Skip to main content

Sanctions and Export Deflection

  • Living reference work entry
  • First Online:
The New Palgrave Dictionary of Economics

Abstract

Different countries impose export sanctions. This article highlights conclusions from new research into Iranian export sanctions on whether and how export sanctions cause export deflection. The main findings are as follows: (1) two-thirds of the value of Iranian non-oil exports destroyed by export sanctions have been deflected to destinations not imposing sanctions; (2) exporters reduced their product prices and increased their product quantities as they deflected exports to new destinations; (3) exporters deflected more of their core products; (4) larger exporters deflected more of their exports than smaller exporters; (5) the new destinations of Iranian exports are more politically friendly with Iran; and (6) the probability of an exporter deflecting exports to another destination increased if the exporter already existed in that destination, suggesting that market entry costs matter too. These findings suggest that, if the goal of export sanctions is to reduce total exports of the targeted country, export sanctions may be less effective in a globalised world as exporters can deflect their exports from one export destination to another. However, if the goal of export sanctions is to put pressure on exporters in the targeted country, then export sanctions can be effective, as exporters incur welfare losses while deflecting exports to new destinations.

This chapter was originally published in The New Palgrave Dictionary of Economics, Online edition, 2016. Edited by Palgrave Macmillan

Note

This article is based on the paper ‘Sanctions and export deflection: evidence from Iran’, which is forthcoming in Economic Policy.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Institutional subscriptions

Bibliography

  • Doxey, M. 1980. Economic sanctions and international enforcement. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Drezner, D. 1999. The sanctions paradox: Economic statecraft and international relations. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Eaton, J., and M. Engers. 1992. Sanctions. Journal of Political Economy 100(5): 899–928.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Friedman, M. 1980. Economic sanctions. Newsweek, January 21 , p. 76.

    Google Scholar 

  • Haidar, J. I. 2016. Sanctions and export deflection: Evidence from Iran. Economic Policy.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hufbauer, G., K. Elliott, B. Oegg, and J. Schott. 2007. Economic sanctions reconsidered. 3rd ed. Washington DC: Peterson Institute for International Economics.

    Google Scholar 

  • Levy, P. 1999. Sanctions on South Africa: What did they do? American Economic Review 89(2): 415–420.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Martin, L. 1993. Coercive cooperation: Explaining multilateral economic sanctions. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tolley, G., and J. Wilman. 1977. The foreign dependence question. Journal of Political Economy 85: 323–393.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Copyright information

© 2016 The Author(s)

About this entry

Cite this entry

Haidar, J.I. (2016). Sanctions and Export Deflection. In: The New Palgrave Dictionary of Economics. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-349-95121-5_3040-1

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-349-95121-5_3040-1

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, London

  • Online ISBN: 978-1-349-95121-5

  • eBook Packages: Springer Reference Economics and FinanceReference Module Humanities and Social SciencesReference Module Business, Economics and Social Sciences

Publish with us

Policies and ethics