Authors : Võ Thị Thu Hồng; Nguyễn Văn Mỹ; Lê Ngọc Linh Đan

Volume/Issue : Volume 11 - 2026, Issue 6 - June

Google Scholar : https://tinyurl.com/2kbs8e9r

Scribd : https://tinyurl.com/mrct6rs3

DOI : https://doi.org/10.38124/ijisrt/26jun1546

Note : A published paper may take 4-5 working days from the publication date to appear in PlumX Metrics, Semantic Scholar, and ResearchGate.

Abstract : The increasing use of trade remedy measures has become a prominent feature of the contemporary global trading environment, creating considerable challenges for exporting firms, particularly small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) in developing economies. While previous studies have primarily focused on the macroeconomic consequences of trade remedies, limited attention has been devoted to understanding how SMEs strategically respond to these trade barriers at the firm level. Addressing this gap, the present study investigates the influence of trade remedy-related factors on export strategy adjustment among SMEs in Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam. Grounded in the Resource-Based View (RBV), Institutional Theory, and the Adaptive Strategy Perspective, the study proposes a conceptual framework incorporating five explanatory variables: trade remedy tariffs and related costs, trade policy uncertainty, firm capability, institutional support, and market diversification. Data were collected from 210 export-oriented SMEs operating in Ho Chi Minh City and analyzed using Cronbach’s Alpha, Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA), Pearson correlation analysis, and multiple regression techniques. The findings indicate that trade policy uncertainty exerts the strongest influence on export strategy adjustment, followed by market diversification, institutional support, and firm capability. In contrast, trade remedy tariffs and related costs do not significantly affect export strategy when other strategic factors are taken into account. These results suggest that SMEs are more responsive to uncertainty and strategic risks associated with international trade than to direct financial burdens alone. This study contributes to the growing literature on SME adaptation under trade policy pressure by highlighting the importance of organizational preparedness, market flexibility, and institutional support mechanisms. The findings also provide practical implications for managers and policymakers seeking to strengthen the resilience and international competitiveness of Vietnamese SMEs in an increasingly uncertain global trade environment.

Keywords : Trade Remedies; Export Strategy Adjustment; SMES; Trade Policy Uncertainty; Market Diversification; Vietnam.

References :

1. Aaby, N. E., & Slater, S. F. (1989). Management influences on export performance: A review of the empirical literature 1978–1988. International Marketing Review, 6(4), 7–26.
2. Barney, J. (1991). Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage. Journal of Management, 17(1), 99–120.
3. Cavusgil, S. T., & Zou, S. (1994). Marketing strategy–performance relationship: An investigation of the empirical link in export market ventures. Journal of Marketing, 58(1), 1–21.
4. DiMaggio, P. J., & Powell, W. W. (1983). The iron cage revisited: Institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields. American Sociological Review, 48(2), 147–160.
5. Felbermayr, G., & Sandkamp, A. (2020). The trade effects of anti-dumping duties: Firm-level evidence from China. European Economic Review, 122, 103275.
6. Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., & Anderson, R. E. (2010). Multivariate data analysis (7th ed.). Pearson.
7. Hoekman, B., & Kostecki, M. (2009). The political economy of the world trading system (3rd ed.). Oxford University Press.
8. Jalali, H. S. (2024). Trade policy revisited: How government support initiatives affect international performance in SMEs? Review of International Business and Strategy.
9. Leonidou, L. C., Katsikeas, C. S., & Morgan, N. A. (2000). Firm-level export performance assessment: Review, evaluation, and development. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 28(4), 493–511.
10. Meng, N., & Wang, F. (2023). Navigating trade policy shocks: How firms reallocate exports in third markets. CESifo Working Paper, No. 10752.
11. Miles, R. E., & Snow, C. C. (1978). Organizational strategy, structure, and process. McGraw-Hill.
12. North, D. C. (1990). Institutions, institutional change and economic performance. Cambridge University Press.
13. Nunnally, J. C., & Bernstein, I. H. (1994). Psychometric theory (3rd ed.). McGraw-Hill.
14. Penrose, E. (1959). The theory of the growth of the firm. Oxford University Press.
15. Scott, W. R. (2008). Institutions and organizations: Ideas and interests (3rd ed.). Sage.
16. Wernerfelt, B. (1984). A resource-based view of the firm. Strategic Management Journal, 5(2), 171–180.
17. Zhou, F., & Wen, H. (2022). Trade policy uncertainty, development strategy, and export behavior: Evidence from listed industrial companies in China. Journal of Asian Economics, 83, 101540.