查詢結果分析
來源資料
相關文獻
- 論「雙邊自由貿易協定」對「亞太經濟合作會議」的組織運作之衝擊
- 從APEC到WTO--建構我國參與國際經貿組織之整體策略
- 兩岸互動體制之研究:以加入世界貿易組織為例
- 兩岸於WTO中互動對兩岸關係之影響--與APEC比較
- 臺灣參與國際經貿組織之意義與應有之做法--以APEC及WTO為例
- 我國WTO義務履行的國際法基礎--以米酒稅調降事件對美諮商為例
- 國際建制在美中貿易談判中扮演之角色:以WTO為例
- 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
- WTO杜哈談判期間服務爭端案件之考察--兼論貿易建制演進的司法途徑
- Analysis of East Asia Economic Integration Negotiation
頁籤選單縮合
題 名 | 論「雙邊自由貿易協定」對「亞太經濟合作會議」的組織運作之衝擊=The Impact of Signing Bilateral Free Trade Agreements on the operations of the Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation |
---|---|
作 者 | 黃偉峰; | 書刊名 | 人文及社會科學集刊 |
卷 期 | 23:4 2011.12[民100.12] |
頁 次 | 頁399-445 |
分類號 | 558.15 |
關鍵詞 | 雙邊自由貿易協定; 亞太經濟合作會議; 世界貿易組織; 內容分析法; 國際建制; BFTAs; APEC; WTO; Content analysis; International regime; |
語 文 | 中文(Chinese) |
中文摘要 | 一般預期,雙邊自由貿易協定(Bilateral Free Trade Agreements, BFTAs)會 危害到多邊經貿組織的貿易自由化議程及其內部的組織運作(簡稱危害說)。為 此,本文運用大量原始檔案的內容分析結果,來試圖檢證亞太地區的BFTAs 洽 簽活動是否危害亞太經濟合作會議(Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation, APEC) 的組織運作。首先,從言語重視程度來看,本文發現APEC 各國領袖及資深官 員可能會因BFTAs 洽簽活動而較不關注APEC 之貿易暨投資自由化核心議程, 卻反而較強調APEC 經濟和技術合作及能力建構之核心議程。然而,上述兩大 核心議程在APEC 領袖和資深官員的言辭重視中並非互斥關係。另外,從APEC 組織運作的實際行動,即APEC 工作計畫的執行來看,本文發現若特定年度任 兩個配對國曾向世界貿易組織(World Trade Organization, WTO)登記BFTAs, 則其執行的APEC 計畫數目較少,由此證實了「危害說」。然而,當在特定年度 此組配對國向WTO 登記BFTAs 的累計數目越多時,則其所執行APEC 計畫數 目反而越多。此項發現意謂著會員體之BFTAs 洽簽活動對APEC 組織運作並不 全然是負面的影響。尤其當各會員體之BFTAs 累計數量愈多時,反而更願意執 行APEC 計畫來強化其BFTAs 之政策方向。本文之發現因而修正了過去學界對 此議題的理論假設。 |
英文摘要 | It is usually assumed that the signing of bilateral free trade agreements (BFTAs) will undermine the trade liberalization agenda and internal operations of multilateral organizations (call it the “undermining hypothesis”). Using the results of content analyses on massive volumes of archive data from the Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC), this paper aims to verify the above “undermining hypothesis.” Contrary to the common expectations, I find that APEC leaders and senior officials, perhaps due to various BFTAs activities, are less likely to emphasize the core agenda of APEC on trade and investment liberalization and facilitation (TILF), but more likely to stress another core agenda on economic and technology cooperation (ECOTECH). However, there is no tradeoff effect between their emphasis on TILF and that on the ECOTECH agenda. Moreover, in the implementation record of APEC projects, I find that in any given year, if a pair of countries (APEC economies themselves, or non-members) register BFTAs in the World Trade Organization (WTO), then the number of their APEC projects implemented is reduced. However, in any given year, the greater the accumulated number of BFTAs for a pair of countries, the greater the number of APEC projects they implement. This latter finding is not entirely compatible with the “undermining hypothesis,” as it seems to suggest that the greater the accumulated number of BFTAs is signed, the greater the need to implement APEC projects. Indeed, many APEC projects are considered by member economies as preconditions, facilitators, or side payments for them to push forward the trade liberalization agenda. Therefore, it is likely that when the accumulated number of BFTAs increases, APEC members may feel it necessary to do more APEC projects, and hence the number of APEC project implemented increases. This finding revises the conventional wisdom derived from the “undermining hypothesis.” |
本系統中英文摘要資訊取自各篇刊載內容。