Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorBREWSTER, Rachel
dc.contributor.authorBRUNEL, Claire
dc.contributor.authorMAYDA, Anna Maria
dc.date.accessioned2015-10-01T15:24:52Z
dc.date.available2015-10-01T15:24:52Z
dc.date.issued2015
dc.identifier.issn1028-3625
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/1814/37155
dc.description.abstractIn this paper we claim that, in the WTO Appellate Body (AB)'s ruling in US — Countervailing Measures (China), the AB decision has not put in question the practice of imposing countervailing duties (CVDs). While the US has formally "lost" the case, a change in the procedures and tests used to motivate the CVD will allow the US to continue using this policy tool on the specified products. From an economic point of view, this is not welcome news since CVDs have the standard distortionary effects of tariffs and could go against environmental goals. From a political-economy point of view, the CVDs in this case appear driven by pressure of domestic manufacturers of clean energy technology and products.en
dc.format.mimetypeapplication/pdfen
dc.language.isoenen
dc.relation.ispartofseriesEUI RSCASen
dc.relation.ispartofseries2015/69en
dc.relation.ispartofseriesGlobal Governance Programme-191en
dc.relation.ispartofseriesGlobal Economicsen
dc.rightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessen
dc.subjectEnvironmental goodsen
dc.subjectCountervailing dutiesen
dc.subjectWTOen
dc.subject.otherTrade, investment and international cooperation
dc.titleTrade in environmental goods : a review of the WTO Appellate Body’s ruling in "US-countervailing measures (China)"en
dc.typeWorking Paperen
eui.subscribe.skiptrue


Files associated with this item

Icon

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record