That last part is not in the actual title of the book "Trade Remedies in North America," by Gregory Bowman, Nick Covelli, David Gantz, and Ihn Ho Uhm, but that's pretty much what the book is. It covers the policy issues, the nitty-gritty of trade remedy proceedings, all the various jurisdictions that come into play, and looks at some specific cases.
It covers the basics of AD/CVD/Safeguards in Canada, Mexico and the U.S. It discusses how WTO rules apply to each. It talks about the NAFTA Chapter 19 process for AD/CVD appeals.
It also gets into the policy justifications behind AD/CVD laws. Is AD/CVD simply a protectionist sham? Or do they address legitimate concerns with behavior by foreign companies and governments? Should AD and CVD be distinguished in this regard? There's not likely to be agreement any time soon on the policies at issue. The authors put things well when they say:
From an economist's perspective, antidumping and countervaling duty law leaves much to be desired. There are some sound economic justifications for various aspects of antidumping and countervailing duty law, particularly in relation to predatory export pricing and certain instances of subsidization in which the long-term costs to producers and the states may outweigh short-term consumer welfare gains. However, many scholars consider that these rationales are often inadequately addressed in antidumping and countervailing duty law, and it is not even clear whether antidumping or countervailing duty law are the first best policy response to deail with them.
That all sounds right to me. It can be frustrating to see these policy issues ignored in trade negotiations. For obvious reasons, many countries would not want the whole trade remedy regime opened up to discussion. However, the focus on narrow, technical issues obscures the important foundational issues that are left unaddressed.
There's also a chapter on statistics, which provides detailed information on the number and types of trade remedy cases, outcomes of the cases, and the correlation of macroeconomic factors with these cases.
Finally, with the case studies, the Softwood Lumber case is striking in terms of how many areas of litigation have been involved. You have domestic AD/CVD proceedings before U.S. agencies; you have appeals to U.S. courts; you have CUSFTA and NAFTA Chapter 19 appeals; you have GATT and WTO litigation relating to the U.S. AD/CVD determinations; you have NAFTA Chapter 11 litigation; and you have the Softwood Lumber Agreement and resulting international arbitration. (The only thing missing is a direct WTO challenge by the U.S. to the alleged Canadian subsidies.)
