中美服务贸易开放度的比较与启示——基于频度分析的方法  

Comparing Analysis of Service Trade Openness between China and America Based on Frequency Analysis

作　　者：白洁[1,2] 

机构地区：[1]中国社科院世界经济与政治研究所 [2]山东财经大学经济学院

出　　处：《亚太经济》2015年第6期78-84,共7页Asia-Pacific Economic Review

基　　金：国家社会科学基金青年项目(编号:13CJL036)的阶段性成果

摘　　要：中国服务贸易开放的总体水平和世界定位对正在进行的多边服务贸易协定(TISA)以及区域贸易协定谈判(TPP、RCEP等)至关重要。文章在对Hoekman的频度分析法进行修正的基础上,对中美服务贸易开放度进行测算和比较分析。结果表明:(1)中美服务贸易开放度差距不大;(2)美国战略型服务部门的贸易开放度较低,中国传统服务部门的开放度较低;(3)中美两国对跨境支付和境外消费的限制较少,对商业存在限制较多;美国对自然人流动限制较少,中国对自然人流动的限制较高;(4)两国对国民待遇的限制较少,对市场准入的限制较多。文章对该研究结论作出了合理解释,并从中挖掘出一系列有益的政策内涵。The overall level and world status of China＇s service trade openness is very important to the nego- tiation of multilateral （TISA） and regional （TPP, RCEP etc） trade agreement. This paper modifies the Hoekman＇s frequency analysis method and uses this revised method to measure service trade openness of China and America. The result indicates that： （1） America＇s openness in service is greater than China. But the gap be- tween these two countries is limited. （2） The strategic service industries get more protection from American government, while the traditional service industries get more protection from Chinese government. （3） Both countries impose less restrictions on cross-border payment and abroad consumption , while impose more restric- tions on commercial presence. America sets less limit on natural person＇ flow, while China sets more limit on it. （4） Both countries impose less restrictions on national treatment and more restrictions on market access. This pa- per gives a reasonable explanation of the research result and provides some useful policy suggestions.

关 键 词：服务贸易 贸易开放度 频度分析 

分 类 号：F752[经济管理—国际贸易]