区域贸易协定中的服务规则——与服务贸易总协定的多边规则相比,其多样性和创造性如何?

P. Latrille, Juneyoung Lee
{"title":"区域贸易协定中的服务规则——与服务贸易总协定的多边规则相比,其多样性和创造性如何?","authors":"P. Latrille, Juneyoung Lee","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.2171698","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The study tries first to assess the extent of similarities and divergences among services rules in regional trade agreements as compared to the GATS. To do so, it uses a typology identifying variations in 48 key provisions structured under seven themes commonly found in RTAs and using the GATS as a benchmark. The analysis identifies two main families of agreements (GATS-inspired and NAFTA-inspired) and a residual category. The paper briefly explores the historical development that led to these families as well as their geographical spread both on an agreement by agreement basis and a country by country basis. The paper then analyses by theme the variations found in the RTAs among services rules including their novelty as compared to the GATS. Given the lack of available information on the implementation of the agreements the paper tries to assess whenever possible the magnitude of the discrepancies and their practical impacts. While subject to some qualifications, the results of the study are relatively straight forward: there is no spaghetti bowl in services rules, but just two families and one residual category. The details reveal that the degree of divergence between those two families does not overall seem insurmountable. This assessment concords with other studies (e.g. Marchetti, Roy) that have equated them in terms of national treatment and market access and have compared directly commitments undertaken under the three families of agreements. One may even note a certain tendency to a convergence towards the GATS model (e.g. the addition of market access clause in the second generation of NAFTA-like agreements or the use of GATS-type architecture by EU for agreements else than pre-adhesion ones).","PeriodicalId":206472,"journal":{"name":"INTL: Political & Legal Issues (Topic)","volume":"26 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2012-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"16","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Services Rules in Regional Trade Agreements - How Diverse and How Creative as Compared to the GATS Multilateral Rules?\",\"authors\":\"P. Latrille, Juneyoung Lee\",\"doi\":\"10.2139/ssrn.2171698\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The study tries first to assess the extent of similarities and divergences among services rules in regional trade agreements as compared to the GATS. To do so, it uses a typology identifying variations in 48 key provisions structured under seven themes commonly found in RTAs and using the GATS as a benchmark. The analysis identifies two main families of agreements (GATS-inspired and NAFTA-inspired) and a residual category. The paper briefly explores the historical development that led to these families as well as their geographical spread both on an agreement by agreement basis and a country by country basis. The paper then analyses by theme the variations found in the RTAs among services rules including their novelty as compared to the GATS. Given the lack of available information on the implementation of the agreements the paper tries to assess whenever possible the magnitude of the discrepancies and their practical impacts. While subject to some qualifications, the results of the study are relatively straight forward: there is no spaghetti bowl in services rules, but just two families and one residual category. The details reveal that the degree of divergence between those two families does not overall seem insurmountable. This assessment concords with other studies (e.g. Marchetti, Roy) that have equated them in terms of national treatment and market access and have compared directly commitments undertaken under the three families of agreements. One may even note a certain tendency to a convergence towards the GATS model (e.g. the addition of market access clause in the second generation of NAFTA-like agreements or the use of GATS-type architecture by EU for agreements else than pre-adhesion ones).\",\"PeriodicalId\":206472,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"INTL: Political & Legal Issues (Topic)\",\"volume\":\"26 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2012-10-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"16\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"INTL: Political & Legal Issues (Topic)\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2171698\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"INTL: Political & Legal Issues (Topic)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2171698","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 16

摘要

本研究首先试图评估与服务贸易总协定相比,区域贸易协定中服务规则的相似和差异程度。为此,它使用了一种类型学,确定了在区域贸易协定中常见的七个主题下构成的48项关键条款的变化,并以服务贸易总协定为基准。分析确定了两个主要的协定家族(gats启发和nafta启发)和一个剩余类别。本文简要探讨了导致这些家庭的历史发展及其地理分布,并以协议为基础,以国家为基础。然后,本文按主题分析了区域贸易协定中服务规则之间的差异,包括它们与服务贸易总协定相比的新颖性。由于缺乏关于协定执行情况的现有资料,本文件试图尽可能评估差异的程度及其实际影响。虽然受到一些限制,但研究的结果相对直接:服务规则中没有意大利面碗,只有两个家庭和一个剩余类别。细节表明,这两个家庭之间的分歧程度总体上似乎并非不可克服。这一评价与其他研究(例如Marchetti, Roy)一致,这些研究在国民待遇和市场准入方面将它们等同起来,并比较了在三个协定家族下所作的直接承诺。人们甚至可以注意到向服务贸易总协定模式趋同的某种趋势(例如,在第二代类似北美自由贸易协定的协议中增加了市场准入条款,或者欧盟在加入前协议以外的协议中使用服务贸易总协定类型的架构)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Services Rules in Regional Trade Agreements - How Diverse and How Creative as Compared to the GATS Multilateral Rules?
The study tries first to assess the extent of similarities and divergences among services rules in regional trade agreements as compared to the GATS. To do so, it uses a typology identifying variations in 48 key provisions structured under seven themes commonly found in RTAs and using the GATS as a benchmark. The analysis identifies two main families of agreements (GATS-inspired and NAFTA-inspired) and a residual category. The paper briefly explores the historical development that led to these families as well as their geographical spread both on an agreement by agreement basis and a country by country basis. The paper then analyses by theme the variations found in the RTAs among services rules including their novelty as compared to the GATS. Given the lack of available information on the implementation of the agreements the paper tries to assess whenever possible the magnitude of the discrepancies and their practical impacts. While subject to some qualifications, the results of the study are relatively straight forward: there is no spaghetti bowl in services rules, but just two families and one residual category. The details reveal that the degree of divergence between those two families does not overall seem insurmountable. This assessment concords with other studies (e.g. Marchetti, Roy) that have equated them in terms of national treatment and market access and have compared directly commitments undertaken under the three families of agreements. One may even note a certain tendency to a convergence towards the GATS model (e.g. the addition of market access clause in the second generation of NAFTA-like agreements or the use of GATS-type architecture by EU for agreements else than pre-adhesion ones).
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Reverse Regulation? National Political Budget Cycles and the Moderating Power of Transnational Rating Agencies Wie Eurobonds Sinn machen könnten (How Eurobonds Could Make Sense) Governance and Social Media in African Countries: An Empirical Investigation Consumer Attitude and Behavior on Green Packaging in Korea A Chinese Model for Tax Reforms in Developing Countries?
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1