+7 925 966 4690, 9am6pm (GMT+3), Monday – Friday
ИД «Финансы и кредит»

JOURNALS

  

FOR AUTHORS

  

SUBSCRIBE

    
Economic Analysis: Theory and Practice
 

Safeguard measures as an instrument of import-substitution policy: foreign experience and prospects for Russia

Vol. 15, Iss. 2, FEBRUARY 2016

PDF  Article PDF Version

Received: 5 November 2015

Received in revised form: 14 January 2016

Accepted: 20 January 2016

Available online: 4 March 2016

Subject Heading: ANALYSIS OF COMPETITIVE ABILITY

JEL Classification: F13, O24, P52, Q27

Pages: 129-143

Gubina M.A. Saint Petersburg State University, St. Petersburg, Russian Federation
m.gubina@spbu.ru

Koval' A.G. Saint Petersburg State University, St. Petersburg, Russian Federation
a.koval@spbu.ru

Trofimenko O.Yu. Saint Petersburg State University, St. Petersburg, Russian Federation
o.trofimenko@spbu.ru

Importance Under the increasing competition on international markets and contemporary foreign economic policy of Russia, import substitution serves as a significant strategy for the protection of national producers. Safeguard measures are one of the trade policy's instruments aiming at protecting domestic industries from import products.
Objectives The research aims to identify the specifics of safeguard measures in Russia and abroad.
Methods The paper rests on the institutional approach. The comparative analysis on the basis of statistical and reporting data reveals trends in the application of safeguard measures in the international practice. The case study considers the relevant Indian experience.
Results Safeguard measures support national producers; however, the procedure for their implementation has certain difficulties, including the need for a well-elaborated evidence base, countervailing duties and further liberalization during a limited time period. Therefore, only few countries use this instrument of trade policy. Nevertheless, the increasing attention of the world community and successful cases of implementing the measures, for instance in India, prove the possibility of import substitution.
Conclusions Safeguard measures for national producers' support may be possible only if there is a relevant institutional network for efficient interaction of the State and the business. Russia should develop the institutional infrastructure within the Eurasian Economic Union. However, these measures would not provide a successful import substitution without reasonable steps on the part of national companies.

Keywords: import substitution, safeguard measures, special protective tariff, trade dispute, WTO

References:

  1. Sutyrin S.F., Lomagin N.A., Sherov-Ignat'ev V.G., Trofimenko O.Yu., Kapustkin V.I., Nazarova M.V., Lisitsyn N.E. Prisoedinenie Rossii k VTO: osnovnye obyazatel'stva, vozmozhnye posledstviya [Russia's accession to the WTO: major commitments, possible implications]. St. Petersburg, International Trade Center, Saint Petersburg State University Publ., 2012, 36 p.
  2. Beshkar M. Trade Skirmishes and Safeguards: A Theory of the WTO Dispute Settlement Process. WTO Staff Working Paper, 2009, no. 9, 36 p.
  3. Busch M.L., Pelc K.J. Law, Politics, and the True Cost of Protectionism: The Choice of Trade Remedies or Binding Overhang. World Trade Review, 2014, vol. 13, iss. 1, pp. 39–64. doi: Link
  4. Mavroidis P.C., Messerlin P.A., Wauters J.M. The Law and Economics of Contingent Protection in the WTO. Cheltenham, UK, Edward Elgar, 2008, 606 p.
  5. Peng M.W., Wang D.L, Jiang Y. An institution-based view of international business strategy: a focus on emerging economies. Journal of International Business Studies, 2008, no. 39(5), pp. 920–936.
  6. Rugman A., Verbeke A. American Trade Policy and Corporate Strategy. World Competition: Law and Economic Review, 1990, vol. 13, no. 4, pp. 79–90.
  7. Gubina М.А., Маlova А.S. [Liberalization or protection: Indian experience in application of trade remedies]. Materialy mezhdunarodnoi konferentsii “Evolyutsiya mezhdunarodnoi torgovoi sistemy: problemy i perspektivy – 2015” [Proc. Int. Sci. Conf. Evolution of International Trading System: Problems and Prospects 2015]. St. Petersburg, Gamma Publ., 2015.
  8. Chlenstvo v VTO: novyi etap uchastiya Rossii v mezhdunarodnoi torgovoi sisteme: monografiya [Membership in the WTO: a new stage for Russia in the international trading system: a monograph]. Moscow, Prospekt Publ., 2014, 318 p.
  9. Van den Bossche P., Zdouc W. The Law and Policy of the World Trade Organization: Text, Cases and Materials. UK, Cambridge University Press, 2013, 737 p.
  10. Koval' A.G., Sutyrin S.F., Trofimenko O.Yu. Zashchita natsional'nykh proizvoditelei v ramkakh VTO [Protecting domestic producers within the WTO]. Vestnik Sankt-Peterburgskogo universiteta. Ser. 5: Ekonomika = Vestnik of Saint Petersburg University. Series 5: Economics, 2014, vol. 1, pp. 53–70.
  11. Novikov M.V., Zemlyanskaya S.V. Protsedura primeneniya spetsial'nykh zashchitnykh mer vo vneshnetorgovoi praktike [Procedure for safeguards application in the foreign trade policy]. Vestnik Volgogradskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta. Ser. 3: Ekonomika, Ekologiya = Science Journal of VolSU. Global Economic System, 2014, no. 3, pp. 79–85.
  12. Bown C.P. How Different Are Safeguards from Anti-dumping? Evidence from US Trade Policies toward Steel. The World Bank, Policy Research Working Paper, 2013, no. 6378.
  13. Zheng W. Reforming Trade Remedies. Michigan Journal of International Law, 2013, vol. 34, iss. 151, pp. 152–207.
  14. Gubina M.A. Vliyanie prisoedineniya k VTO na farmatsevticheskuyu otrasl': opyt Indii, vozmozhnye posledstviya dlya Rossii. V kn.: Chlenstvo v VTO – novyi etap uchastiya Rossii v mezhdunarodnoi torgovoi sisteme [The impact of the WTO accession on the pharmaceutical industry: Indian experience and potential consequences for Russia. In: Membership in the WTO: a new stage for Russia in the international trading system]. St. Petersburg, Saint Petersburg State University Publ., 2013, pp. 120–135.
  15. Bown C.P. Taking Stock of Antidumping, Safeguards, and Countervailing Duties, 1990–2009. The World Economy, 2011, vol. 34, iss. 12, pp. 1955–1998. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9701.2011.01388.x
  16. Bown C.P., Tovar P. Trade Liberalization, Antidumping, and Safeguards: Evidence from India's Tariff Reform. Journal of Development Economics, 2011, vol. 96, iss. 1, pp. 115–125.
  17. Podoba Z., Gorshkov V. Spetsial'naya tarifnaya sistema Yaponii: praktika primeneniya [Special tariff system of Japan: practical application]. Mirovaya ekonomika i mezhdunarodnye otnosheniya = World Economy and International Relations, 2015, no. 5, pp. 81–91.
  18. Finger M., Nogues J.J. Safeguards and Antidumping in Latin American Trade Liberalization: Fighting Fire With Fire. Washington, World Bank, Palgrave Macmillan, 2006, 312 p.
  19. Lee Y.-S. First WTO Case on Transitional Product-Specific Safeguard Measure under Section 16 of the Protocol of China's Accession to the WTO: Affirming Discriminatory Safeguard Measure by the WTO? Journal of World Trade, 2012, vol. 46, no. 4, pp. 913–936.
  20. Evenett S.J. BRICS Trade Strategy: Time for a Rethink. The 17th GTA Report. London, CEPR Press, 2015, 107 p.
  21. Viljoen W. Trade Remedies and Safeguards in BRICS Countries. Tralac Trade Law Centre. Tralac Working Paper, 2013, February, 45 p.
  22. Van Bael I., Bellis J.F. EU Anti-dumping and Other Trade Defense Instruments. Kluwer Law International, 2011, 1396 p.

View all articles of issue

 

ISSN 2311-8725 (Online)
ISSN 2073-039X (Print)

Journal current issue

Vol. 23, Iss. 3
March 2024

Archive