跨境数据流动规制的模式差异、协调路径与中国方案  

Model Differences,Coordination Paths and China’s Solutions for Cross-border Data Flow Rules

作　　者：孙南翔[1] Sun Nanxiang

机构地区：[1]中国社会科学院国际法研究所

出　　处：《法治社会》2024年第3期105-115,共11页Law-Based Society

基　　金：国家社科基金一般项目“涉外法治体系建设中的管辖权演化规则研究”(项目批准号:23BFX145)的阶段性研究成果。

摘　　要：截至目前,全球并未形成统一的数据流动规则体系,数据跨境流动规则主要分为美国模式、欧盟模式和中国模式。由于主要数字经济体在数据跨境流动与数据安全保护之间的关注焦点不同,以全球主义或国际软法为方法推进高标准的全球统一数据流动规则体系构建的方案,在短期内难以实现。作为数字经济大国,我国应转变对商业数据跨境流动相对保守的态度。我国可以全面与进步跨太平洋伙伴关系协定(CPTPP)“电子商务”章节为主要内容,探索通过与韩国、日本及欧洲、东南亚国家等缔结专门的数字贸易协定,推动跨境流动规则体系的建设。我国还应加快对区域全面经济伙伴关系协定(RCEP)等经贸协定“电子商务”规则的国内转化立法,特别是积极引入数据跨境流动的风险评估理念与制度。Up to now,there is no unified data flow rule system in the world,and the cross-border data flow rules are mainly divided into the US model,the EU model and the Chinese model.Due to the different focuses of major digital economies on cross-border data flow and data security protection,it is difficult to achieve a high-standard global unified data flow rule system in the short term based on globalism or international soft law.As a big country in the digital economy,China should change its relatively conservative attitude towards the cross-border flow of commercial data.China can use the“e-commerce”chapter of the CPTPP as the main content to explore the establishment of a cross-border flow rule system by concluding special digital trade agreements with South Korea,Japan,Europe,and Southeast Asian countries.China should also speed up the domestic legislation on the transformation of the“e-commerce”rules of economic and trade agreements such as RCEP,especially the active introduction of the risk assessment concept and system of cross-border data flow.

关 键 词：数据跨境流动 统筹发展与安全 自由贸易协定 风险评估 数据贸易协定 

分 类 号：F72[经济管理—产业经济]