【作者】 陈秀莲；

【导师】 林桂军；

【作者基本信息】 西南财经大学 ， 国际贸易学， 2011， 博士

【摘要】 《服务贸易总协定》(GATS)签订后,2001年以来,WTO框架下服务贸易的多边谈判陷入停滞状态,2006年WTO甚至宣布终止,与此同时,各国纷纷开展区域服务贸易一体化的建设,特别是2000年以后,包含服务贸易内容的协定占了1958-2010年签订的服务贸易协定的84%。与欧洲、美洲等地区国家很早就参与到服务贸易一体化相比,亚洲地区的国家参与较晚,但发展最快。中国也积极参与到区域服务贸易一体化的建设中,到.2010年止,已经签订了包括与澳门、香港在内的11个包含服务贸易内容的区域协定,主要以南-南型FTA为主,其中,2007年签订并生效的中国-东盟服务贸易协定是中国与东盟签订的首个区域服务贸易协定。基于以上背景,本文关注了以下几个问题：为什么2000年后区域服务贸易一体化发展如此迅速?实现服务贸易自由化的路径,是选择以WTO为代表的多边化还是选择以区域谈判为代表的一体化?中国-东盟区域服务贸易一体化的水平、影响一体化进程的服务贸易壁垒程度以及壁垒对一体化的影响有多大?围绕上述问题,本文按照以下逻辑进行阐述：首先,理论上运用贸易政治经济学的原理,结合现实中服务贸易一体化谈判的特点,对实现服务贸易自由化的路径进行分析,归纳出服务贸易自由化背景下多边化与一体化的选择之路。其次,阐述中国-东盟服务贸易一体化的进程,选取衡量指标,实证分析总体和代表性分部门(运输、旅游、建筑与金融)的一体化水平,并进一步对中国与东盟的服务贸易竞争力做了分析；再次,通过测度指标实证分析影响中国-东盟服务贸易一体化的主要障碍-服务贸易壁垒的总体和代表性分部门(运输、旅游、建筑与金融)情况和程度；最后,针对目前中国-东盟开展服务贸易一体化的特点、存在的服务贸易壁垒现状与程度,提出了加快服务贸易一体化进程的国际性与国内的若干建议。通过研究,本文得出以下观点：1、服务贸易与货物贸易的特点不同,由于利益集团的推动,以及现实中区域服务贸易谈判的特点,使得服务贸易的一体化比多边化更有优势,因此,实现服务贸易自由化,服务贸易一体化是最优路径,而这也是20世纪90年代以来区域一体化迅速发展的根本原因。2、BOP统计意义上的“跨境服务贸易”(代表了模式1“跨境交付”模式2“境外消费”和模式4“自然人流动”)与FAT统计意义上的服务贸易模式3“商业存在”的情况表明,目前中国与东盟服务贸易一体化正处在初级阶段,部分服务部门如旅游、运输已基本成型。总体上看,中国-东盟与欧盟、北美自由贸易区相比一体化水平相差较大,但增速远远超过这两个区域。分部门的情况表现为：(1)运输服务贸易一体化已经在硬件建设上构建起海陆空的立体交通网络,但软件一体化的建设较晚。运输服务贸易一体化的程度较高,中国、东盟各国增长也很快,但各国的运输服务贸易长期处于逆差的状态。(2)旅游服务已经建立起初步一体化,正在推动一体化的深化。目前,中国与东盟的旅游一体化主要是由中国对东盟的出口拉动；动态上,中国与东盟的出口一体化变动不大,但进口的一体化有所变动。(3)中国与东盟的建筑服务一体化水平在不断提高,而且其地区结构与业务结构在组建自由贸易区后发生了较大的变化。(4)中国与东盟的金融服务贸易一体化建设起步较晚,但进展较快。近几年来,中国与东盟的金融一体化程度比日本与东盟、韩国与东盟的程度要高,而且中国与东盟组建自由贸易区后,金融联系变得更密切,呈现出一体化水平稳步提高的趋势。3、虽然中国-东盟服务贸易一体化程度较低,但中国与东盟国家服务贸易互补性很大,其中与东盟老成员国的互补性大于与新成员国的互补性。4、中国与东盟总体服务贸易并不具有竞争力,只有在部分服务领域才具有竞争力,且大部分的金融等资金技术密集型服务部门并不具有竞争力。5、从政策角度看,服务贸易的限制措施是中国与东盟开展服务贸易一体化建设的障碍之一。目前中国与东盟国家的总的服务贸易壁垒特点为：与WTO相比,中国与东盟比WTO框架下的测度的服务贸易壁垒程度要低；市场准入的壁垒高于国民待遇的壁垒以及模式、国别、部门壁垒程度等各有差异。6、代表性分部门(运输、旅游、建筑和金融)的服务贸易壁垒特点表现为,各服务部门的特征不同,不同模式上的服务贸易壁垒的主要表现也不同,但“商业存在”模式上普遍存在壁垒。此外,除了运输服务部门,新加坡的·壁垒最低；而运输服务贸易壁垒总体最高的国家是越南,旅游部门的是泰国,建筑的是菲律宾,金融的是中国。7、建筑服务贸易壁垒的动态趋势说明中国与东盟各国在建筑服务领域的壁垒趋于减弱,其中减少幅度最大的是中国,其次为泰国。金融服务贸易壁垒的动态趋势则为另外一番景象,虽然总体趋势为下降,但中国、越南与马来西亚三国呈明显的下降趋势,而印尼、新加坡和泰国属于1997年后的一段时期金融服务贸易壁垒不降反升,2006、2007年才逐渐趋于下降的趋势。8、表现为服务贸易限制措施的服务贸易壁垒对服务贸易一体化的影响的实证结果表明,服务贸易壁垒对不同的服务部门一体化的影响不一：对建筑服务一体化的影响程度来看,服务贸易壁垒的影响程度排在第三位；对金融一体化的影响程度来看,金融服务贸易壁垒的影响最大。9、服务贸易壁垒对一体化的影响不容忽视,但对于发展中国家来说,适度保护和削减壁垒应该辩证的看待,在此基础上,提出了应在国际与国内(宏观、中观、微观)上实施正确的贸易政策措施,逐渐削减服务贸易壁垒,渐进的推动一体化水平的提高。本文的贡献主要表现为：1、一体化与多边化的研究由来已久,成果也很丰富,但多为从货物贸易的角度进行分析,从服务贸易的角度进行的探讨较少,结合中国-东盟这一中国参与服务贸易一体化的第一个组织,从一体化水平、竞争力、服务贸易壁垒进行全面、系统的分析更是凤毛麟角,因此,研究的视角较新颖。2、传统区域主义认为,政府制定对外贸易政策是以考虑经济福利为出发点,因此相较于以WTO为代表的多边化,区域一体化是一国参与国际经济合作实现贸易自由化的次优选择；但本文结合新区域主义兴起的背景,从服务贸易与货物贸易差异的角度,运用贸易政治经济学的原理,从交易成本、发达国家与发展中国家的对立态度以及区域服务贸易一体化“基层主义”的组织原则等方面,结合区域服务贸易谈判的超GATS和自我完善的特点,提出了以区域谈判为主要手段的服务贸易一体化,是一国通过国际经济合作、实现服务贸易自由化的最优路径。3、选择BOP统计和FAT统计意义上的衡量指标,对中国与东盟服务贸易一体化的“跨境服务贸易”(代表了模式1“跨境交付”、模式2“境外消费”和模式4“自然人流动”)和模式3“商业存在”的总体水平进行衡量,并与欧盟等代表性区域组织进行了比较,此外还分别衡量了代表性服务分部门(运输、旅游、建筑与金融等四个)的一体化水平,便于准确把握中国-东盟服务贸易一体化的建设状况。4、量化了影响服务贸易一体化的主要障碍—服务贸易壁垒：运用改进的Hoekman指数对总体壁垒进行测度；采用修正过的服务贸易限制指数(STRI),运用与构建服务贸易壁垒模版,对运输、旅游、建筑与金融等四个代表性服务分部门的壁垒情况和程度进行了测度；还在静态测度的基础上,进一步对建筑、金融分部门的服务贸易壁垒进行动态测度,并运用panel data实证分析了表现为贸易限制措施的服务贸易壁垒对服务贸易一体化的影响。更多还原

【Abstract】 Negotiations under WTO have been felled into Stagnation since 2001 after "General Agreement on Trade in Services"(GATS) has been signed. At the same time, the Agreements of trade in services since 2000 signed accounted for 84% of Trade in Services Agreement in 1958-2010. It is later in Asian than Europe, America and other countries to participate the integration of trade in services very early. But it is fastest growing.China is also actively involved in the construction of regional integration in trade in services. By 2010, China has been signed 11 regional agreements, mainly the south-south FTA. The China-ASEAN service trade agreement signed in 2007 is the first regional service trade agreements of China Among them.Based on the above background, the paper focuses on questions as following: Why the regional integration of trade in services is growing so quickly after 2000? to achieve liberalization of trade in services, a country how to choose the path between multilateral negotiations and regional integration? How the degree of regional trade integration services of CAFTA, the barriers to services trade and how the barriers effect the integration of trade in services.To address these concerns the problem, the main ideas of paper is as the following: Firstly, the paper summarized that the choice between services Multilateral and integration by analyzing the path to services liberalization and combined the characteristics of trade in services. Secondly, the paper elaborate the process of CAFTA service trade integration, empirical analyze the degree of integration of overall and sub-sector (such as transport, tourism, construction and financial). In addition, Competitiveness of trade in services between China and the ASEAN is further analyzed in the paper. Thirdly, barriers of overall and sub-sector (transport, tourism, construction and finance) in CAFTA trade integration services were analyzed practically by some measures. Finally, the paper shows some international and domestic recommendations to propose the process of integration. The results of the paper are as follows by above research:Firstly, Services trade is quite different with trade in goods. The integration of regional trade in services is more advantage than multilateral by the lobbying of interest Groups and features of regional negotiations. Therefore, the integration of trade in services is the optimal path which a country achieves trade in services liberalization by international economic cooperation.Secondly, BOP Statistics show that Service trade integration of CAFTA is primary, but some service sectors such as tourism, transportation has been basically formed. Overall, the degree of CAFTA is less than the EU and the NAFTA largely, but grew is much faster than the two. FAT Statistics also is similar with BOP statistics by Commercial presence mode.The status of sub-sectors is as follows:In integration of transport services, CAFTA has been built up three-dimensional system of sea and air transport network, but the software integration is later in 2002. The degree of transport integration is high level for the high level of integration of goods. But the services trade deficit of transport services is a long period.Tourism has set up the initial integration of tourism services. At present, tourism integration mainly is promoted by what China export to ASEAN. Dynamically, exports intensity has no significant change, as import intensity of Thailand, Singapore, Malaysia declined and of Indonesia, Malaysia, and the Philippines increase.The level of exports integration of construction services maintain the rapid development and improve continuously. The regional structure and infrastructure changed very much after establish of CAFTA.Integration of financial services trade started later than transport, tourism, but increase rapidly. In recent years, the degree of CAFTA is higher than Japan—ASEAN and Korea—ASEAN, but only Singapore, Malaysia and Brunei remaining Close relationship with China. Dynamicly, closer financial ties in CAFTA and steadily improve.Thirdly, although the low level of integration, but complementary is great between China and ASEAN countries. Moreover, complementary between China and old members of ASEAN is greater than the new member states. Fourthly, Trade in services competitive between China and ASEAN show that all the States is not competitive, and only competitive in such as tourism, construction, telecommunications and computer services. Large Part of the financial and other resources and technology-intensive service sector is not competitive.Fifthly, Showed with a policy perspective, restrictions on trade in services is one of the major barriers in integration of CAFTA. The feature is as follows: services trade barriers are lower than the WTO, the barriers of market access are higher than the national treatment, and there is different in models, countries and sectors.Sixthly, the barriers of the typical sector of services trade show that there are different features in sectors and models, but barriers in mode three is Very common.the barriers in Singapore is minimum in all sector in addition to transport services. The highest barriers to trade are Vietnam in transport, is Thailand in tourism, is Philippines in construction and is China in financial.Seventhly, the dynamic trend of barriers in construction services tends to decline, among them; China is the sharpest decrease, followed by Thailand. On the other hand, the dynamic trend of financial services trade barriers was another big picture. Although the overall trend is down, but China, Vietnam and Malaysia showed a downward trend, while Indonesia, Singapore and Thailand rise after 1997 and only in 2006,2007, tend to decline gradually.Eighthly, the empirical analysis of influence of Restrictions on trade in services on the integration of construction shows that industry added value of GDP impact greatest services integration, followed by the impact of distance, the impact of trade barriers in third place. The empirical analysis of financial shows that restrictive policy impact greatest the integration.Lastly, barriers to services trade integration can not be ignored. For developing countries, we should view dialectically the appropriate protection and reduction of barriers. The paper proposed to carry out the right trade policy measures (Macro-view, middle-view, Micro-view), reduce barriers and promote the integration levels gradually.The main contribution of this paper is: Firstly, It is a long time in research on integration and multilateral and the results are very rich, but which mostly from the perspective of trade in goods. There is a little view on services and rare on CAFTA combined with the degree of integration, competitiveness and trade barriers to services comprehensive and systematically. Therefore, the paper has a relatively new perspective.Secondly, Traditional regionalism believes that the Government considers the foreign trade policy based on economic welfare.so Traditional regionalism think regional integration is the second best option compared to the multilateral represented by WTO. but the paper consider the transaction cost, the opposite attitude of developed and developing countries and regional integration, "subsit urity" of organizational principles of services trade integration, combined with the feature of GATS plus and self-improvement, under the background of the rise of new regionalism, difference of trade in services and trade in goods, using the principles of political economy of trade, by Trade Political Economy. At last, the paper believes that integration of trade in services is the optimal path to achieve trade liberalization.Thirdly, the paper choose the indexs of BOPS and FATS to measured the overall degree of Cross-border service trade, model, mode 2 and mode 4, and Commercial presence,mode 4.Again, compared with EU and NAFTA.the paper also measured the degree of typical sectors,such as Transportation, Travel,Architecture and Finance.Lastly, quantitative the degree of barriers:improved Hoekman index is used to measure the overall barriers; modified restrictions on trade in services index (STRI) and the templates and building services trade barriers is used to measure the degree of transport, tourism, construction and financial services sub-sectors.in additional, further measure the degree dynamicly based on the static measure.at last, the paper further analyzed the affect which services trade restrictions to services trade integration empirically by the use of panel data.更多还原