区域一体化背景下的中日韩服务贸易自由化研究

发布时间：2018-02-07 11:36

  本文关键词： 区域一体化 竞争力水平 产业内贸易 贸易限制性指数 贸易成本　出处：《对外经济贸易大学》2015年博士论文　论文类型：学位论文

【摘要】：随着服务贸易成为新的经济增长点,无论是发达国家还是发展中国家,无不把促进服务贸易发展作为重中之重。二十世纪九十年代后因为世界经济一体化推进受阻,区域一体化浪潮后来居上,在服务贸易领域这一趋势也是亦然。因此诸多国家服务贸易发展也越来越在一体化背景下展开。本文选取在亚太合作中具有举足轻重地位的中日韩三国作为切入点,重点探讨各方在参与服务贸易区域一体化时的自由化水平,即如何对服务贸易壁垒进行正确测度?一方面有助于厘清中国在WTO框架下的服务贸易各部门的自由化水平,这将是中国参与区域一体化谈判的基础;另一方面有助于从宏观上比较中国与主要贸易伙伴包括日韩的贸易成本。摸清中国服务贸易自由化的“家底”,并采取有针对性的措施降低服务贸易的成本,助力中国服务贸易自由化是本文研究的出发点和目的。本文在简要回顾了中日韩区域一体化发展进程后,分别从中日韩服务贸易竞争力水平、贸易相关性及贸易结构演变三个角度对区域一体化的现实基础做出分析;接着构建了一个综合性的分析框架,即将贸易限制性指数法(微观角度)和贸易成本测度(宏观角度)加以结合,用于分析区域服务贸易合作自由化水平;具体分为两个步骤:微观上运用改进的Hoekman贸易限制性指数对服务贸易的四种形式(主要是商业存在)及十一个部门及子部门的自由化水平进行测度,即依据中日韩三方在《服务贸易总协定》中的市场准入承诺对各方的服务贸易自由化水平做基础的评估。宏观上应用具有微观理论基础的改进后的引力模型对包括日韩在内的中国的主要贸易伙伴进行贸易成本的测度,并将贸易成本分解成固定成本与可变成本,在此基础上运用面板模型分别对贸易成本、固定成本及可变成本的影响因素进行实证分析,并进行贸易潜力的预测。最后依据改进的测度方法得出结论,在区域一体化背景下中国发展服务贸易应从以下几方面入手:加快现代服务贸易部门的发展;以开放推动落后服务贸易部门的改革;推动同贸易伙伴间自贸协议的谈判与签订,尤其积极推进中日韩自贸区的建立;加强文化的交流与沟通;增强政治互信,推进争端解决机制的建立。在开展本项研究过程中,本文在原有的服务贸易自由化研究方法的基础上进行了改进,改进主要体现在:一是对服务贸易限制性指数测度方法的改进。本文直接采用了世界银行(2012)公布的主要限制性条款赋值规则、模式3(商业存在)下所有部门的标准赋值及特定部门的特定措施的赋值标准,并借鉴了刘庆林、白洁(2014)对Hoekman方法中二级行业传统赋权方法的改进。二是在贸易成本的测度上采用Novy(2011)中贸易成本的测度方法。目前国内关于服务贸易成本测算大多是采用Novy(2006)或Novy(2008)中的引力模型,该模型虽然能够解决Anderson and van Wincoop(2003)模型中用不可直接观测的价格指数作为多边阻力项所产生的问题,但其假设仍然是基于双边贸易成本具有“对称”性。Novy(2011)不仅克服了双边贸易成本的对称性,而且具备微观理论基础,其测算结果取决于恒等关系而不是计量估计,能够应用于各种贸易理论模型,且对测量误差也高度稳健。三是本文所建立的分析框架完善了现有的服务贸易自由化水平的测度体系。对服务贸易壁垒的测度方法,尽管分类标准不同,但学者们一般均采用直接法或间接法,鲜有研究考虑到将其结合起来,分别从微观上测度服务贸易具体部门的自由化水平,再从宏观上测度国家整体的自由化水平。尽管从世界范围来看,中日韩三国服务贸易均不具备明显的竞争优势,但日本与韩国的服务贸易竞争力水平呈现出逐年增强的趋势而中国却呈现出逐年下降的趋势,中日韩三国的优势部门均为服务贸易的传统部门:运输、旅游及商业服务,其中日本在现代服务贸易部门如专利信息服务、金融服务部门具有明显优势;从双边贸易的相关度来看,中韩、韩日两国不论从出口还是进口角度,均存在较高的结合度,但中日之间则相关度较低。而从贸易互补性来看,则日韩大于中韩,中韩大于中日;从贸易结构上看,中韩两国服务贸易的产业内贸易水平相对较高并且呈现出逐年上升的趋势。日本与中国、韩国间的产业内贸易水平均相对较低,且中日之间的产业内贸易以垂直型为主。通过改进的Hoekman指数法测算的中日韩三国服务贸易自由化水平由高到低依次为日本、韩国、中国。从具体的服务部门来看,传统的服务贸易部门:运输、旅游及商业服务均是中日韩三国自由化水平最高的部门;而对现代的服务贸易部门来说则只有日本一枝独秀,其中,日本在金融、教育、健康及分销服务部门的自由化水平远高于中韩两国。另外通讯服务也是三国除传统部门外均为自由化水平最高的部门,这一结论与世界银行(2012)及OECD(2014)发布的结果吻合。采用Novy(2011)引力模型测算的中国与包括日韩在内的八个主要贸易伙伴的贸易成本表明,中韩之间贸易成本的下降幅度大于中日之间;对贸易增长的分解表明,中日韩三方的经济增长均是双边贸易增长的最主要原因,但综合考虑贸易成本与多边阻力的影响表明,中韩之间服务贸易成本的下降对双边贸易增长具有显著的作用;对贸易成本影响因素进行的实证检验表明,双边物理距离对服务贸易成本具有较大的正相关影响,服务贸易伙伴的市场潜力、双边的文化习俗距离和是否签订自贸协议则对双边服务贸易成本具有较大的负相关影响。而在对分解后的固定成本和可变成本的影响因素进行检验后发现,相同的解释变量对双边可变服务贸易成本的影响要强于双边服务贸易成本;对双边服务贸易成本具有显著影响的部分解释变量对双边固定服务贸易成本却不存在类似的影响。最后在对中国与其他贸易伙伴国(地区)的出口潜力进行检验后发现,双边服务贸易成本对中国的服务贸易出口量有着十分显著且深刻的影响。并且,中国与韩国、日本间的服务贸易出口均属于潜力开拓型即贸易不足型。当然,在整个论文的写作过程中,也存在一些不足,这些不足也是作者今后要继续努力的方向。一是应扩大样本数据以增强服务贸易成本测度模型的说服力。服务贸易数据缺乏是学术界公认的难题,本文只测算了中国与包括日韩在内的八个贸易伙伴的服务贸易成本,未能将亚太地区更多国家包括进来,尤其是与中国已经签订或拟签订自贸协定的国家和地区,这对本文研究区域一体化背景下的服务贸易自由化是一个遗憾,也是未来努力的方向。二是本文未能对中国内部服务贸易成本进行测算。有学者曾利用中国2002年的投入产出表测算了中国内部服务贸易成本,但利用中国2007年及2010年的投入产出表却未能实现目标。对国内贸易成本的研究还需进一步深化,这也是作者未来努力的方向。
[Abstract]:Along with the development of service trade has become a new economic growth point, whether developed or developing countries, all to promote the development of trade in services as a priority among priorities. After 1990s because of the world economic integration is blocked, the tide of regional integration in the field of service trade catch up from behind, this trend is vice versa. So many countries in the development of service trade is more and more in under the background of integration. This paper selected in the Asia Pacific cooperation plays an important role in Japan and South Korea as a starting point, focusing on the liberalization of trade in services in all levels of regional integration, namely how to correctly measure the barriers to trade in services? Will help to clarify the level of liberalization China under the framework of WTO service trade departments of a and this will be the basis for China participation in regional integration negotiations; the help from the macro on the other hand Comparison of Chinese with major trading partners, including Japan and South Korea trade. To find out the cost of free trade in services Chinese of "resources", and to take targeted measures to reduce the cost of service trade, help China service trade liberalization is the starting point and purpose of this study. This paper briefly reviews the development process of regional integration in Japan and South Korea. From Korea in the service trade competitiveness, make analysis of the evolution of three aspects of trade relationship and trade structure based on the reality of regional integration; then constructs the analysis framework of a comprehensive, upcoming trade restrictive index method (microcosmic) and measurement of trade costs (macro) to be combined, for the analysis of regional cooperation in trade in services the level of liberalization; the concrete is divided into two steps: micro with improved Hoekman index of the four forms of trade restrictions on trade in services (mainly Is there commercial) measure the level of liberalization and eleven departments and sub departments, which is based on the evaluation of market access in the general agreement on trade in services and the three party < > in the commitment to service trade liberalization level to the parties based on macroscopic. Application of gravity model has improved micro theoretical basis after the main trade partner including South Korea, Chinese to measure the cost of trade, and the trade cost is divided into fixed cost and variable cost, based on the panel data model of factors affecting the trade cost, fixed cost and variable cost of empirical analysis, forecast and trade potential. Based on the improved method to measure the final conclusion, under the background of regional integration of China service trade development from the following aspects: to accelerate the development of modern service trade sector; to promote backward open service The reform of trade sector; promote trade partners with the free trade agreement negotiations and signing, especially to actively promote the establishment of a free trade area; to strengthen cultural exchange and communication; enhance political trust, promote the establishment of dispute settlement mechanism. In this research process, this paper based on the liberalization of trade in services of existing research methods on improving, improvement is mainly reflected in: the improvement of the service trade restriction method index. This paper directly uses the World Bank (2012) announced the main restriction clause assignment rules, model 3 (commercial presence) specific measures of standard assignment all departments and sector specific assignment criteria. And from the Liu Qinglin, white (2014) improvement of the two industries in the traditional Hoekman method. Two weighting method is the use of Novy in the measure of trade costs (2011) on the trade cost measure method. Currently on the service trade cost is mostly by Novy (2006) or Novy (2008) in the gravity model, although the model can solve the Anderson and van Wincoop (2003) model with price index can not be directly observed as multilateral resistance problems, but it is still based on the assumption of bilateral trade cost with the "symmetry" of.Novy (2011) not only overcomes the symmetry of bilateral trade cost, but also have a micro theoretical basis, its calculation results depends on the identity relation instead of measurement estimation, which can be used in various trade theory model, and the measurement error is also highly robust. Three analytical framework is established in this paper to improve the measure system of service trade liberalization. The level of the existing measurement methods of service trade barriers, despite the different classification criteria, but the scholars generally adopt direct method or indirect method, little research Consider to be combined, respectively from the micro sector specific measure of service trade liberalization from the macro level to measure the country's overall level of liberalization. Although from the view of the world, Japan and South Korea trade in services do not have a clear competitive advantage, but the level of service trade competitiveness in Japan and South Korea showed increased year by year the trend of Chinese has shown a declining trend, Japan and South Korea are the advantages of Department of trade in services of traditional sectors: transport, tourism and commercial services, including Japan in modern service sectors such as patent information services, financial services sector has obvious advantages; and from the correlation of bilateral trade between Korea and Japan,. No matter from the angle of import or export, are combined with a high degree of correlation between China and Japan, but is in a low degree. From the view of trade complementarity, while Japan and South Korea than China and South korea, China and South Korea than in Japan; from the trade structure, trade in services between China and South Korea intra industry trade level is relatively high and showing a rising trend year by year. Japan and South Korea China, intra industry trade level is relatively low, and between China and Japan on a vertical intra industry trade. Through the trilateral trade in services the level of liberalization measure Hoekman index improved from high to low in Japan, South Korea, China. From the service sector, the traditional service trade sector: transportation, tourism and business services are from Japan and South Korea by the highest level of the modern service sector; the trade sector is only in Japan a thriving, among them, Japan in the financial liberalization, education, health and the level distribution service sector is much higher than that of China and South Korea. In addition to the traditional communication service is also three departments are free of water The highest level departments, this conclusion with the World Bank (2012) and OECD (2014) released results. Using Novy (2011) and the gravity model to estimate Chinese including South Korea, eight major trading partners of trade cost between China and South Korea showed that between trade costs declined more than in Japan; decomposition of trade the growth of the three party and show that economic growth is the main reason for the growth of bilateral trade, but considering the impact of trade costs and multilateral resistance indicated that the decline in the cost of service trade between China and South Korea on the growth of bilateral trade has a significant effect; empirical test on the influence factors of trade costs show that bilateral physical distance is positive the related impact on the cost of service trade, service trade partners market potential, bilateral culture distance and whether signed a free trade agreement on bilateral trade in services cost A negative impact is greater. While testing influence factors on the decomposition of the fixed cost and variable cost and found that the same variables impact on bilateral trade costs than the variable cost of bilateral trade in services; has a significant impact on bilateral trade in services cost of some of the explanatory variables on the bilateral trade cost is the fixed service there is no similar effect. Finally on Chinese and other trading partners (regions) of export potential after inspection found that the service trade exports to China bilateral service trade costs has a very significant impact and profound. And Chinese between Japan and South Korea, trade in services exports are exploiting potential the lack of trade. Of course, in the writing process, there are also some shortcomings, these deficiencies is the author in the future to continue efforts direction. One should expand The sample data in order to enhance the service trade cost measure model of persuasion. Service trade is the lack of data problem recognized by the academic community, this article only calculates the China and including South Korea, the eight trading partners of the service trade cost, failed to more countries in the Asia Pacific region included, especially signed or intends to sign a free trade agreement and countries this area has been China, on the background of this research on regional integration under the liberalization of trade in services is a pity, but also the direction of future efforts. This is the two not to calculate the cost of service trade. Chinese internal scholars have used China 2002 input-output table calculates the Chinese internal cost of service trade, but by 2007 China and the input-output table of 2010 failed to achieve the goal of the research. The domestic trade costs need to be further deepened, the future direction of this is also the author.

【学位授予单位】：对外经济贸易大学
【学位级别】：博士
【学位授予年份】：2015
【分类号】：F746
，

本文编号：1494285