Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-q99xh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T06:31:02.306Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A ‘probabilistic’ approach to the use of econometric models in sunset reviews

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  31 October 2007

ALEXANDER KECK ,
BRUCE MALASHEVICH  and
IAN GRAY
ALEXANDER KECK
Affiliation:
World Trade Organization
BRUCE MALASHEVICH
Affiliation:
Economic Consulting Services, LLC, Washington
IAN GRAY*
Affiliation:
Duff & Phelps, LLC, Denver
*
*Director, Duff & Phelps, LLC, 950 17th Street, Suite 2000, Denver, CO 80202USA, Tel: +1-303-749-9015, E-mail: Ian.Gray@duffandphelps.com
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Economists have increasingly become involved in trade remedy and litigation matters that call for economic interpretation or quantification. The literature on the use of econometric methods in response to legal requirements of trade policy is rather limited. This article contributes to filling this gap by demonstrating the efficacy of using a simple ‘probabilistic’ model in analyzing the ‘likelihood’ of injury to the local industry concerned, following a finding of continuation or recurrence of dumping (or countervailable subsidies). The legal concept of ‘likelihood’ is not only particularly well-suited to illustrate the systemic need for trade lawyers and economists to cooperate. It is also of imminent practical relevance with a groundswell of ‘sunset’ reviews looming on the horizon. We discuss the significance of economic analysis for trade remedy investigations by reviewing the literature, the applicable WTO rules, and, in particular, the pertinent case law. The potential value of probabilistic simulations for ‘likelihood’ determinations is exemplified using a real-world application. Using data from past United States International Trade Commission investigations, we find that a probabilistic model that takes account of the uncertainty surrounding economic parameters reduces the risk of misjudging the effect on the domestic industry of a termination of trade remedies.

Type
Research Article
Information
World Trade Review , Volume 6 , Issue 3 , November 2007 , pp. 371 - 396
Copyright
Copyright © Alexander Keck, Bruce Malashevich, and Ian Gray 2007

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.)

References

Boltuck, R. D. and Kaplan, S. T. (1998), ‘An Economic Approach to ITC Sunset Reviews’, in Lawrence, R. Z., Brookings Trade Forum: 1998, Washington, DC: Brookings Press, pp. 219–240.Google Scholar
Daughety, A. (1985), ‘Reconsidering Cournot: The Cournot Equilibrium is Consistent’, Rand Journal of Economics, 16(3): 368–379.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Horn, H. and Mavroidis, P. C. (2004), ‘Still Hazy after All These Years: The Interpretation of National Treatment in the GATT/WTO Case-Law on Tax Discrimination’, European Journal of International Law, 15(1): 39–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT), Secretariat (1994), The Results of the Uruguay Round of Multilateral Trade Negotiations, The Legal Texts, Geneva: World Trade Organization (WTO).Google Scholar
Grossman, G. M. (1986), ‘Imports as a Cause of Injury: The Case of the US Steel Industry’, Journal of International Economics, 20(3/4): 201–223.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grossman, G. M. and Mavroidis, P. C. (2005), ‘United States – Countervailing Duties on Certain Corrosion-Resistant Carbon Steel Flat Products from Germany: The Sounds of Silence’ (WTO Doc. WT/DS213/AB/R), in Horn, H. and Mavroidis, P. C. (eds), The WTO Case Law of 2002, The American Law Institutle Reporters' Studies, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Irwin, D. A. (2003), ‘Causing Problems? The WTO Review of Causation and Injury Attribution in US Section 201 Cases’, World Trade Review, 2(3): 297–325.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kelly, K. (1988), ‘The Analysis of Causality in Escape Clause Cases’, Journal of Industrial Economics, 37(2): 187–207.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Morkre, M. and Kelly, K. (1994), ‘Effects of Unfair Imports on Domestic Industries: US Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Cases, 1980–1988’, Federal Trade Commission Bureau of Economics Staff Report.Google Scholar
Perry, M. (1982), ‘Oligopoly and Consistent Conjectural Variations’, Rand Journal of Economics, 13(1): 197–205.Google Scholar
Pindyck, R. S. and Rotemberg, J. J. (1987), ‘Are Imports to Blame? Attribution of Injury under the 1974 Trade Act’, Journal of Law and Economics, 30(1): 101–122.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Prusa, T. J. and Sharp, D. C. (2001), ‘Simultaneous Equations in Antidumping Investigations’, Journal of Forensic Economics, 14(1): 63–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sumner, D. A., Barichello, R. C., and Paggi, M. S. (2003), ‘Economic Analysis in Disputes of Trade Remedy and Related Measures in Agriculture, with Examples from Recent Cases’, Paper presented at the International Conference ‘Agricultural policy reform and the WTO: where are we heading?’, 23–26 June 2003, Capri.Google Scholar
World Trade Organization (WTO) (2005), World Trade Report 2005, Geneva: WTO.Google Scholar