Webb, RichardCamminati, JosefinaThorne, Raúl León2012-06-152012-06-152005-07https://hdl.handle.net/10986/8202Peru's experience in the application of antidumping and safeguard measures is characterized by a radical change in the philosophy and procedures of trade at the beginning of the 1990s, and by an increasing use of these mechanisms. Trade liberalization was accompanied by the liberalization of foreign currency transactions and of financial and labor markets. Also, the internal revenue administration was modernized, institutions for regulation and competition defense were created, and state enterprises were transferred to private owners or concessionaires. New laws and institutions were created to regulate markets, including INDECOPI, a novel government agency charged with antimonopoly regulation and consumer defense, and which houses the Antidumping and Subsidies Commission. This highly autonomous and technical Commission became the central player in the implementation of WTO rules and procedures for fair trade. Since the reform was launched, a total of 81 trade protection cases have been presented, of which 57 were followed by a dumping investigation. The application of antidumping duties was approved for 29 of the cases investigated. Only two cases of safeguard investigations were recorded, one of which (Chinese textile clothing articles) is still in the negotiation phase. This paper reviews that case experience in detail, concluding that Peru has clearly differentiated between unfair competition and dumping on the one hand, and damage and safeguards on the other, and has applied strict technical criteria to the former and broader political considerations to the latter. Despite recent indications of a partial retreat from those principles, the decade-old reform is expected to last.CC BY 3.0 IGOACCOUNTINGADMINISTRATIVE AUTONOMYADMINISTRATIVE FUNCTIONSAGRICULTURAL PRODUCTSAGRICULTUREANTIDUMPINGANTIDUMPING DUTIESANTIDUMPING MEASURESANTIDUMPING RULESAUTHORITYAUTONOMYAVERAGE TARIFFBALANCE OF PAYMENTSBANKRUPTCYBUREAUCRACYCAPITAL FLOWSCAPITAL GOODSCDSCENTRAL BANKCENTRAL BANK LAWCOMPETITION CRITERIACOMPETITIVENESSCONSTITUTIONCONSUMER PROTECTIONCONSUMERSCONTROLLED PRICESCORRUPTIONCOUNCIL OF MINISTERSCOUNTRY OF ORIGINCUSTOMS CLEARANCEDEBTDECREEDEMOCRACYDEPOSIT INSURANCEDEREGULATIONDOMESTIC INDUSTRYDOMESTIC PRODUCTIONECONOMIC POLICYECONOMIC RESEARCHECONOMIC SECTORSECONOMISTSEMPLOYMENTEXCHANGE RATEEXCHANGE RATESEXPORT SECTORSEXPORTERSEXPORTSFAIR TRADEFINANCIAL SYSTEMFISCALFOREIGN CURRENCIESFOREIGN CURRENCYFOREIGN INVESTMENTSFOREIGN TRADEFOREIGN TRADE POLICYFREE MARKET ECONOMYFREE MARKETSFREE TRADEGOVERNMENT AGENCYGOVERNMENT POLICYHEALTH SERVICESHIGH TARIFFSHUMAN RESOURCESIDEOLOGIESIMPORTSINDUSTRIAL PRODUCTIONINDUSTRIAL SECTORINEFFICIENCYINFLATIONINSOLVENCYINSTITUTIONAL DEVELOPMENTINSTITUTIONAL REFORMINSURANCEINTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATIONSJUDICIARYLABOR MARKETLABOR MARKETSLAWSLEGAL ACTIONLEGISLATIONLEGISLATORSMACROECONOMIC CONTEXTMARKET ACCESSMARKET COMPETITIONMONOPOLIESNATIONAL LEVELNATIONAL TERRITORYORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTUREPATENTSPAYROLL TAXESPOLITICAL CRISISPOLITICAL INTERFERENCEPOLITICAL POWERPREFERENTIAL TREATMENTPRESIDENCYPRICE SUBSIDIESPRIVATIZATIONPRODUCERSPRODUCTION COSTSPROTECTIONISMPUBLIC AGENCYPUBLIC EXPENDITUREPUBLIC FINANCESPUBLIC HEALTHQUALITY STANDARDSQUANTITATIVE RESTRICTIONSRATIONALIZATIONREPRESENTATIVESREPRESENTATIVITYREVENUE ADMINISTRATIONREVENUE COLLECTIONSAFEGUARD CLAUSESAFEGUARD MEASURESSALES TAXESSOCIAL PROGRAMSSTATE AGENCIESSTATE ENTERPRISESSTATISTICAL DATATARIFF LEVELSTARIFF RATESTARIFF REDUCTIONTOTAL REVENUETRADE AGREEMENTTRADE LIBERALIZATIONTRADE POLICYTRADE PROTECTIONTRADE REFORMTRANSPARENCYUNFAIR COMPETITIONWTOWorld Bank10.1596/1813-9450-3658