PROTECTIONISM INCREASES AND SPREADS:

GLOBAL USE OF TRADE REMEDIES RISES BY 18.8% IN FIRST QUARTER 2009

 

Chad P. Bown[1]

Brandeis University &

The Brookings Institution

11 May 2009

 

A Monitoring Update to the Global Antidumping Database[2]

 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

 

Much has been made of the Group of Twenty`s (G-20) commitments to refrain from imposing new protectionist measures in the wake of the global economic crisis.[3] Most of the G-20 economies are members of the World Trade Organization (WTO), and many of them had pre-crisis applied import tariff rates quite close to the upward limit on their bound tariff legal commitments under the WTO. This proximity limits their policymakers` abilities to respond to domestic protectionist pressure by simply raising applied import tariffs; as raising import tariffs above these bound legal commitments would be a flagrant violation of the rules of the international trading system under the WTO.

 

Nevertheless, policymakers in these economies do have the flexibility to funnel domestic industry demands for new import restrictions into alternative trade remedy policy instruments such as antidumping, countervailing duties (anti-subsidy policies), and safeguards. This study examines newly available data that tracks the combined use of these trade policies and finds a continued increase in protectionist resort to these import barriers in the first quarter 2009. The first quarter 2009 increase is above and beyond the sharp increase that began in 2008 with the spread of the global economic crisis.[4]

 

Compared to the same time period in 2008, the first quarter of 2009 saw an 18.8% increase in initiated investigations in which domestic industries request the imposition of new import restrictions under trade remedy laws. While the list of new investigations is dominated by India and Argentina, other G-20 members that also initiated at least one new investigation during the first quarter of 2009 include Australia, Canada, China, the European Union and its member states, Mexico, South Africa, Turkey and the United States.[5] China`s exporters were the dominant target for these new investigations that may result in import restrictions, facing over two thirds of the new investigations.

 

Compared to the same time period in 2008, the first quarter of 2009 also saw a 15.4% increase in the imposition of new import-restricting tariffs and quotas upon completion of earlier investigations initiated under these trade remedy laws, a trend that will almost certainly continue to increase throughout the remainder of 2009 and into 2010. While India imposed the most new import barriers under these laws during this time period, other G-20 members that did so include Argentina, Australia, Brazil, Canada, the EU and its member states, South Korea, Turkey and the United States. China`s exporters are the dominant target for these newly imposed import restrictions facing new barriers in over 70% of the cases.

 

 

I. NEWLY INITIATED TRADE REMEDY INVESTIGATIONS

 

In the first quarter (1Q) of 2009, domestic industries in WTO members initiated 35 product-level investigations requesting imposition of new import restrictions under national trade remedy laws such as antidumping (AD), countervailing duties (CVD), global safeguards (SG), and China-specific safeguards (CSG), an increase of 18.8% compared to the same period in 2008.[6] As illustrated in Fig. 1, the 1Q 2009 increase continues an upward trend; the total number of new import-restricting trade remedy investigations launched in 2008 was itself 29.1% higher than the number of new investigations initiated during 2007.[7]

 

In the historical data on the use of these trade policies and especially in the case of antidumping, the vast majority of new investigations and requests for import protection do ultimately result in the imposition of new definitive import restrictions, typically with a 12 month or so lag. One implication of the 2008-2009 surge in new investigations is the high likelihood that they will result in a 2009-2010 surge in newly imposed definitive import restricting measures.

 

Source: Global Antidumping Database.

 

 

POLICY-IMPOSING COUNTRIES

 

Sixteen different WTO members initiated at least one new product-level trade remedy investigation in 1Q 2009. Developing countries dominated use by initiating 77% of these new investigations, compared to developed economies which initiated 23% of the investigations.

 

Nearly 50% of the new investigations were undertaken by two countries alone: India initiated nine new product-level investigations, followed by Argentina with eight new investigations. Israel initiated three investigations, the Ukraine and the U.S. each initiated two, and eleven other WTO members (Australia, Canada, China, Colombia, European Union, Kyrgyz Republic, Mexico, Pakistan, Peru, South Africa, Turkey) initiated one product-level investigation each.

 

AFFECTED SECTORS

 

The new trade remedy investigations covered a number of different sectors in 1Q 2009. The dominant sector was chemicals, with seven total investigations, five of which were initiated by India. Other sectors targeted with multiple investigations include textiles and apparel (5), machinery (4), iron and steel (3), plastics and rubber (3), wood (3), materials (3), and agriculture (2).

 

SPREAD OF TRADE REMEDY USE BEYOND ANTIDUMPING

 

While antidumping was still the preferred trade remedy of choice as 24 of the 35 investigations initiated in 1Q 2009 occurred under a national AD law, WTO members also initiated import-restricting investigations under their national provisions relating to global safeguards (6), China-specific safeguards (3) and countervailing duties (2 unique cases).[8] Indeed, an analysis of antidumping alone suggests its use in 1Q 2009 (24 new product-level investigations) was relatively flat when compared with its use throughout 2008, in which WTO members averaged 25 new investigations per quarter.

 

The 1Q 2009 increase in trade remedy protectionism above its 2008 levels is therefore largely due to the increase in the use of these other import-restricting policies (CVD, SG, CSG). Consider India`s activity in the 1Q 2009: it initiated 3 antidumping investigations, 3 China-specific safeguard investigations, 2 global safeguard investigations, and its first ever countervailing duty investigation. [9] Thus not only is protectionism on the rise, but the trade remedy policy instruments through which WTO members are implementing the new import-restricting barriers are expanding beyond traditional antidumping use as well.

 

TARGETED EXPORTERS

 

China was the exporting country most frequently targeted by new investigations in 1Q 2009. China was specifically named in 19 of the 28 (67.9%) newly initiated product-level investigations under (AD, CVD, CSG) laws that require the investigating country to specifically name at least one exporting country.[10] In 12 out of these 28 (42.9%) investigations, China was the only country named. Finally, in the remaining 7 instances in which China was named as one of multiple exporting countries, there was only one other exporting country named in the product-level investigation. Using trade remedies to target China`s exports continues a trend dating back to China`s WTO accession in 2001 and even earlier.[11]

 

Other frequently investigated exporters include the European Union or its member states (5) and Brazil (4). Four other WTO members (Indonesia, South Korea, U.S., Vietnam) were investigated with two product-level investigations each, while eight other countries (Argentina, Hong Kong, Oman, Paraguay, Saudi Arabia, Singapore, Taiwan, Thailand) each faced one new investigation.

 

 

II. NEWLY IMPOSED IMPORT-RESTRICTING TRADE REMEDIES

 

In addition to the newly initiated investigations, WTO members also imposed a number of new definitive import-restricting trade remedies in 1Q 2009. Most of these new import restrictions were imposed after months of consideration for investigations initiated only in late 2007 or early 2008.

 

As Fig. 2 indicates, WTO members imposed 21 new product-level definitive import restrictions in 1Q 2009 under national trade remedy laws, an increase of 10.0% compared to the same period in 2008.[12] The new measures imposed in 1Q 2009 took place at an annualized rate that is 15.4% higher than the rate at which definitive new measures were imposed in 2008.

 

However, the actual increase in imposed measures in 2Q through 4Q of 2009 is expected to be much larger than 15.4% higher than the number imposed in 2008, given the sharp increase in newly initiated investigations in 2Q through 4Q of 2008 (see again Fig. 1). [13]

 

Source: Global Antidumping Database.

 

POLICY-IMPOSING COUNTRIES

 

Ten different WTO members imposed at least one definitive import-restricting trade remedy in 1Q 2009. Developing countries imposed 48% of the definitive new measures, compared to developed economies which imposed 52% of the new barriers.

 

Multiple new product-level import barriers were imposed by India (4), U.S. (4), Australia (3), Argentina (2), South Korea (2), and Turkey (2). Four other WTO members (Brazil, Canada, Colombia, European Union) imposed one new definitive import-restricting trade remedy each.

 

AFFECTED SECTORS

 

Newly imposed trade remedies covered a number of different sectors in 1Q 2009. The dominant sector was iron and steel, with six new barriers, three of which were imposed by the U.S. Other sectors targeted with multiple new definitive import restrictions include machinery (4), textiles and apparel (2), plastics and rubber (2), wood (2), and vehicles (2). Agriculture and chemicals only faced one newly imposed measure each in 1Q 2009.

 

SPREAD OF TRADE REMEDY USE BEYOND ANTIDUMPING

 

Most of the investigations from which new definitive import-restricting measures imposed in 1Q 2009 took place under national antidumping laws, though a handful of investigations took place under either national countervailing duty laws or both. Of the 21 newly imposed product-level import restrictions, 16 resulted from antidumping investigations alone, two resulted from countervailing duty investigations alone, and three resulted from simultaneous antidumping and countervailing duty investigations. There were no ongoing global safeguard (SG) or China-specific safeguard (CSG) investigations begun in 2007-2008 that resulted in the imposition of definitive new import barriers during 1Q 2009.

 

TARGETED EXPORTERS

 

China was the exporting country most frequently targeted by imposition of new import-restricting trade remedies in 1Q 2009. China`s exporters were targeted in 15 of the 21 (71.4%) new product-level import-restrictions imposed under the trade remedy laws (AD, CVD, CSG) that require the investigating country to name at least one exporting country. In 10 out of 21 (47.6%) investigations that resulted in new import restrictions in 1Q 2009, China was the only country targeted. Finally, in 4 out of the remaining 5 instances in which China was named as a target, there was only one other exporting country also targeted with a newly imposed import restriction.

 

Other countries whose exporters faced the imposition of more than one newly imposed trade remedy in 1Q 2009 include Thailand (3), Malaysia (3), India (2), Indonesia (2), South Korea (2), Taiwan (2) and Vietnam (2). Four other countries (Greece, Iran, United Arab Emirates, U.S.) each had exporters that faced the imposition of one new import restricting trade remedy only. Overall, 86.9% of the targeted exporters facing new import restrictions were from developing countries, and 13.1% of the exporters were from developed economies.

 


Sources:

 

The 20 WTO Members from whom the antidumping data derives are: Argentina, Australia, Brazil, Canada, China, Colombia, EU, India, Israel, Mexico, New Zealand, Pakistan, Peru, South Africa, South Korea, Taiwan, Turkey, Ukraine, USA, and Venezuela. According to data from the WTO, these 20 Members initiated 90% (89%) of all antidumping investigations (new measures imposed) by the WTO membership during 1995-2007. Thus tracking data from these economies serves as a relatively comprehensive sample likely to reflect general trends in the WTO membership.

 

With only four exceptions, the antidumping data provided above are collected from each country`s national government publications and made publicly available on their websites, as detailed in the appendix. Thus the statistics are reliable to the extent that these countries publish their new anti-dumping initiations and applied measures on their websites. Data for China, Israel, South Korea, and Ukraine is taken from the WTO`s semi-annual reports for 2007-2008 and from various news agency websites for 1Q-2009 (see appendix table 3).

 

The 18 WTO Members from whom the countervailing duty data derives are: Argentina, Australia, Brazil, Canada, China, Colombia, EU, India, Mexico, New Zealand, Pakistan, Peru, South Africa, South Korea, Taiwan, Turkey, USA, and Venezuela. According to data from the WTO, these 18 Members initiated 93% (97%) of all countervailing duty investigations (new measures imposed) by the WTO membership during 1995-2007. Thus this serve as a relatively comprehensive sample likely to reflect general trends in the WTO membership. The countervailing data provided are collected from national government publications, the WTO`s semi-annual reports, and news agency websites.

 

Data from WTO Members` use of global safeguards and China-specific safeguards is taken from the WTO and national government publications.

 

The Global Antidumping Database can be found at http://www.brandeis.edu/~cbown/global_ad/ . The complete and detailed data on antidumping investigations will be made available in early summer 2009 as version 5.0 of the Global Antidumping Database.

 

 

Appendix Table 1:

Newly Initiated Import-Restricting Trade Remedy Investigations, 1Q 2009

 

 

Policy-imposing Country

Policy

Exporting Country

Product

Initiation Date

 

 

 

 

 

 

1

Argentina

AD

China

Certain taffeta ligament weft and warp fabrics

01/06/2009

2

Argentina

AD

Brazil

Certain taffeta ligament weft and warp fabrics

01/06/2009

3

Argentina

AD

China

Electric food processors

01/14/2009

4

Argentina

AD

Brazil

Electric food processors

01/14/2009

5

Argentina

AD

China

Laminated floors

01/23/2009

6

Argentina

AD

China

Footwear

03/02/2009

7

Argentina

AD

China

Steel wheels

03/09/2009

8

Argentina

AD

China

Stainless steel knives with plastic handles

03/20/2009

9

Argentina

AD

Brazil

Stainless steel knives with plastic handles

03/20/2009

10

Argentina

AD

Paraguay

Recordable compact discs (CDRs)

03/25/2009

11

Argentina

AD

China

Denim

03/25/2009

12

Australia

AD

Germany

Geosynthetic clay liners

01/06/2009

13

Canada

AD

China

Certain waterproof footwear

02/27/2009

14

Canada

AD

Vietnam

Certain waterproof footwear

02/27/2009

15

China

AD

Thailand

Terephthalic acid

02/12/2009

16

China

AD

South Korea

Terephthalic acid

02/12/2009

17

Colombia

AD

China

Blenders

02/16/2009

18

European Union

AD

China

Certain cargo scanning systems

03/18/2009

19

India

CVD

China

Sodium nitrite

01/14/2009

20

India

CSG

China

Soda ash

01/16/2009

21

India

SG

NA

Oxo alcohols

01/16/2009

22

India

SG

NA

Dimethoate technical

01/21/2009

23

India

CSG

China

Aluminum flat rolled products and aluminum foil

01/27/2009

24

India

CSG

China

Nylon tyre cord fabric

02/06/2009

25

India

AD

China

Certain phosphorus based chemical compounds

02/13/2009

26

India

AD

European Union

Certain phosphorus based chemical compounds

02/13/2009

27

India

AD

Oman

Polypropylene

02/24/2009

28

India

AD

Saudi Arabia

Polypropylene

02/24/2009

29

India

AD

Singapore

Polypropylene

02/24/2009

30

India

AD

China

Viscose staple fibre excluding bamboo fibre

03/19/2009

31

India

AD

Indonesia

Viscose staple fibre excluding bamboo fibre

03/19/2009

32

Israel

AD

European Union

Recycled containerboard

01/18/2009

33

Israel

AD

European Union

Uncoated wood free printing and writing papers

02/25/2009

34

Israel

SG

NA

Steel rebars

03/23/2009

35

Kyrgyz Republic

SG

NA

White sugar

02/17/2009

36

Mexico

AD

China

Carbon steel nuts

02/03/2009

37

Pakistan

AD

Belgium

Secondary quality tinplate

01/16/2009

38

Pakistan

AD

France

Secondary quality tinplate

01/16/2009

39

Pakistan

AD

Germany

Secondary quality tinplate

01/16/2009

40

Pakistan

AD

Netherlands

Secondary quality tinplate

01/16/2009

41

Pakistan

AD

USA

Secondary quality tinplate

01/16/2009

42

Peru

SG

NA

Cotton yarn

01/19/2009

43

South Africa

AD

China

Staple polyester fibre

01/23/2009

44

Turkey

AD

China

Knives for electromechanical domestic kitchen appliances

01/15/2009

45

Turkey

AD

Hong Kong

Knives for electromechanical domestic kitchen appliances

01/15/2009

46

Ukraine

AD

USA

Poultry

03/05/2009

47

Ukraine

AD

Brazil

Poultry

03/05/2009

48

Ukraine

SG

NA

Liquid chroline

03/17/2009

49

USA

CVD

Argentina

Ni-resist piston inserts

01/26/2009

50

USA

CVD

South Korea

Ni-resist piston inserts

01/26/2009

51

USA

AD

Indonesia

Polyethylene retail carrier bags

03/31/2009

52

USA

AD

Taiwan

Polyethylene retail carrier bags

03/31/2009

53

USA

AD

Vietnam

Polyethylene retail carrier bags

03/31/2009

54

USA

CVD

Vietnam

Polyethylene retail carrier bags

03/31/2009

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Sources: Global Antidumping Database. Derived from sources described in Appendix Table 3. AD = antidumping; CVD = countervailing duty; SG = global safeguard; CSG = China-specific safeguard. NA indicates not applicable since global safeguards (SG) are intended to be applied on an MFN basis to imports from all export sources.


 

Appendix Table 2:

Newly Imposed Import-Restricting Trade Remedies, 1Q 2009

 

 

Policy-imposing Country

Policy

Exporting Country

Product

Imposition Date

 

 

 

 

 

 

1

Argentina

AD

China

Universal joints and tripods (auto parts)

01/06/2009

2

Argentina

AD

China

Steel chain

02/13/2009

3

Australia

AD

China

Certain toilet tissue

01/01/2009

4

Australia

AD

China

Certain tubeless steel demountable rims

01/01/2009

5

Australia

AD

Indonesia

Certain toilet tissue

01/01/2009

6

Australia

AD

Greece

Processed dried currants

01/15/2009

7

Brazil

AD

USA

Butyl acrylate

03/25/2009

8

Canada

AD

China

Certain aluminum extrusions

03/17/2009

9

Canada

CVD

China

Certain aluminum extrusions

03/17/2009

10

Colombia

AD

China

Screws

02/11/2009

11

European Union

AD

China

Certain iron or steel fasteners

01/26/2009

12

India

AD

China

Cathode ray colour television picture tubes

02/17/2009

13

India

AD

Malaysia

Cathode ray colour television picture tubes

02/17/2009

14

India

AD

South Korea

Cathode ray colour television picture tubes

02/17/2009

15

India

AD

Thailand

Cathode ray colour television picture tubes

02/17/2009

16

India

AD

China

Compact fluorescent lamps

02/27/2009

17

India

AD

Vietnam

Compact fluorescent lamps

02/27/2009

18

India

AD

Iran

Compact disc - recordable (CD-R)

03/06/2009

19

India

AD

Malaysia

Compact disc - recordable (CD-R)

03/06/2009

20

India

AD

South Korea

Compact disc - recordable (CD-R)

03/06/2009

21

India

AD

Thailand

Compact disc - recordable (CD-R)

03/06/2009

22

India

AD

UAE

Compact disc - recordable (CD-R)

03/06/2009

23

India

AD

Vietnam

Compact disc - recordable (CD-R)

03/06/2009

24

India

AD

China

Cable ties

03/31/2009

25

India

AD

Taiwan

Cable ties

03/31/2009

26

South Korea

AD

China

Polyester yarn

01/02/2009

27

South Korea

AD

Taiwan

Polyester yarn

01/02/2009

28

South Korea

AD

Malaysia

Particle board

02/25/2009

29

South Korea

AD

Thailand

Particle board

02/25/2009

30

Turkey

AD

China

Yarn of man-made or synthetic or artificial staple fibres

01/12/2009

31

Turkey

AD

India

Yarn of man-made or synthetic or artificial staple fibres

01/12/2009

32

Turkey

AD

Indonesia

Yarn of man-made or synthetic or artificial staple fibres

01/12/2009

33

Turkey

CVD

India

Pet films

03/22/2009

34

USA

CVD

China

Circular welded carbon quality steel line pipe

01/14/2009

35

USA

AD

China

Uncovered innerspring units

02/19/2009

36

USA

AD

China

Small diameter graphite electrodes

02/26/2009

37

USA

CVD

China

Circular welded austenitic stainless pressure pipe

03/16/2009

38

USA

AD

China

Circular welded austenitic stainless pressure pipe

03/17/2009

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Sources: Global Antidumping Database. Derived from sources described in Appendix Table 3. AD = antidumping; CVD = countervailing duty; SG = global safeguard; CSG = China-specific safeguard. NA indicates not applicable since global safeguards (SG) are intended to be applied on an MFN basis to imports from all export sources.

 


Appendix Table 3:

Sources of Data: User Countries` Government Agencies or Publications that provided the antidumping and countervailing duty data and their Websites

 

Country

Government Agency or Publications that provided the data

Website

Argentina

La Comision Nacional de Comercio Exterior (CNCE)

http://www.cnce.gov.ar/

Australia

Australian Customs and Border Protection Service

http://www.customs.gov.au/site/page.cfm?u=4221

Brazil

Ministerio do Desenvolvimento, Industria e Comercio Exterior -
Departamento de Defesa Comercial (DECOM) (Ministry of Development, Industry, and International Trade - Department of Trade Defense )

http://www.desenvolvimento.gov.br/

Canada

Canada Border Services Agency (CBSA)

http://cbsa-asfc.gc.ca/menu-eng.html

China

Xinhua (New China News Agency)

http://www.xinhuanet.com/english/index.htm

 

Colombia

Ministerio de Comercio, Industria y Turismo -- Direccion de
Comercio Exterior (Ministry of Trade, Industry and Tourism - Division of
International Trade)

http://www.mincomercio.gov.co/eContent/newsdetail.asp?id=2688&idcompany=10

European Union

Official Journal of the European Communities

http://eur-lex.europa.eu/en/index.htm

India

Government of India: Department of Commerce

http://commerce.nic.in/traderemedies/ad_casesinindia.asp?id=2

Israel

State of Israel Ministry of Industry, Trade & Labor

www.moit.gov.il

 

Mexico

Ministry of the Economy

http://www.pymes.gob.mx/upci/

New Zealand

Ministry of Economic Development

http://www.med.govt.nz/templates/StandardSummary____28.aspx

Pakistan

National Tariff Commission

http://www.ntc.gov.pk/currint.asp

Peru

Empresa Peruana de Servicios Editoriales S.A.:

http://www.elperuano.com.pe/

South Africa

International Trade Administration Commission of South Africa

http://www.itac.org.za/news_archive.asp?pageNo=1&art_date=

South Korea

Antidumpingpublishing.com

http://www.antidumpingpublishing.com/

Taiwan

International Trade Commission: Ministry of Economic Affairs

http://www.moeaitc.gov.tw/itcweb/webform/wfrmSite.aspx?pagestyle=2&programid=274

Turkey

Undersecretariat of the Prime Ministry for Foreign Trade

http://www.dtm.gov.tr/dtmweb/index.cfm?action=detay&yayinID=581&icerikID=684&dil=TR

Ukraine

Sokrat Daily

ISI Emerging Market Database

United States

International Trade Administration (ITA)

http://trade.gov/index.asp

Venezuela

Comision Antidumping y

Sobre Subsidios (CASS)

http://www.cass.gob.ve

 

 

 


Endnotes



[1] Chad P. Bown is an Associate Professor in the Department of Economics and International Business School at Brandeis University and a Fellow in the Global Economy and Development Program at the Brookings Institution. He prepared this report as part of the World Bank`s trade policy transparency initiative to update data made freely and publicly available via the Global Antidumping Database, whose website published earlier monitoring updates for 2008.

 

Correspondence: Chad P. Bown, Department of Economics and International Business School, Brandeis University, Mailstop 021, 415 South Street, Waltham, MA 02454-9110 USA, tel: +1.781.736.4823, fax: +1.781.736.2269, email: cbown@brandeis.edu, web: http://www.brandeis.edu/~cbown/ .

 

[2] Aksel Erbahar, Laura Gutowski, and Ludmila Cieszkowsky Elias provided outstanding research assistance.

 

[3] The G-20`s Washington Summit led to a 15 November 2008 declaration that `[w]e underscore the critical importance of rejecting protectionism and not turning inward in times of financial uncertainty. In this regard, within the next 12 months, we will refrain from raising new barriers to investment or to trade in goods and services, imposing new export restrictions, or implementing World Trade Organization (WTO) inconsistent measures to stimulate exports.` (G-20, 2008, p. 4) The G-20`s London summit led to a 2 April 2009 `Global Plan for Recovery and Reform` plan which also stated `We have today therefore pledged to do whatever is necessary to. . .promote global trade and investment and reject protectionism, to underpin prosperity` (G-20, 2009, p. 1).

 

[4] The data in this monitoring report extends the analysis of the 2008 trends in antidumping reported at http://www.brandeis.edu/~cbown/global_ad/monitoring/ , including Bown, Chad P. (2009) `Monitoring Update to the Global Antidumping Database: Protectionism Is on the Rise as Antidumping Import Restriction Use up 31% in 2008,` 5 March; Bown, Chad P. (2009) `Protectionism Is on the Rise: Antidumping Investigations,` chapter 11 in Richard Baldwin and Simon Evenett, eds. The Collapse of Global Trade, Murky Protectionism, and the Crisis: Recommendations for the G20. VoxEU.org e-book, 5 March; and Gamberoni, Elisa and Richard Newfarmer (2009) `Trade Protection: Incipient but Worrisome Trends,` World Bank Trade Notes no. 37, 2 March.

 

[5] The EU, France, Germany, Italy and the UK as these are five separate members of the G-20 but are represented by one collective EU trade policy. The only G-20 members for which we did not find evidence of newly initiated trade remedy investigations during the first quarter of 2009 were Brazil, Indonesia, Russia, Saudi Arabia and South Korea.

 

[6] Appendix table 1 lists the 54 different trade remedy investigations during the 1Q 2009 that can be reduced to the 35 (non-redundant) product-level investigations illustrated in the figure. To make comparable the data on policy use across different (AD, CVD, SG, CVD) trade remedy laws, AD or CVD investigations (measures) against multiple exporting countries are treated as one product-level investigation (measure). For example, Argentina`s two antidumping investigation of `Electric food processors` from Brazil and from China are treated as one product-level investigation. Furthermore, to ensure that they are not redundant, a WTO member`s simultaneous AD and CVD investigations (measures) over the same product are treated as one investigation (measure). For example, the US`s simultaneous AD and CVD investigations of `Polyethylene retail carrier bags` from Vietnam are treated as one product-level trade remedy investigation. Finally, associated with its terms of accession to the WTO agreement in 2001, WTO members were granted access to a transitional (until 2014) China-specific safeguard (CSG) with which they can implement new China-specific import restrictions if there is evidence of injury (or a threat thereof) to a domestic industry associated with increased imports from China.

 

[7] The year 2007 was the trough (low point) in the global use of trade remedies during the period since 1995.

 

[8] By a countervailing duty investigation being unique we mean that it was not accompanied by a simultaneous antidumping investigation against the same exporting country over the same exporting product. See again footnote 2.

 

[9] Furthermore, Israel and the Kyrgyz Republic initiated their first ever global safeguard investigations in 2009. Turkey also initiated its first-ever countervailing duty investigation in 2008.

 

[10] Of the 35 product-level newly initiated investigations in the 1Q 2009, six did not name any exporting countries because they were global safeguards, and China initiated one investigation itself.

 

[11] For a discussion and analysis, see Chad P. Bown (forthcoming) `China`s WTO Entry: Antidumping, Safeguards, and Dispute Settlement,` in Robert Feenstra and Shang-Jin Wei (eds.) China`s Growing Role in World Trade. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press for NBER.

 

[12] Appendix table 2 lists the 38 different trade remedy investigations that resulted in the imposition of definitive new import restrictions during the 1Q 2009 that can be reduced to the 21 (non-redundant) product-level trade barriers illustrated in the figure.

 

[13] Indeed, the low point for newly imposed definitive trade remedies occurred in 2Q 2008 (Fig. 2.), i.e., four quarters after the low point for newly initiated trade remedy investigations in 2Q 2007 (Fig. 1).