欧盟反倾销贸易效应的实证分析  

An Empirical Analysis of the Trade Effect of EU Antidumping Actions

作　　者：杨仕辉[1] 谢雨池[1] 邓莹莹[1] 

机构地区：[1]暨南大学,广州510632

出　　处：《广东外语外贸大学学报》2011年第5期32-39,共8页Journal of Guangdong University of Foreign Studies

基　　金：暨南大学人才项目"反倾销贸易效应的实证分析与比较"(2008JSYJ009);暨南大学"211工程"项目"贸易壁垒风险测度及其损害的实证研究"(JJ211Y004);广东省教育厅人文社会科学研究重大攻关项目"全球分工模式的演变与广东产业新的竞争优势培育研究"(10ZGXM79005)

摘　　要：对欧盟反倾销申诉样本构成、金额进行统计分析后,发现中国和印度的影响较大,化学工业、纺织、机电和贱金属及其制品行业受影响程度较高。实证分析发现欧盟反倾销申诉对被诉国出口贸易的影响不尽相同,在不同行业也存在不同程度的影响。但征收关税和实施反倾销措施都会导致被诉国涉案产品出口贸易额的减少,即均存在贸易破坏效应,比较关税与反倾销措施的影响,发现欧盟实施反倾销措施对其进口贸易的限制作用均远大于关税,表明反倾销措施已经成为欧盟取代传统关税控制进口的贸易政策。同时,欧盟反倾销措施还对欧盟进口具有贸易转移效应,使被诉国出口市场丧失。A statistic analysis of the composition and import values of antidumping cases in the EU shows that China and India are the most affected named countries. Overall, the most affected industries in the two countries are those of chemicals, textiles, machinery and electrical equipment and base metals. Our empirical analysis indicates that EU antidumping actions have certain diversified impacts on the exports of the named countries and their industries. Both tariff imposing and antidumping action will bring about a reduction on the named country＇ s export of involved commodities, namely the ＂trade destructing effect＂. However, by comparing the impacts from these two measures, we find that the EU antidumping action has a greater effect on restricting import than on imposing tariff, which proves that the EU antidurnping action has become a substitution of tariff as a trade policy to restrict import. Moreover, we find that the EU antidumping action also has a ＂trade diversion effect＂ , leading to the named countries losing some of the market share.

关 键 词：欧盟 反倾销 关税 贸易破坏效应 贸易转移效应 

分 类 号：F753.0[经济管理—国际贸易]