:::

詳目顯示

回上一頁
題名:國際多邊貿易談判政治動能之研究:服務貿易建制形成之經驗及啟示
書刊名:長庚人文社會學報
作者:周旭華 引用關係
作者(外文):Chou, Hsu-hua
出版日期:2011
卷期:4:1
頁次:頁93-117
主題關鍵詞:談判政治動能權力結構服務貿易WTONegotiationPolitical momentumPower structureTrade in services
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(1) 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:33
  • 點閱點閱:82
摘 要 本文從國際政治的角度,檢視1980 年代國際多邊服務貿易建制創設之 談判過程,藉以釐清在權力結構變化下,國際多邊貿易談判的政治動能問 題。透過本文之考察發現,當年服務貿易建制形成之談判,由於形成了「美 國領導,EC 配合,印度及巴西不反對」之局面,因而獲得了推動議程所需 要的政治動能。對於當前「世界貿易組織」(WTO)所面對的談判困境來說, 這段昔日服務貿易建制形成的經驗,或許能提供若干啟示。WTO 設立以來 的第一個回合談判── 杜哈發展議程,自2001 年底展開迄今歷時九年,仍 然無法終結此回合談判。從國際政治的角度觀之,政治動能不足,乃是造成 談判遲滯的關鍵因素。而政治動能是否足夠,基本上取決於權力結構下主要 行為者之能力及意願。衡諸當今WTO 下的權力新局,推動重大議程所需政 治動能之產生,要靠美國與歐盟共同領導,加上新興開發中大國之配合。然 而,形成此種局面殊非易事,這也正是突破杜哈議程談判困境的挑戰所在。
Abstract Taking an international political perspective, this paper examines the negotiation process of the formation of international trade in service regime during 1980s to illuminate the issue of political momentum in multilateral trade negotiations in the shadow of a changing power structure. The existence of a situation which was “led by the US, supported by the EU and not opposed by India and Brazil” provided necessary political dynamism for moving the agenda on in 1980s. For the stalemated WTO Doha Agenda negotiations today, the experience in services regime formation 20 years ago may be inspiring. To provide necessary momentum for making breakthrough in major issues under current power structure, it is essential that the US and the EU should be willing to lead jointly and all those newly emerged developing powers should be willing to give full support.
期刊論文
1.鍾從定(20040500)。國際多邊談判分析。問題與研究,43(3),135-157。new window  延伸查詢new window
2.周旭華(20100600)。多邊貿易談判的政治脈絡:國際關係理論作為WTO政策研究工具之初探。東吳政治學報,28(2),153-206。new window  延伸查詢new window
3.Ahnlid, A.(1996)。Comparing GATT and GATS: Regime Creation under and after Hegemony。Review of International Political Economy,3(1),65-94。  new window
4.Commission of the European Communities(1985)。Completing the Internal Market。COM,85,310。  new window
5.Drake, W.、K. Nicolaidis(1992)。Ideas, Interests, and Institutionalization: ‘Trade in Services’ and the Uruguay Round。International Organization,46,37-100。  new window
6.Hoekman, B.、P. Sauve(1994)。Liberalization of Service Markets: Complements or Substitutes ?。Journal of Common Market Studies,32(3),283-318。  new window
7.Sapir, A.(1999)。The General Agreement on Trade in Services: From 1994 to the Year 2000。Journal of World Trade,33,51-66。  new window
8.Trachtman, J. P.(1995)。Trade in Financial Services under GATS, NAFTA, and the EC: A Regulatory Jurisdiction Analysis。Columbia Journal of Transnational Law,34,37-122。  new window
研究報告
1.Pelkmans, J.(2003)。Mutual recognition in goods and services: An economic perspective。Brussels:ENEPRI。  new window
2.張新平(2001)。加入WTO與開放外國專技人員政策之研究。  延伸查詢new window
圖書
1.Zartman, I. William(1976)。The 50% Solution。New Haven:Yale University Press。  new window
2.Keohane, Robert O.、Nye, Johseph S., Jr.(2001)。Power and Interdependence: World Politics in Transition。New York:Longman。  new window
3.羅昌發(199910)。國際貿易法。月旦出版社。  延伸查詢new window
4.張新平(19960000)。世界貿易組織下之服務貿易。臺北:月旦出版社。new window  延伸查詢new window
5.OECD(1973)。Report by the High Level Group on Trade and Related Problems。Paris。  new window
6.Elermann, C-D、G. Campogrange(1991)。Rules on Services in the EEC: A Model for Negotiating World-Wide Rules?。The New GATT Round of Multilateral Trade Negotiations: Legal and Economic Problems。Netherlands。  new window
7.Feketekuty, G.(1988)。International Trade in Services: An Overview and Blueprint for Negotiations。Cambridge, Massachusetts。  new window
8.Singh, J. P.(2006)。The Evolution of National Interests: New Issues and North-South Negotiations during the Uruguay Round。Negotiating Trade: Developing Countries in the WTO and NAFTA。  new window
其他
1.WTO Secretariat(19910710)。Services Sectoral Classification List(MTN.GNS/W/120)。  new window
2.(2011)。Brazil, China, EU Press US to Step Up in Doha Negotiations,http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5jH8Lob-XhBh7jzYAduATE97GvIOA?docId=CNG.5fd9d9aca2e24cbdb73350eb1197d306.961, 20110319。  new window
3.European Court of Justice(1979)。Case 120/78, Rewe-ZentralAGv。  new window
4.Jha, Lalit K(2010)。India, China, Brazil to decide Doha’s fate: US,http://business.rediff.com/report/2010/may/19/wto-india-chinabrazil-to-decide-dohas-fate-us.html, 20100519。  new window
5.Kleen, P.(2008)。So Alike and yet so Different: A Comparison of the Uruguay Round and the Doha Round。  new window
6.Lynn, Jonathan(2009)。US Calls for New Approach in Doha Talks,http://in.reuters.com/article/idINLP41959320090625, 20110319。  new window
7.Palmer, Doug(2009)。EU Urges US to Take Leadership Role on Doha,http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSN1837962420090318, 20110319。  new window
8.Lamy Urges Negotiators to Find “second wind” in Trade Talks,http://www.wto.org/english/news_e/news_e.htm。  new window
9.WTO。International Trade Statistics 2010: World trade developments in 2009,http://www.wto.org/English/res_e/statis_e/its2010_e/its10_world_trade_dev_e.htm, 20110319。  new window
 
 
 
 
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top
:::
無相關著作
 
無相關點閱
 
QR Code
QRCODE