【摘要】：在貿易爭端越來越頻繁的今天,如何更有效地解決爭端越來越重要。目前,在爭端解決中,經濟學家多是關注于WTO爭端機制,對于多種爭端解決機制的選擇關注不多。對于中國而言,爭端解決機制的運用主要以雙邊磋商為主,使用WTO爭端機制尚顯不足,沒有充分利用其他爭端解決機制。針對這種現狀,中國要不斷改進爭端解決機制選擇的不足,更好地促進貿易爭端的解決。因此,爭端解決機制選擇的研究具有重要的理論價值和實際意義。本文以“貿易爭端解決機制的選擇”為研究對象,從單邊行動、雙邊磋商、區域協調、WTO爭端解決機制為切入點,運用理論研究中福利、博弈分析,以及經驗研究中統計、計量、案例分析的方法,從經濟學和政治經濟學角度,得出以下結論：WTO爭端解決機制的經濟福利和政治福利要優于單邊行動、雙邊磋商、區域協調,但是在具體爭端中,爭端解決機制的選擇取決于雙方不斷博弈的結果,其中政治、經濟因素影響搏弈的均衡結果,并且得到經驗研究的支持。中國在爭端解決機制的選擇中,經濟因素起著更重要的作用,行業利益團體的影響力不大,在此基礎上給出了啟示。 本文圍繞這些問題的研究,主要有七章的內容： 第一章導論部分主要對研究背景與意義、方法、創新及不足的介紹,提出本文研究的重要價值。第二章文獻綜述部分得出,現有的文獻對于爭端解決機制選擇的研究不夠,特別是對于中國爭端解決機制的選擇關注不多,為此引出本文所要研究的問題。 第三章對單邊行動、雙邊磋商、區域協調、WTO爭端解決機制理論分析中得出,在單邊行動中,目標國的福利受到損害；雙邊磋商、區域協調在爭端解決中有時會出現福利受損的情況,特別在利益集團的影響下,福利受損更為嚴重；而WTO爭端解決機制能夠實現福利最大化。在福利比較中,雙邊磋商優于單邊行動,區域協調又優于雙邊磋商,WTO爭端解決機制的福利最高。 在第四章,本文試圖建立爭端解決機制選擇的博弈模型,包括從單邊行動到WTO爭端解決機制、雙邊磋商到WTO爭端解決機制選擇的博弈模型,得出政治、經濟因素影響博弈的均衡結果,政治因素使得爭端通過WTO爭端解決機制的可能性增加。 第五章經驗研究發現,在爭端解決機制的選擇中,目標國經濟上依存于美國,美國更愿意通過雙邊磋商,而在政治因素作用下美國更多地申訴到WTO,其中利益集團的影響更大。 第六章研究得出,在爭端解決中,對發展中國家,中國運用雙邊磋商；對美歐等發達國家,中國開始更多地訴諸WTO。作為發展中國家,中國在爭端解決機制的選擇中,政治因素不同于發達國家利益集團的影響。中國在爭端解決中,經濟因素作用更大；在政治因素中,利益團體影響不明顯,政府的重視和作用更為顯著,并且得到中國案例的經驗支持,在此基礎上,提出了啟示。 第七章在整個結論的基礎上,再次強調對中國的啟示。中國在爭端解決中雙邊磋商是基礎,WTO要加強,其他機制要重視,利益團體起作用。
[Abstract]:As trade disputes are becoming more and more frequent, how to more effectively resolve the dispute is becoming more and more important. At present, in the dispute settlement, many economists are concerned about the WTO dispute mechanism, and the choice of a variety of dispute settlement mechanisms is not limited. For China, the application of the dispute settlement mechanism is mainly based on bilateral consultation, and the use of the WTO dispute mechanism is not enough, and other dispute settlement mechanisms are not fully utilized. In view of the present situation, China will continuously improve the solution of the dispute settlement mechanism, and better promote the settlement of trade dispute. Therefore, the study of the choice of dispute settlement mechanism is of great theoretical value and practical significance. This paper takes the "The Choice of the Settlement Mechanism of Trade Dispute" as the research object, from unilateral action, bilateral consultation, regional coordination and the WTO dispute settlement mechanism as the starting point, using the method of statistics, measurement and case analysis in the theoretical research, from the angle of economics and political economy, The conclusion is that the economic welfare and political welfare of the WTO dispute settlement mechanism should be better than unilateral action, bilateral consultation and regional coordination, but in the specific dispute, the choice of the dispute settlement mechanism depends on the result of the game between the two parties, in which politics, The economic factors influence the balance result of the fight and get the support of the empirical research. In the choice of the dispute settlement mechanism, China has played a more important role in the economic factors, and the influence of the industry's interest groups is not small, and the enlightenment is given on this basis. This paper focuses on the research of these problems, including seven chapters. The introduction of the first chapter mainly focuses on the background, meaning, method, innovation and deficiency of the research, and puts forward the research of this paper. The second part of the literature review concluded that the existing literature is not enough for the choice of the dispute settlement mechanism, especially for the choice of the dispute settlement mechanism in China. The third chapter analyses the unilateral action, the bilateral consultation, the regional coordination and the WTO dispute settlement mechanism. In the unilateral action, the welfare of the target State is damaged; bilateral consultation and regional coordination are sometimes shown in the dispute settlement At present, the welfare is damaged, especially under the influence of the interest group, and the welfare is more serious; and the WTO dispute settlement mechanism can The benefits are maximized. In the benefit comparison, bilateral consultation is superior to unilateral action, and the regional coordination is superior to bilateral consultation, and the WTO dispute solution In the fourth chapter, this paper tries to establish a game model of the choice of dispute settlement mechanism, including from unilateral action to the WTO dispute settlement mechanism, bilateral consultation to the game model selected by the WTO dispute settlement mechanism, and the conclusion that the political and economic The factors influence the equilibrium of the game, and the political factors make the dispute through the WTO. The possibility of an end-to-end mechanism has increased. In chapter V, empirical studies have found that, in the choice of dispute settlement mechanisms, the target State is economically dependent on the United States, and the United States is more willing to adopt bilateral consultations, while the United States is more willing to appeal to W under the influence of political factors. The effects of interest groups are greater. Chapter VI studies the application of bilateral consultations to developing countries and China in the settlement of disputes, and to the United States of America and Europe In the developed countries, China has started to have more access to the WTO. As a developing country, China is in the choice of dispute settlement mechanism The factors of governance are different from the influence of the interest groups of the developed countries. In the settlement of disputes, the role of economic factors is greater; in the political factors, the influence of the interests group is not obvious, the attention and the role of the government are more obvious, and the case of China is obtained On the basis of this, the author puts forward some enlightenment. On the basis of the whole conclusion, we once again emphasize the enlightenment to China. China's bilateral consultation in dispute settlement is the basis, WT
【學位授予單位】：復旦大學
【學位級別】：博士
【學位授予年份】：2011
【分類號】：D996.1

【參考文獻】

相關期刊論文 前3條

1 杜玉瓊;;CEPA爭端解決機制的構建[J];四川師范大學學報(社會科學版);2006年01期

2 孔慶江;;淺論單邊貿易措施的適法性[J];現代法學;2006年06期

3 張乃根;論中國利用WTO爭端解決機制的對策[J];政治與法律;2003年01期

相關博士學位論文 前1條

1 楊仕輝;貿易爭端解決的博弈分析與策略研究[D];對外經濟貿易大學;2006年

，

本文編號：2449320