数字化赋能贸易高质量发展的作用机制与推进策略

近年来,数字技术日新月异,数字经济蓬勃发展,为贸易高质量发展带来了新机遇和新思路。数字技术在改善生产要素配置与人员供给、突破流通环节虚实壁垒和促进流通链扁平化、优化社会资源分配、重构消费供需双方关系等方面发挥着重要的作用。贸易数字化发展过程中也面临严峻的挑战,以数字化赋能贸易高质量发展,需要从如下方面着手：提升数字基础设施的投资效率与投资针对性;加快数据资源转化为数据资本;完善数字经济税收治理与反垄断生态系统;推进绿色与数字化深度融入商贸流通体系;扩大社会保障体制覆盖面,加强数字伦理建设;完善企业数字化转型生态扶持、政策扶持以及人才体系建设;运用数字化工具提高普惠效应等。     

数字服务贸易国际规则研究 ——基于CPTPP、EU-JAPAN EPA、USMCA和RCEP的比较分析

数字经济的迅猛发展加速了全球经贸格局重构,传统贸易治理体系难以解决数字贸易发展所带来的问题与挑战。数字贸易治理体系正在加速构建中,但全球层面尚未形成统一的数字贸易治理规则,值得进一步研究。本文根据双边、诸边、区域贸易协定的最新进展,重点关注CPTPP、EU-JAPAN EPA、USMCA和RCEP协定,对比分析数字服务贸易的有关条款,探析全球数字服务贸易治理体系的发展态势。本文发现,在数字服务贸易治理体系规则构建过程中,国家之间的共识与分歧同时存在:共识反映的是数字经济与贸易的发展趋势;分歧反映的是不同国别之间的诉求差异。本文认为,在"双循环"新发展格局下,中国应加快推动数字服务贸易发展,大力完善数字服务贸易治理框架,积极参与数字服务贸易治理体系构建,成为数字贸易规则的参与者、推行者以及领导者。     

区块链视角下我国跨境电商问题解决对策北大核心CSSCI

近年来,随着国际贸易环境的恶化,我国进出口贸易增速明显放缓,而以跨境电子商务为代表的新型贸易模式则发展迅猛,正逐步成为我国对外贸易增长的重要引擎。但是,在实际贸易活动中暴露出的跨境物流、跨境支付以及跨境货品质量等问题则严重制约了这一新型贸易模式的发展。为缓解这一矛盾,可基于区块链数据的可追溯特性和时间戳技术,并结合物联网技术,建立跨境货物仓储和运输全程监控系统;利用区块链的点对点传输和分布式共识算法,在跨境支付体系中流通通用数字货币,建立数字货币对等实物价值平台;利用区块链数据的不可篡改特性和时间戳技术,建立商品溯源电子标签,实现对跨境货物物流环节的全程监控,改变跨境支付体系中的层级代理结构,从源头保证货物来源的真实性。     

世界贸易组织中的适当贸易保护问题

<正> 1995年1月1日开始起动的世界贸易组织的基本宗旨是通过建立一个开放、完整、健全和持久的多边贸易体制,以促进世界货物和服务贸易的发展,合理有效地利用世界资源来改善生活质量,扩大就业,确保实际收益和有效需求的稳定增长。从这一基本宗旨出发,世界贸易组织(WTO)在贸易自由化方面又向前迈进了一步,签订了包括13个多边货物贸易协定、服务贸易总协定、知识产权保护协议、争端解决规则与程序谅解、贸易政策审议机制及多个诸边协议。这一系列协定和协议为协调多边贸易关系和解决贸易争端以及规范国际贸易竞争规则打下了良好的基础。     

数字服务贸易国际竞争力比较及对我国启示

数字服务贸易是指通过网络跨境传输交付的产品和服务贸易,是数字贸易的重要组成部分。数字服务贸易深刻影响国际贸易分工、分配关系,引发国际社会广泛关注,各国围绕跨境数据流动、数据存储规则、知识产权保护、数字服务监管等的博弈日益激烈。基于联合国贸发会议统计框架和相关数据对全球数字服务贸易发展态势进行分析,并通过国际市场占有率、贸易竞争力指数、显性比较优势指数对主要经济体数字服务贸易国际竞争力进行比较后发现,全球数字服务贸易增长迅猛,正成为服务贸易增长关键动力,推动全球贸易向服务化方向发展;从细分子类看,与信息通信技术(ICT)高度相关的计算机和信息服务贸易增长最快,金融、保险、工程研发等传统服务贸易增长较慢;从主要经济体看,发展中国家与发达国家数字服务贸易在规模、占比和竞争力水平上均存在较大差距,并呈现出一定扩大趋势。我国应把握数字服务贸易发展机遇,推动数字服务产业创新发展,鼓励和支持企业参与全球数字服务分工,完善数字服务治理体系,与相似发展水平的国家一同推动包容性数字贸易规则体系的建设。     

RTAs框架下跨境数据流动规则对数字服务贸易的影响研究

文章基于2010—2021年全球50个代表性经济体的双边数字服务出口数据,采用引力模型实证检验了跨境数据流动规则的贸易创造效应。结果表明:缔约国之间签订的RTAs中,跨境数据流动规则的承诺水平越高,双边数字服务贸易规模越大,贸易创造效应越显著;将跨境数据流动规则细分为数据流动规则、数据本地化规则和数据保护规则后发现,数据本地化条款对数字服务贸易的促进作用更强;相较于其他部门,跨境数据流动规则对金融服务的贸易促进作用更强;缔约国整体的经济自由度水平越高,跨境数据流动规则对数字服务贸易的促进效应越小;缔约国之间的数据监管环境差距越大,跨境数据流动规则越能促进双边数字服务贸易发展。机制检验结果表明:跨境数据流动规则能够通过降低贸易成本、缩短制度距离和扩大出口国的双向FDI规模促进数字服务贸易发展。研究结论证实了跨境数据流动规则产生的贸易创造效应,为我国有效制定数字服务贸易开放政策、积极参与全球数字治理提供了经验证据。     

2006年世界贸易回顾及2007年前瞻

今年4月中旬,世界贸易组织发表世界贸易报告~①,对2006年世界贸易作了回顾并对2007年世界贸易前景作了预测。WTO报告称:2006年世界贸易增长强劲,但其背后隐藏着风险——由于世界金融和房产市场存在的风险以及货物与服务贸易的巨大不平衡,2007年不确定因素增加,世界经济和贸易增长放缓的预期加强。     

数字贸易壁垒的内涵、测度与国际治理

数字化、虚拟化和全球化的特征决定了数字贸易面临区别于传统贸易的新型贸易壁垒.文章从目标合法性、手段合理性以及效果合意性三个层面对数字贸易监管措施与数字贸易壁垒进行了辨析,并对数字贸易壁垒的内涵进行界定.利用数字服务贸易限制指数、数字贸易限制指数等指标对数字贸易限制程度进行了领域间和国家间的比较.结果 表明,发展中经济体的数字贸易壁垒明显高于发达经济体,基础设施和连通性以及数据获取和使用障碍是数字贸易最为重要的限制因素.数字贸易规则的"亚太模板"有望成为多边数字贸易规则的主要参照.中国应以RCEP的达成为契机,以数字基础设施为抓手,以自由贸易试验区为载体,以数据跨境流动为突破点,进一步提升数字贸易治理能力和开放水平.     

数字贸易规则的发展态势与对策

随着全球数字贸易的发展,欧美等发达国家都在积极争夺数字贸易规则制定的主导权,跨境数据自由流动、数字知识产权保护和数字贸易关税问题日益成为各国关注的焦点。为了应对这一态势,中国应当在坚持数据主权优先、经济发展与个人信息保护并重的前提下,引导企业提高数字贸易相关法律法规的遵从度,加强行业的自律性,并通过双边或多边贸易谈判,积极参与数字贸易国际规则的制定。     

聚焦在市场准入--WTO航空运输服务贸易自由化进程及特点

WTO前身GATT一直将服务贸易排除在其管理范围之外,乌拉圭回合第一次将服务贸易纳入多边贸易谈判中,并最终达成《服务贸易总协定》（GATS）,《服务贸易总协定》是乌拉圭回合的重大成果,它大大扩展了多边贸易体制的范围,将服务贸易纳入多边贸易体制的框架内,为各成员方影响服务业的政策制订了规则和纪律。     

The effect of border barriers to services trade on goods trade

This paper has two objectives (a) to introduce border policy-induced barriers (PIBs) to services trade and (b) analyse the impact of border PIBs in services sectors on goods trade. The World Input-Output Database covering 43 countries is used over the period 2000–14. A three-stage analysis is employed. The measures of bilateral services trade barriers calculated in each services sector in the first stage are decomposed into its cultural/geographic and policy-induced parts in the second stage. Border PIBs to services trade are used in the structural gravity estimations of bilateral goods trade in the final stage. The results demonstrate significant and robust adverse effects of barriers to services trade on goods trade. When the level of development is taken into consideration, there are marked differences in the impact of these barriers on goods trade.     

Does integration of services differ from integration of goods?

The theory of economic integration has been well developed over time but mainly with regard to goods. Conceptually integration for services needs to be differentiated from goods according to the characteristics of services and the nature of barriers to integration. The need for personal interaction between supplier and user gives rise to different ways in which services are traded from goods with suppliers and users crossing borders and a different balance between cross-border trade and permanent presence. Obstacles to trade take place behind rather than at the border. The European Union has been chosen as an example of integration for services both on the basis of past experience and because of its ability to remove obstacles for services using specific institutional powers. Existing levels of integration for goods and services are compared with those to be expected on the basis of theory. Market integration for manufactured goods is lower than previously estimated and services higher, although services remain considerably less integrated. Finally, explanations for differing levels of integration both compared to goods and those expected among different services are sought in terms of the barriers to cross-border trade and permanent presence in the form of regulation, market structures and cultural factors.     

Assessing the Benefits to Developing Countries of Liberalisation in Services Trade

This paper discusses the potential impacts of services trade liberalisation on developing countries and reviews existing quantitative studies. Its purpose is to distill themes from current literature rather than to advocate specific policy changes. The picture emerging is one of valiant attempts to quantify in the presence of formidable analytical and data problems yielding only a clouded image of likely impacts on trade, consumption, production and welfare emerging to the point that the policy implications of results are not always clear. A central intuition would seem to be that with genuine two‐sided (OECD/non‐OECD) liberalisation in services that are seemingly considerably labour‐intensive in delivery, the potential should be there for significant developing country gains from global liberalisation allowing full cross‐border delivery. However, this picture is neither fully endorsed by available studies, neither is it explicitly contradicted. This seems to be the case for a number of reasons. One difficulty with the studies is that the conceptual underpinnings of what determines trade in services and how this trade differs analytically from that of trade in goods (if at all) is an issue prior to assessments of impacts of liberalisation of trade in services on developing countries being discussed. Key issues here are the treatment of mobility for service providers (both firms and workers), and the differing analytical structures needed to analyse individual service items (banking, insurance, telecoms, etc.). Some recent analytical work suggests that liber‐alisation in some service items, such as banking, need not always yield gains, and this contrasts with quantitative studies where analytical structures mirror conventional trade in goods treatments. The discussion and measurement of barriers to service trade in both developed and developing countries is also problematic. One is talking of domestic regulation, entry barriers, portability of providers, competition policy regimes more so than only barriers at national borders, as with tariffs. Both representing and quantifying such barriers raise major difficulties, and these are also spelled out in the paper. Which barriers actually restrict trade, and which do not because they are redundant is one issue, for instance. It is also often misleading to represent barriers in simple ad valorem equivalent form. As a result, numerical modelling work on the effects of service trade barriers which is based on ad valorem equivalent modelling is often not fully convincing. In addition, individual country results vary considerably across studies in ways that it is frequently hard for outsiders to understand. Studies do, however, point towards a tentative conclusion that effects are small and positive for developed and most developing countries if FDI flow changes accompanying service trade liberalisation are excluded from the analysis, but much larger and more variable across countries if they are present. This could be taken to suggest that mode 3 GATS liberalisation (roughly captured in some studies) might be important for developing countries; but mode 4 GATS liberalisation could be even more important given large barriers to labour flows across countries. Thus, if service trade liberalisation is thought of primarily as a surrogate for improved functioning of global factor markets in which more capital flows to developing countries and more labour flows from them to developed countries, then developing countries could benefit in a major way from genuine two‐sided (OECD/non‐OECD) liberalisation. Developing countries fear, however, that in global negotiations on services liberalisation where there is an asymmetry of power that largely one‐sided liberalisation may be the outcome, and their gains will be correspondingly limited. The paper concludes by evaluating econometric studies on linkage between services liberalisation and country growth rules, and briefly discusses some key sectoral issues in health services and transportation.     

Beyond Border Barriers: The Liberalisation of Services Trade in Tunisia and Egypt

Tunisia and Egypt have both recently undertaken significant steps toward trade reform. They have committed to a partnership agreement with the European Union. Both countries have also joined the WTO and are participating in Doha Round discussions on the liberalisation of non‐tariff barriers on both goods and services trade. These developments provide an interesting context within which to investigate not only the changes in welfare associated with reforms affecting the trade in goods, but also the impacts of services liberalisation. Using open‐economy computable general equilibrium models for both Tunisia and Egypt, this paper explores the reasons why structural differences in these two economies imply different opportunities and challenges with trade reform and services liberalisation. The gains from eliminating barriers at the border for goods trade are significantly greater for Tunisia than Egypt. Both countries, however, gain substantially from liberalisation of foreign direct investment in services. Furthermore, economic growth is more evenly distributed across sectors than with liberalisation of trade in goods alone. In addition to reporting on the impact of alternative policies on income, output, employment and trade, sector‐level effects are also considered.     

多边贸易体系与国际服务贸易的发展

近年来,国际服务贸易迅速发展,其增长速度超过了同期货物贸易的增长速度,引起了广泛的关注。本文阐明了多边贸易体系对国际服务贸易的推动作用,分析了WTO成立后国际服务贸易发展呈现的新特征,从而指出了我国作为发展中国家服务贸易的发展趋向。     

The crisis-resilience of services trade

Much attention has been focused on the impact of the current crisis on goods trade; hardly any on its impact on services trade. Using new trade data from the USA, and more aggregate data from other OECD countries, the authors show that services trade is weathering the current crisis much better than goods trade. On the basis of new evidence from Indian services exporters, it is suggested that services trade is more robust relative to goods trade for three reasons: less cyclical demand; lesser dependence on external finance; and few explicitly protectionist measures so far taken in services.     

WTO法新发展与我国外贸法的完善

乌拉圭回合通过的一系列多边贸易协定标志着WTO法的新发展，使原来仅以货物贸易关系为调整对象的GATT法律体系发展成为既调整货物贸易，又调整技术贸易和服务贸易三大法律关系的WTO法律体系：WTO法的新发展既体现在对GATT法律体系的扩充，又体现在对GATT立法内容的修订与补充上：文章在论述WTO法新发展的基础上，探讨我国外贸法与外贸制度中迫切需要完善的若干问题。     

International Trade Agreements and International Migration

Despite large potential economic gains, bilateral and multilateral negotiations focusing on liberalisation of migration have not shared the high profile of international trade negotiations and agreements. Migration and trade have been traditionally viewed rather separately and the relevance of the many, and complex, interdependencies has been given remarkably little attention in the literature to date. In this article, we focus on the two‐way interaction between international migration and agreements designed to enhance cross‐border trade and investment. Liberalisation of international trade in services and in the movement of people potentially offers much greater economic gains than liberalisation of remaining barriers to goods trade. However, progress within multilateral frameworks is fraught with difficulty. The World Trade Organization’s General Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS) has yielded little real progress so far and negotiations within more flexible unilateral and bilateral frameworks are likely to be more successful in liberalising the movement of labour. We discuss a range of specific examples, focusing particularly on the interesting case of New Zealand. We find that trade agreements are increasingly including agreements on migration, though typically favouring temporary migration and involving numerically modest quotas. We conclude that migration regulatory frameworks are likely to be further and more strongly linked to trade and investment agreements in the future, particularly given changing economic and demographic forces. The primary focus of migration policies may nonetheless remain different from that of trade policies. While further migration liberalisation is likely to be through bilateral and regional agreements, it will be important to try to lock in the gains of such agreements, while simultaneously working to consolidating these in a way that will help to facilitate future multilateral agreement.     

TiSA金融服务规则研究

部分世贸组织成员目前正在谈判的TiSA是乌拉圭回合之后最重要的多边服务贸易谈判。TiSA不仅全面接受GATS的核心内容,还在若干重要领域形成内容更具体的多边服务贸易协议,进而构建一套与多边货物贸易体制一样完整的规则体系。在金融服务规则方面,TiSA在管制措施、数据处理、资本控制、金融产品和金融监管等方面均有突破,但其他协议的融入、国内管制、透明度和补贴等议题尚未解决。深入研究这些规则,这不仅是中国自贸区寻找"先行先试"现实版本的需要,更重要的是为中国参与下一轮国际竞争做好充分准备。     

Determinants of Bilateral Trade Protection

In this paper, determinants of bilateral protection levels are empirically identified when controlling for multilateral trade regulation and importing‐country‐specific factors. Strong empirical support is provided of that three bilateral factors are influencing the bilateral protection level. Specifically, a country's protection level on goods from a trade partner is positively affected by the domestic import penetration of goods produced by the trade partner, negatively influenced by the intra‐industry traded share of these imports and positively affected by the trade partner's protection level on domestic goods. Moreover, very high explanatory values are provided in the cross‐section estimations, indicating that these determinants, policy regulations and importer‐specific factors jointly explain almost all of the variation in bilateral protection levels. The results are general in the sense that estimations are performed for a large sample of bilateral trade relations including 22 trade partners that are highly differentiated in terms of country characteristics. The overall results indicate that, to the extent that policy makers can affect bilateral protection levels under multilateral trade regulation, they act on political‐economy rather than economic goals.