World Trade Organisation indicate that developing countries – including India, China, South Africa, Argentina, Brazil and Mexico – are now the heaviest users of anti-dumping policies (Mankiw, Gregory and Swagel, 2005). As opposed to 463 anti-dumping cases by developed countries since the Uruguay Round, Finger, Francis and Wangchuk (2001) establish that, developing countries initiated a total of 559 cases. This is confirmed in Prusa (2005) who contends emerging countries use anti-dumping policy 15 to 20 times more often than traditional users such as the European Union and United States. As with most advanced economies, the use of anti-dumping policies by developing countries comes with both positives and negatives. In the discussions that follow, the paper explores the positive and negative effects of the use of AD legislations in developing countries. It concludes that, despite claims that AD policy helps to achieve anti-competitive outcomes, the welfare consequences of such a policy are enormous, especially from the perspectives of domestic consumers and user enterprises. A thorough examination of the extent of the existence of predation and material injury is thus necessary if AD policy is to remain a key instrument in international trade policy. Antibiotics and Additives, Antidumping Litigation, Duty Evasion, Fisheries Management, Fraud Enforcement, Letters, Newsletters, Our Work, Testimony/Comments, Trade
Join the Mailing ListGet news from Southern Shrimp Alliance straight to your inbox! By submitting this form, you are consenting to receive marketing emails from: . You can revoke your consent to receive emails at any time by using the SafeUnsubscribe® link, found at the bottom of every email. Emails are serviced by Constant Contact |
