臺灣人文及社會科學引文索引資料庫系統

:::

詳目顯示

回上一頁
第 1 筆 / 總合 1 筆   第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁
/1頁
題名：臺灣貿易救濟制度對產業保護效果之研究--以反傾銷為例
書刊名：貿易調查叢刊
作者：郭騏榮／黃智輝
作者(外文)：Guo, Chi-jung／Huang, Chi-huei
出版日期：2009
卷期：20:2
頁次：頁77-103
主題關鍵詞：反傾銷；世界貿易組織；臺灣反傾銷制度；貿易保護；Anti-dumping；World trade organization；Taiwan anti-dumping system；Trade protection
原始連結：連回原系統網址new window
相關次數：
  • 被引用次數被引用次數:期刊(0) 博士論文(0) 專書(0) 專書論文(0)
  • 排除自我引用排除自我引用:0
  • 共同引用共同引用:36
  • 點閱點閱:185
摘 要 世界貿易組織(World Trade Organization, WTO)於1995年成立之後，各 會員國在世界貿易組織的規範及要求下，漸漸減少例如關稅、配額等常 見使用之傳統貿易手段，但僅有反傾銷制度的施行卻出現有增無減的趨 勢，突顯出反傾銷措施在國際進出口貿易中扮演成重要之角色，而其對 雙邊貿易國之影響更值得深入探討了。本文希望以台灣反傾銷案件為基 礎，探討反傾銷案件的調查結果對控訴國與涉案國及非涉案國之間貿易 效果之影響及反傾銷制度對控訴國國內產業之保護效果，及事後研究檢 討。 本文採用統計軟體進行各項數據驗證，首先以皮爾森分析進行變數 之間相關性分析，檢驗相關變數間是否存在顯著性。其次變異數分析以 多變量變異數分析探討不同反傾銷案件結果對於涉案國出口價值(數量) 變動是否有何影響。最後是迴歸分析，透過線性迴歸分析法對於應變數 與自變數之間關係，確認彼此間關係程度驗證反傾銷相關變數分別與涉 案國出口價值(數量)及非涉案國出口價值(數量)之間是否存在關係及其關係程度。研究結果發現，若反傾銷案件之判決結果為肯定判決，則涉案 國出口價值(數量)將會顯著下降且反傾銷稅課徵稅率越高，涉案國出口價 值(數量)下降越多。
Abstract Country members have reduced their use of tariffs and quotas as trade barrier since the inception of the World Trade Organization (WTO) in January 1995. However, the use of anti-dumping (AD) measure has become more popular among these countries. It shows that AD plays a more important role in international trade. Hence this study tries to discuss the AD influence on trade and economic activities. We have gathered data in Taiwan and found out the impacts of AD on trade. Named products of AD cases are defined specifically. In the meantime, there is rare study on typical named countries’ influence of AD system on trading. This study uses statistical analysis system which uses multi-regression and ANOVA to analyze anti-dumping cases. The empirical result of the study shows the export value (quantity) of named countries would fall significantly when the ruling on AD case is affirmative. In addition, the export value (quantity) of named countries would fall more when AD duty is higher.
期刊論文
1.Prusa, Thomas J.(2001)。On the Spread and Impact of Antidumping。Canadian Journal of Economics，34(3)，591-611。  new window
2.Belderbos, René A.、Sleuwaegen, Leo(1998)。Tariff Jumping DFI and Export Substitution: Japanese Electronics Firms in Europe。International Journal of Industrial Organization，16(5)，601-638。  new window
3.Haaland, J. I.、Wooton, I.(1998)。Anti-dumping Jumping: Reciprocal Anti-dumping and Industrial Location。Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv，134(2)，340-362。  new window
4.Krupp, C. M.、Pollard, Patrica S.(1996)。Market Responses to Antidumping Laws: Some Evidence from the US Chemical Industry。Canadian Journal of Economics，29，199-227。  new window
5.Nieberding, Jame F.(1999)。The Effect of U.S. Antidumping Law on Firms 'Market Power: An Empirical Test。Review of Industrial Organization，14，65-84。  new window
6.Staiger, R. W.、Wolak, F. A.(1994)。Measuring Industry Specific Protection: Antidumping in the United States。Brookings Papers on Economic Activity: Microeconomics，1，51-118。  new window
7.黃智輝(20071000)。臺灣反傾銷案件產業損害認定關鍵因素之研究。臺灣經濟金融月刊，43(10)=513，32-47。  延伸查詢new window
8.左俊德、楊秀玲(19990700)。課徵反傾銷稅對產業影響之研究。貿易調查專刊，4，87-106。new window  延伸查詢new window
9.陳坤銘、楊光華、陳財家(20000700)。反傾銷制度與產業保護效果--臺灣個案研究。貿易調查專刊，5，297-329。new window  延伸查詢new window
10.Leidy, M. P.、Hoekman, B. M.(1990)。Production Effects of Price- and Cost-Based Antidumping Laws Under Flexible Exchange Rates。Canadian Journal of Economics，23(4)，873-895。  new window
11.Ethier, W. J.、Fischer, R. D.(1987)。The New Protectionism。Journal of International Economic Integration，2，1-11。  new window
12.Hansen, W. L.、Prusa, T. J.(1996)。Cumulation and ITC Decision Making: The Sum of the Parts is Greater Than the Whole。Economic Inquiry，34，746-769。  new window
13.Murray, T.、Rousslang, D. J.(1989)。A Method for Estimating Injury Caused by Unfair Trade Practices。International Review of Law and Economics，9(2)，149-164。  new window
14.Feinberg, Robert M.(1989)。Exchange Rates and Unfair Trade。Review of Economics and Statistics，71，704-707。  new window
15.Krupp, Corinne M.、Skeath, Susan(2002)。Evidence on the Upstream and Downstream Impacts of Antidumping Cases。North America Journal of Economics and Finance，13(2)，163-178。  new window
16.Mahdavi, Mahnaz、Bhagwati, Ainala(1994)。Stock Market Data and Trade Policy: Dumping and the Semiconductor Industry。International Trade Journal，8(2)，207-221。  new window
17.Kelly, K. M.、Morkre, M. E.(1998)。Do Unfairly Traded Imports Injure Domestic Industries?。Review of International Economics，6(2)，321-332。  new window
18.Fischer, R. D.(1992)。Endogenous Probability of Protection and Firm Behavior。Journal of International Economics，32，149-163。  new window
19.Reitzes, J. D.(1993)。Antidumping Policy。International Economic Review，34(4)，745-763。  new window
20.Devault, J. M.(1996)。The Welfare Effects of US Antidumping Duties。Open Economies Review，7，19-33。  new window
21.黃智輝(20031200)。反傾銷案件產業損害調查經濟效益實證分析--我國案例探討。臺灣銀行季刊，54(4)，216-248。new window  延伸查詢new window
22.Herander, M. G.、Schwartz, J. B.(1984)。An Empirical Test of the Impact of the Threat of US Trade Policy: The Case of Antidumping Duties。Southern Economics Journal，51，59-79。  new window
23.Devault, James M.(1993)。Economics and the International Trade Commission。Southern Economic Journal，60(2)，463-478。  new window
24.Hansen, W. L.(1990)。The International Trade Commission and the Politics of Protectionism。American Political Science Review，84，21-46。  new window
25.Moore, M. O.(1992)。Rules or Politics? An Empirical Analysis of ITC Anti-dumping Decisions。Economic Inquiry，30，449-466。  new window
26.王友利(2007)。「歐盟貿易救濟制度與措施對其產業保護效果之研究」。《貿易調查專刊》，18，88-138。  延伸查詢new window
27.Boltuck, R. D.(1987)。“An Economic Analysis of Dumping, ”。Journal of World Trade Law，21，45-54。  new window
28.Bown, C. P. and M. A. Crowley(2007)。“Trade Deflection and Trade Depression,”。Journal of International Economics，72，176-201。  new window
29.Durling, J. P.、Prusa, T. J.(2006)。The Trade Effects Associated with an Antidumping Epidemic: The Hot-rolled Steel Market, 1996-2001X。European Journal of Political Economy，22，675-695。  new window
30.Hartigan, J. C., S. Kamma, and P. R. Perry(1989)。“The Injury Determination Category and the Value of Relief from Dumping,”。Review of Economics and Statistics，71，183-186。  new window
31.Hughes, J. S., S. Lenway, and J. Rayburn(1997)。“Stock Price Effects of US Trade Policy Responses to Japanese Trading Practices in Semi-conductors,”。Canadian Journal of Economics，30，922-942。  new window
32.Messerlin, P. A. and G. Reed(1995)。“Antidumping Policies in the United States and the European Community,”。Economic Journal，105，1565-1575。  new window
會議論文
1.黃智輝、郭騏榮(2009)。臺灣貿易救濟制度對其產業保護效果之研究。第十屆全國實證經濟學論文研討會，國立中正大學 。new window  延伸查詢new window
2.Tharakan, P. K.、M.,D. Greenaway、J. Tharakan(1998)。Cumulation and Injury Determination of the European Community in Antidumping Cases134，320-339。  new window
研究報告
1.Vandendenbussche, Hylke、Koning, Jozef、Springael, Linda(1999)。Import Diversion under European Antidumping Policy。  new window
2.行政院主計處(2006)。《國民經濟動向統計季報》。  延伸查詢new window
學位論文
1.呂世義(2007)。反傾銷制度對貿易之影響--以美國反傾銷案件為例(碩士論文)。國立東華大學。  延伸查詢new window
2.李淑媛(2006)。反傾銷案件產業損害認定經濟分析模型之研究-台灣型鋼產業之應用(博士論文)。國立臺灣大學。new window  延伸查詢new window
圖書
1.黃智輝(2008)。WTO架構下貿易救濟案件課徵反銷銷稅經濟效果及因應對策--以臺灣產業受影響為例。亞太綜合研究院。  延伸查詢new window
2.Steele, Keith(1996)。Antidumping Under the WTO: A Comparative Review。London：Kluwer。  new window
3.Jackson, John H.、Vermulst, Edwin A.(1989)。Antidumping Law and Practice。University of Michigan Press。  new window
4.沈筱玲(1999)。反傾銷措施裁定效應之分析--以本土個案為例。台北：天一圖書公司。  延伸查詢new window
單篇論文
1.Blonigen, Bruce A.(2000)。U.S. Antidumping Filings and the Threat of Retaliation，University of Oregon。，http://ctrc.sice.oas.org/geograph/antidumping/bloni.pdf。  new window
2.Furusawa, T.，Prusa, T. J.(1996)。Antidumping Enforcement in a Reciprocal Model of Dumping: Theory and Evidence。  new window
3.Prusa, T. J.，Skeath, S.(2000)。The International Use of Antidumping: Unfair Trade or Tit-For-Tat?。  new window
4.Moore, M. O.(2000)。Facts Available Dumping Allegations: When Will Foreign Firms Cooperate in Antidumping Petitions?。  new window
圖書論文
1.Prusa Thomas. J.(1997)。The Trade Effects of U.S. Antidumping Actions。The Effects of U.S. Trade Protection and Promotion Policieo。Chicago：University of Chicago Press。  new window
2.Kaplan, S.(1991)。Injury and Causation in USITC Antidumping Determinations: Five Recent Approaches。Policy Implications of Antidumping Measures。North-Holland Publishing Co.。  new window
3.US International Trade Commission(1995)。The Economy-Wide Effects of Outstanding Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Orders。The Economic Effects of Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Orders and Suspension Agreements。Washington, DC：US International Trade Commission。  new window
 
 
 
 
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top
QR Code
QRCODE

臺灣人文及社會科學引文索引資料庫

目前上線人數：948（臺灣：948，外國：0） ／ 本年度總使用人次：2071125 ／ 訪客人次（自102年09月）：67870069
國家圖書館著作權聲明 Copyright © 2013 All rights reserved.
本館地址: 100201臺北市中山南路20號． 本館地圖及交通資訊．
總機：(02)23619132．最佳瀏覽解析度為1024x768以上