PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
September 10, 20250 citations

Research on China’s Strategies for Addressing Non-Tariff Barriers and Anti-dumping under the New Trade Protectionism Background

View Full Paper
DJDaqing Jiang

Key Points

  • China's reliance on non-tariff barriers, such as regulatory frameworks, impedes foreign competition while promoting local industries.
  • The study highlights a significant drop in Korea's market share for bisphenol-A, decreasing from 21% to under 10% from 2014 to 2017.
  • Analysis based on WTO notifications and trade statistics examines key cases, emphasizing the dual nature of China's trade measures.
  • The findings indicate a need for Korea to strengthen its negotiation and innovation strategies in response to China's trade practices.

Abstract

The rise of neo-trade protectionism has reshaped the global trade order, shifting emphasis from traditional tariffs to non-tariff barriers (NTBs) and trade remedies justified on regulatory grounds. This study investigates China’s increasing reliance on NTBs—such as technical barriers to trade (TBT), sanitary and phytosanitary (SPS) measures, and chemical regulatory frameworks—and its frequent use of anti-dumping actions to pursue industrial protection and structural adjustment. Based on WTO notifications, MOFCOM case announcements, and trade statistics, the paper analyzes three key cases: the 2015 Bisphenol-A (BPA) anti-dumping dispute, regulatory frictions between Korea’s K-REACH and China’s chemical control system, and China’s anti-dumping duties on Korean stainless steel plate. Findings reveal that China’s measures serve dual purposes: short-term protection of domestic industries facing overcapacity and long-term promotion of supply chain localization and technological upgrading. For Korea, these actions led to marked export declines—BPA market share fell from 21% in 2014 to under 10% in 2017, and stainless steel exports dropped over 60% between 2015 and 2018. Policy implications suggest Korea must strengthen institutional negotiation, advance firm-level patent and standards strategies, and build multilateral alliances to offset China’s regulatory power. This study contributes to the literature by situating China’s NTBs and anti-dumping practices within the broader neo-protectionist paradigm and offering strategic insights for Korea’s policy response.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Daqing Jiang (2025) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/68c18f469b7b07f3a0616317https://doi.org/10.63802/pemr.v1.i1.94
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Also Consider

Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context:

  1. 1More than Protectionism: Unbundling U.S. Motives in the Trade and Technological War with China2025 · 1 citations
  2. 2South Korea’s Response to Japan’s Export Restrictions on Semiconductor Materials2025
  3. 3China's Antidumping Investigations against US Feed Products: Lessons from the Trenches2024
  4. 4Export Strategies for Korean Cosmetics to China: Focusing on the Utilization of the Korea-China FTA and Responses to Non-Tariff Measures2025
  5. 5Analysis of the Korea's Trade Deficit with China in 20232024