英语翻译These issues relate broadly to anti-dumping regimes per

英语翻译
These issues relate broadly to anti-dumping regimes per se.There are also many criticisms that flow from the biased nature of the specific rules and processes.From a political science perspective these features of anti-dumping regimes also help governments to administer protection in a way that appears impartial,automatic and rule-based where many of the procedures may be biased towards a positive finding.
While it may thus be appealing as a protectionist device,as such a device,it may be inefficient in terms of the protectionist goals.This is because the mercantilist downside from a political science perspective is that an anti-dumping finding only applies to a certain group of countries.Alternative sources of supply may fill any vacuum created by a successful anti-dumping investigation.In addition,its supposed rule-based impartial nature can be a defect if this prevents direct protectionist lobbying.There are also significant dead-weight legal costs for the domestic industry,often on a recurring basis.
These concerns suggest that at the very least,some comprehensive re-evaluation would be in order.To assess the fairness and efficiency of anti-dumping regimes one should begin with an identification of the mischief against which they are addressed.As indicated above,historically the main governmental concerns were with the possibility of predatory pricing.In addition to the question of whether this is likely to be a concern in practice there is a problem in that the current laws do not naturally address that particular eventuality.An anti-predatory pricing law would look at the relationship between price and cost.Looking at differences in prices alone,as they apply between home and export markets is more likely to simply identify a mischief in the home market,namely monopoly prices.This would not be cause for concern in the import market.Where anti-dumping analysis does look at cost,it tends to look at fully allocated cost including research and development.
While economic analysis commonly leaves issues of legal implementation aside,at the extreme if a particular field of regulatory endeavour is virtually incapable of being set up in a clear,consistent and efficient manner,this would add to overall concerns about the regulatory endeavour.Where international economic law is concerned and in particular anti-dumping regulation,the problem may not be inherent but rather may flow from the disparate negotiating positions of various WTO Members.This could make it almost impossible for a negotiated agreement to provide enough clarity and guidance to ensure an efficient outcome.Speaking at an earlier time,Robert Hudec has spoken of ‘the typical arbitrariness of anti-dumping and countervailing duties criteria ...’.

这些问题涉及广泛,以本身的反倾销制度.还有,从具体的规则和过程流了很多批评带有偏见性.从政治学角度对反倾销制度的这些特点也有利于政府管理的方式,似乎公正的保护,
自动和以规则为基础的地方,很多手续可能偏向积极的结论.
其他供应来源可能填补一个成功的反倾销调查造成任何真空.另外,它应该以规则为基础的公正性,可以是一个缺陷,如果这样可以防止直接保护主义游说.也有显着死重的法律费用的国内产业,往往在一个经常性的基础.
虽然它可能因此而吸引用作保护主义的设备,因为这样的设备,它可以在目标方面的效率不高的保护主义.这是因为从政治学的角度重商主义的缺点是,反倾销调查只适用于某些国家集团.
其他供应来源可能填补一个成功的反倾销调查造成任何真空.另外,它应该以规则为基础的公正性,可以是一个缺陷,如果这样可以防止直接保护主义游说.也有显着死重的法律费用的国内产业,往往在一个经常性的基础.
这些问题表明,至少,一些全面重新评估将在秩序.评估的公平性和反倾销制度的效率,应该首先是对他们所处理的恶作剧鉴定.如上所述,历史上主要政府关注的是掠夺性定价的可能性.
除了这是否可能是一个在实践中有一个担心,目前的法律并不能自然解决这一问题,特别是可能发生的问题.反掠夺性定价的法律将看看价格和成本之间的关系.单看价格的差异,他们之间的出口市场适用于家庭和更利克尔
虽然经济分析通常叶片在极端的法律执行外问题,如果一个特定领域的监管努力几乎是无法被设置在一个明确的,一贯的和有效的方式了,这将增加对监管工作全面关注.在国际经济法律方面,特别是反倾销条例,
该问题可能不是固有的,而是从各种可能会流世贸组织成员分歧的谈判立场.这可以使它几乎不可能通过谈判达成协议,以提供足够的明确性和指导,以确保有效率的结果.在较早的时间时,罗伯特胡德茨发言的'反倾销和反补贴税的标准...'.典型的随意性