检索规则说明:AND代表“并且”;OR代表“或者”;NOT代表“不包含”;(注意必须大写,运算符两边需空一格)
检 索 范 例 :范例一: (K=图书馆学 OR K=情报学) AND A=范并思 范例二:J=计算机应用与软件 AND (U=C++ OR U=Basic) NOT M=Visual
作 者:徐成伦[1]
出 处:《贵州警官职业学院学报》2012年第6期103-109,共7页Journal of Guizhou Police Officer Vocational College
摘 要:贸易报复是WTO争端解决机制赋予当事方的最后救济手段。如今,跨TRIPS协定交叉报复逐渐成为受到弱小经济实体欢迎的新方式。实践也证明这种报复形式的确有其优越之处,既能对发达工业化国家败诉方产生有效的威慑作用,刺激其及时执行DSB裁决,还可改善报复实施方本国的社会福利水平。不过和所有新兴事物一样,跨TRIPS协定交叉报复也存在风险,报复实施方需要精心谋划对策,才能确保此种报复方式之优越性得以充分发挥。Trade retaliation is the Last resort given to Prevailing party under WTO dispute settlement mechanism. Nowadays,cross-retaliation under TRIPS Agreement gradually becomes a new kind of retaliation welcomed by small economic entities.Practicing also proves that this retaliation does have its advantages, not only producing an effective deterrent on losing party as a most industrialized country and stimulating the latter to implement DSB ruling in time, but also improving social welfares of the retaliating party.However,just like all the new things ,cross-retaliation under TRIPS Agreement also has its risks;retaliating parties need to design some careful countermeasures so as to ensure those positive effects of this retaliation fully realized.
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在链接到云南高校图书馆文献保障联盟下载...
云南高校图书馆联盟文献共享服务平台 版权所有©
您的IP:216.73.216.2