• Login
    JavaScript is disabled for your browser. Some features of this site may not work without it.
    Revising European Safeguards and Antidumping Provisions in Light of the Chinese WTO Accession 
    •   QMRO Home
    • Queen Mary University of London Theses
    • Theses
    • Revising European Safeguards and Antidumping Provisions in Light of the Chinese WTO Accession
    •   QMRO Home
    • Queen Mary University of London Theses
    • Theses
    • Revising European Safeguards and Antidumping Provisions in Light of the Chinese WTO Accession
    ‌
    ‌

    Browse

    All of QMROCommunities & CollectionsBy Issue DateAuthorsTitlesSubjectsThis CollectionBy Issue DateAuthorsTitlesSubjects
    ‌
    ‌

    Administrators only

    Login
    ‌
    ‌

    Statistics

    Most Popular ItemsStatistics by CountryMost Popular Authors

    Revising European Safeguards and Antidumping Provisions in Light of the Chinese WTO Accession

    View/Open
    HOOGMARTENSRevisingEuropean2003.pdf (23.06Mb)
    Publisher
    Queen Mary University of London
    Metadata
    Show full item record
    Abstract
    In November 2001, the WTO members allowed the People's Republic of China, a formerly planned economy that is going through different stages of domestic economic and related legal restructuring, to accede to the WTO. This accession is believed to be necessary for the WTO to become a truly international organisation in the post-Cold War era, along side of the IMF and the World Bank, and for China to become an integrated member of the international economic community. Although the end of the Cold War has changed European trade policy profoundly, the European Community (EC)" has maintained a traditionally bifurcated trade policy, in which planned economies, also referred to as "non-market economies", are given treatment different from market economies in trade policy instruments, such as the EC emergency safeguards provisions and EC anti-dumping regulation. The EC perceives the Chinese domestic legal and economic reforms as unfinished; and, although the treatment of Chinese products under the EC import and anti-dumping regulations has been liberalised in recent years, China is still generally considered to be a non-market economy. It is questionable whether in light of China's WTO accession such a non-market approach vis-ä-vis China, as approved in the Chinese Protocol of Accession, is justified. This thesis argues that the non-market approach for China, as it stands today, should be adjusted for two basic reasons. First, this approach does not allow China to benefit fully from its WTO accession for a number of years to come. Second, as long as the period allowing non-market economy treatment continues, the danger exists that the non-market economy trade policy, especially as far as anti-dumping is concerned, may tend to be abused for protectionist purposes by the EC. Protectionist abuse would be harmful for China because its export-oriented growth is necessary to advance the country's domestic legal and economic reforms. Protectionism, equally, would be harmful for the EC because it prevents the Community industry from adjusting itself to face the challenge of increased Chinese competition. Because there is no satisfactory methodological solution to deal with the new variant of non-market economies, and because it is impossible for China - despite all good intentions - to implement fully the WTO accession requirements by the time they must phase in, the suggested approach is for the EC to show restraint in employing these trade policy instruments against China. As far as emergency safeguards are concerned, this restraint is already a fact. Nonetheless, some holdovers from the Cold War should be put up for change. Such adjustments will also be required for the EC anti-dumping regulation.
    Authors
    Hoogmartens, Jan
    URI
    http://qmro.qmul.ac.uk/xmlui/handle/123456789/1808
    Collections
    • Theses [3834]
    Copyright statements
    The copyright of this thesis rests with the author and no quotation from it or information derived from it may be published without the prior written consent of the author
    Twitter iconFollow QMUL on Twitter
    Twitter iconFollow QM Research
    Online on twitter
    Facebook iconLike us on Facebook
    • Site Map
    • Privacy and cookies
    • Disclaimer
    • Accessibility
    • Contacts
    • Intranet
    • Current students

    Modern Slavery Statement

    Queen Mary University of London
    Mile End Road
    London E1 4NS
    Tel: +44 (0)20 7882 5555

    © Queen Mary University of London.