Purpose -The purpose of this paper is to improve the measurement of nominal level and actual strength of China's intellectual property protection (IPP), and examine whether the increase of actual protection strength (APS) is positive or negative impact on China's provincial economic growth. Design/methodology/approach -A modified approach, based on Ginarte-Park's (GP's) and HL's approaches, is used to measure nominal level and APS of China's intellectual property rights (IPR) from 1995 to 2007. The pooled EGLS method (cross-section fixed effect) is used to estimate the effect of China's IPP and other variables on provincial economic growth. Findings -The paper proves that China's APS appears an increase with a phase. China's IPP level by GP approach is on the high side, whereas China's IPP level by HL approach is slightly on the low side. Nominal level of China's IPP is largely influenced by the legislation level, whereas APS mostly embodies the effect of implementing law level. The increase of China's APS has significant positive impact on provincial economic growth. However, at the outset of building an independent innovation country, too strong IPP is bad for the development of innovation capability, and bad for provincial economic growth. Research limitations/implications -Because the APS is unknown, it is impossible to use APS as the dependent variable to estimate the weights of the main influencing factors. The method that the paper assumes three main factors the same weights is second best choice. Thus, several different weights are supplemented to measure the distribution values of China's APS. Practical implications -China's APS quantified by a modified approach and strong evidences can be used to estimate the effect on economic growth. Policy effectiveness could be maximized at seeking the endogenous benefit balance between strengthening IPP and promoting economic development. Originality/value -The paper proposes a modified approach to measure the APS of China's IPR, and proves that the reinforcement of China's APS is beneficial to promoting provincial economic growth. However, at the outset, too strong IPP is harmful.

Since China's entry into the WTO, US anti‐dumping (AD) actions against China have increased, particularly with respect to multiple petitions. Distinguishing between US single and multiple petitions, we examine the trade effects of US AD actions against China based on an unbalanced panel of quarterly trade data. The results show that a US single petition investigation greatly restrains US imports of the filed products from China but also causes more significant import diversion from non‐named countries. In the short run, a preliminary AD duty imposed on China via a US multiple petition not only restrains US imports of the filed products from China but also prevents trade diversion from non‐named countries. In the long run, a final AD duty on China resulting from a US multiple petition creates a larger destructive effect on China and causes US import diversion from non‐named countries. Thus, a final AD duty imposed on China following a US multiple petition not only harms China's exports but also fails to help the US achieve import substitution. Furthermore, we have been able to reveal the negative trade effect of a preliminary AD duty even in cases where the ultimate decision is not to impose a final duty.

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract