Loading...
|
Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
https://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/156482
|
| Title: | WTO複邊協定談判模式之理論分析 :《資訊科技協定》之個案研究
A Theoretical Analysis of WTO Plurilateral Agreement Negotiations: Case Studies on ITA |
| Authors: | 蔡伯辰
Tsai, Po-Chen |
| Contributors: | 盧業中
Lu, Yeh-Chung
蔡伯辰
Tsai, Po-Chen |
| Keywords: | 世界貿易組織
國際經貿法
貿易談判
複邊協定
理性制度論
資訊科技協定（ITA）
World Trade Organization
International trade law
Trade negotiation
Plurilateral agreements
Rational design of international institution
Information Technology Agreement (ITA) |
| Date: | 2025 |
| Issue Date: | 2025-04-01 12:23:14 (UTC+8) |
| Abstract: | 世界貿易組織（World Trade Organization, WTO）作為現今國際上有關國際經貿往來最重要之國際組織，其推動會員進行自由貿易談判之功能在杜哈回合（Doha Round）以來卻陷入癱瘓。本研究探討WTO談判機制的限制，特別是「單一認諾」原則如何導致多邊貿易談判的僵局，並提出所謂「複邊協定談判模式」作為可能的替代方案。本研究採取綜合研究途徑，一方面從國際法角度切入探討複邊協定談判模式與WTO既存法律體系之關係，另一方面則以國際關係領域之理性制度論作為框架，檢視複邊協定談判模式如何在國際環境存在高度不確定性時，提供更多的制度彈性，以促進WTO會員進行談判。本研究選取《資訊科技協定》（ITA）及《資訊科技協定擴大》（ITA II）作為案例，分析其談判過程、參與國家、涉及議題及談判結果如何回歸WTO法律架構。本研究發現複邊協定談判雖能促進談判進行，但仍需注意該模式適用範圍受限於關稅減讓，恐怕不適合處理貿易規則整合等較為複雜的議題。最後本研究進一步指出，WTO談判體制的未來發展可能需在單一認諾原則與複邊協定談判模式間尋求平衡，在維持WTO的包容性與正當性，同時提升談判的靈活度與可行性。
The World Trade Organization (WTO), as a key institution in global trade, has faced significant stagnation in negotiations since the Doha Round, mainly due to the Single Undertaking principle. This study examines the limitations of WTO’s negotiation mechanism and explores Plurilateral Agreement Negotiations as a potential alternative. Applying a combined approach, the study analyzes plurilateral agreements within the WTO legal framework from an international law perspective, while applying the theory of rational design of international institution to assess how plurilateral agreements can introduce greater institutional flexibility under conditions of high uncertainty, thereby facilitating negotiations among WTO members. Through case studies of the Information Technology Agreement (ITA) and ITA II, this research examines the negotiation process, participant countries, issues discussed, and how the agreements fit within the WTO legal structure. The study finds that while plurilateral agreements can advance negotiations, their applicability is mainly limited to tariff reductions and may not be suitable for complex trade regulation harmonization. It concludes that WTO negotiations should balance the Single Undertaking principle with plurilateral agreements to ensure inclusivity, legitimacy, and greater negotiation flexibility. |
| Reference: | 參考資料
中文部分
專書
洪德欽，2018，《WTO法律與政策專題研究》（三版），台灣：新學林
期刊文章
李貴英，2021，〈論世界貿易組織上訴機構之改革：美國立場與歐洲聯盟應對方案之評析〉，《問題與研究》，第60 卷，第1 期，頁1-36。
周旭華，2010，〈多邊貿易談判的政治脈絡：國際關係理論作為WTO政策研究工具之初探〉，《東吳政治學報》，第28卷第2期，頁153-205。
張書芳，2021，〈試析印度與南非對聯合聲明倡議之批評〉，《經貿法訊》，第284期，頁7-13。
陳稚卿，2014，〈由峇里部長會議簡析WTO單一認諾制度〉，《經貿法訊》，第156期，頁16-21。
黃志鵬，2007，〈杜哈回合談判之最新進展與可能影響〉，《貿易政策論叢》，第5期，頁1-20。
楊光華，2021，〈重振世貿組織立法功能之捷徑：多邊架構內之複邊選項〉，收錄於楊光華編，《第21屆國際經貿法學發展學術研討會論文集》，頁11-98，台灣：國立政治大學國際經貿組織暨法律研究中心。https://play.google.com/books/reader?id=2FFPEAAAQBAJ&pg=GBS.PA10&hl=zh_TW
盧業中，2002，〈論國際關係理論之新自由制度主義〉，《問題與研究》，第41卷第2期，頁43-67。
網路資源
吳玉瑩、許裕佳，2015，〈ITA II 和 EGA 談判進展及對臺灣之意義〉，中華經濟研究院WTO及RTA研究中心電子報，第481期：https://web.wtocenter.org.tw/Page/15665/271793。最後造訪於2024/5/4。
經濟部國際貿易署，2024，〈馬拉喀什設立世界貿易組織協定〉，WTO入口網：https://wto.trade.gov.tw/cwto/Pages/Detail.aspx?nodeID=4615&pid=743041。最後造訪於 2024/09/26。
英文部分
專書
Axelrod, R. 1984. The Evolution of Cooperation (Rev. ed.) New York: Basic Books
Jackson, J., 1998. The World Trade Organization Constitution and Jurisprudence. London: Pinter.
Keohane, R. and Nye, J., 2012. Power and interdependence. (4th edition). Boston, Mass. : Longman.
Keohane, R., 1984. After hegemony: cooperation and discord in the world political economy. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press,
Krasner, S., 1983. International regimes. Cornell University Press.
Stone, R., 2011. Controlling institutions: International organizations and the global economy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Tyson, L., 1992. Who's Bashing Whom? Trade Conflict in High Technology Industries. Washington, DC: Peterson Institute for International Economics.
VanGrasstek, C., 2013. The History and Future of the World Trade Organization. Geneva: WTO.
Waltz, K., 1979. Thoery of international politics. Reading, Mass.: Addison-Wesley.
Winham, G., 1986. International Trade and The Tokyo Round Negotiation. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press.
WTO, 2012. 15 Years of the Information Technology Agreement: Trade, innovation and global production networks. Geneva: WTO.
WTO, 2017. 20 Years of the Information Technology Agreement: Boosting trade, innovation and digital connectivity. Geneva: WTO.
Yarbrough, B. and Yarbrough, R., 1992. Cooperation and governance in international trade: the strategic organizational approach. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press.
期刊文章
Aaronson, S. and Leblond, P., 2018. “Another Digital Divide: The Rise of Data Realms and its Implications for the WTO” Journal of International Economic Law, Vol. 21, Iss. 2, pp. 245-272. https://doi.org/10.1093/jiel/jgy019.
Abbott, K. and Snidal, D., 2000. “Hard and Soft Law in International Governance” International Organization, Vol. 54, Iss. 3, pp. 421-456. http://www.jstor.org/stable/2601340.
Abbott, K., et al., 2000. “The Concept of Legalization.” International Organization, Vol. 54, Iss. 3, pp. 401–419. doi:10.1162/002081800551271.
Adlung, R. and Mamdouh, H., 2018. “Plurilateral Trade Agreements: An Escape Route for the WTO?” Journal of World Trade, Vol. 52, Iss. 1, pp. 85-111, https://kluwerlawonline.com/journalarticle/Journal+of+World+Trade/52.1/TRAD2018005.
Baccini, L., Dür, A. and Elsig, M., 2015. “The Politics of Trade Agreement Design: Revisiting the Depth–Flexibility Nexus.” International Studies Quarterly, Vol. 59, No. 4, pp. 765-775. doi: 10.1111/isqu.12188.
Cerny, P., 1993. “Plurilateralism: Structural Differentiation and Functional Conflict in the Post-Cold War World Order” Millennium: Journal of International Studies, Vol. 22, Iss. 1, pp. 27-51. https://doi.org/10.1177/03058298930220010401.
Cornford, A., 2004. “Variable Geometry For the WTO: Concept and Precedent” UNCTAD Discussion Paper No. 171.
Cottier, T., 2007. “Preparing for Structural Reform in the WTO” Journal of International Economic Law, Vol. 10, Iss. 3, pp. 497-508, https://doi.org/10.1093/jiel/jgm030.
de Melo, J. and Vijil, M., 2016. “The critical mass approach to achieve a deal on green goods and services: what is on the table? How much should we expect?” Environment and Development Economics, Vol. 21, Iss. 3, pp. 393–414. doi:10.1017/S1355770X15000285.
Esty, D., 2002. “The World Trade Organization's legitimacy crisis” World Trade Review, Vol. 1, Iss. 1, pp. 7-22. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S1474745601001021.
Fliess, B. and Sauvé, P., 1997. “Of Chips, Floppy Disks and Great Timing: Assessing the Information Technology Agreement” Paper prepared for the Institut Français des Relations Internationales (IFRI) and the Tokyo Club Foundation for Global Studies.
Gallagher, P. and Stoler, A., 2009. “Critical mass as an alternative framework for multilateral trade negotiations” Global Governance, Vol. 15, No. 3, pp. 375-392.
Gao, H., 2021. “Finding a Rule-Based Solution to the Appellate Body Crisis: Looking Beyond theMultiparty Interim Appeal Arbitration Arrangement” Journal of International Economic Law, Vol. 24, Iss. 3, pp. 534–550, https://doi.org/10.1093/jiel/jgab031
Hinman, M. and Stewart, S., 2024. “First, ‘things’ first: prioritizing environmental goods tariff reductions at the WTO” Journal of International Economic Law, jgae056. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/jiel/jgae056.
Hoekman, B. and Marvroidis, P., 2015. “WTO ‘à la carte’ or ‘menu du jour’? Assessing the Case for More Plurilateral Agreements” European Journal of International Law, Vol. 26, Iss. 2, pp. 319-343, https://doi.org/10.1093/ejil/chv025.
Hoekman, B. and Marvroidis, P., 2017.” MFN Clubs and Scheduling Additional Commitments in the GATT: Learning from the GATS” European Journal of International Law, Vol. 28, Iss. 2, pp. 387–407, https://doi.org/10.1093/ejil/chx022.
Hoekman, B. and Marvroidis, P., 2018. “Variable Geometry in the WTO” In R. Schütze, eds., Globalisation and Governance International Problems, European Solutions (pp. 148-169) Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781316417027.
Hoekman, B. and Sabel, C., 2021. “Plurilateral Cooperation as an Alternative to Trade Agreements: Innovating One Domain at a Time” Global Policy, Vol. 12, Iss. 53, pp. 49-60.
Jackson, J., 2001. “The WTO 'constitution' and proposed reforms: seven 'mantras' revisited” Journal of International Economic Law, Vol. 4, Iss. 1, pp. 67-78, https://doi.org/10.1093/jiel/4.1.67.
Jackson, J., Loius, J. and Matsushita, M., 1983. “Implementing the tokyo round: legal aspects of changing international economic rules.” Michigan Law Review, Vol. 81, No. 2, pp. 267-397.
Kahler, M., 1992. “Multilateralism with small and large numbers” International Organization, Vol.46, Iss. 3, pp. 681-708. DOI: 10.1017/S0020818300027867.
Kelsey, J., 2022. “The Illegitimacy of Joint Statement Initiatives and Their Systemic Implications for the WTO” Journal of International Economic Law, Vol. 25, Iss. 1, pp. 2–24, https://doi.org/10.1093/jiel/jgac004.
Keohane, R., 1982. “The Demand for International Regimes.” International Organization, Vol. 36, Iss. 2, pp. 325–355. http://www.jstor.org/stable/2706525.
Keohane, R., 1997. “International relations and international law: two optics.” Harvard International Law Journal, Vol. 38, No. 2, pp. 487-502.
Koremenos, B., 2005. “Contracting around International Uncertainty” American Political Science Review, Vol. 99, No. 4, pp. 549-565.
Koremenos, B., Lipson, C., and Snidal, D., 2001. “The Rational Design of International Institutions.” International Organization, Vol. 55, Iss, 4, pp. 761–799. http://www.jstor.org/stable/3078615
Kucik, J. and Reinhardt, E., 2008. “Does Flexibility Promote Cooperation? An Application to the Global Trade Regime.” International Organization, Vol. 62, Iss. 3, pp. 477–505. http://www.jstor.org/stable/40071901.
Lawrence, R., 2006. “Rulemaking Amidst Growing Diversity: A Club-of-Clubs Approach to WTO Reform and New Issue Selection” Journal of International Economic Law, Vol. 9, Iss. 4, pp. 823-835, https://doi.org/10.1093/jiel/jgl032.
Lin, T., 2011. “Systemic Reflection on the EC-IT Product Case: Establishing an ‘Understanding’ on Maintaining the Product Coverage of the Current Information Technology Agreement in the Face of Technological Change” Journal of World Trade, Vol. 45, No. 2, pp. 401-430.
Lipson, C., 1991. “Why are Some International Agreements Informal?” International Organization, Vol. 45, No. 4, pp. 495-538. https://www.jstor.org/stable/2706946.
Low, P., 2009. “Potential Future Functions of the World Trade Organization” Global Governance, Vol. 15, No. 3, pp. 327-334.
Mann, C. and Liu, X., 2007. “The Information Technology Agreement: Sui Generis or Model Stepping Stone?” Paper presented at the Conference on Multilateralising Regionalism Sponsored and organized by WTO – HEI Co-organized by the Centre for Economic Policy Research (CEPR).
Mavroidis, P. and Neven, D., 2019. “Greening the WTO Environmental Goods Agreement, Tariff Concessions, and Policy Likeness” Journal of International Economic Law, Vol. 22, Iss. 3, pp. 373-388. https://doi.org/10.1093/jiel/jgz018/.
Nakatomi, M., 2012. “Exploring Future Application of Plurilateral Trade Rules: Lessons from the ITA and the ACTA” RIETI Policy Discussion Paper Series, Series No. 12-P-009. Available on: https://www.rieti.go.jp/en/publications/summary/12050012.html
Nakatomi, M., 2013. “Plurilateral Agreements: A Viable Alternative to the World Trade Organization?” ADBI Working Paper Series, Series No. 439. Available on: http://www.adbi.org/working-paper/2013/10/24/5914.plurilateral.agreements.alternative.wto/
Odell, J., 2015. “How Should the WTO Launch and Negotiate a Future Round?” World Trade Review, Vol.14, Iss. 1, pp. 117-133. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S147474561400038X
Park, B., 2016. “The Political Economy of Global Sectoral Agreements in Information Technology, Telecommunications, and Finance” UC Berkeley. ProQuest ID: Park_berkeley_0028E_16480. Merritt ID: ark:/13030/m5547km2. Retrieved from https://escholarship.org/uc/item/3rb3p23h.
Peres, A., 2024. “Transience of (In)Formality: The Role of the Joint Initiatives in Reforming the WTO Negotiations” World Trade Review, Vol. 23, Special Iss. 3: Symposium: Dispute Settlement Inside and Outside of the WTO, pp. 385-407. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S1474745624000119.
Prantl, J., 2005. “Informal Groups of States and the UN Security Council” International Organization, Vol. 59, No. 3, pp. 559-592. https://www.jstor.org/stable/3877809.
Rolland, S., 2010. “Redesigning the Negotiation Process at the WTO” Journal of International Economic Law, Vol. 13, Iss. 1, pp. 65-110, https://doi.org/10.1093/jiel/jgp045.
Rosendorff, P. and Milner, H., 2001. “The Optimal Design of International Trade Institutions: Uncertainty and Escape.” International Organization, Vol. 55, Iss. 4, pp. 829–857. http://www.jstor.org/stable/3078617.
Rosendorff, P., 2005. “Stability and Rigidity: Politics and Design of the WTO’s Dispute Settlement Procedure.” The American Political Science Review, Vol. 99, Iss. 3, pp. 389–400. http://www.jstor.org/stable/30038947.
Slaughter, A., 1993. “International Law and International Relations Theory: A Dual Agenda” American Journal of International Law, Vol. 87, Iss. 2, pp. 205-239. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/2203817.
Snidal, D., 1991. “Relative Gains and the Pattern of International Cooperation” American Political Science Review, Vol. 85, Iss. 3, pp. 701-726. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/1963847
Steinberg, R., 2002. “In the Shadow of Law or Power? Consensus-Based Bargaining and Outcomes in the GATT/WTO.” International Organization, Vol. 56, Iss. 2, pp. 339-374. doi:10.1162/002081802320005504.
Stone, R., 2013. “Informal governance in international organizations: Introduction to the special issue” Review of International Organization, Vol. 8, pp. 121-136. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11558-013-9168-y.
Strange, S., 1982. “Cave! Hic Dragones: A Critique of Regime Analysis” International Organization, Vol. 36, No. 2, International Regimes, pp. 479-496. https://www.jstor.org/stable/2706530.
Tasker, J., 2001. “The information technology agreement: building global information infrastructure while avoiding customs classification disputes.” Brooklyn Journal of International Law, Vol. 26, Iss, 3, pp. 917-948.
Tijmes-Lhl, J., 2009. “Consensus and majority voting in the WTO” World Trade Review, Vol. 8, Iss. 3, pp. 417 – 437. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S1474745609004388.
US International Trade Commission, 1997. “Advice Concerning the Proposed Modification of Duties on Certain Information Technology Product and Distilled Spirits” Investigation No. 332-380. Retrieved from: https://www.usitc.gov/commission_publications_library?f%5B0%5D=date_of_publication%3A1997.
VanGrasstek, C. and Sauvé, P., 2006. “The Consistency of WTO Rules: Can the Single Undertaking Be Squared with Variable Geometry?” Journal of International Economic Law, Vol. 9, Iss. 4, pp. 837-864, https://doi.org/10.1093/jiel/jgl031.
Vossenaar, R., 2013. “The APEC List of Environmental Goods: An Analysis of the Outcome & Expected Impact” International Centre for Trade and Sustainable Development issue paper No.18.
Westerwinter, O., Abbott, K. and Biersteker, T., 2021. “Informal governance in world politics” Review of International Organization, Vol. 16, pp. 1-27. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11558-020-09382-1.
Winslett, G., 2018.” Critical Mass Agreements: The Proven Template for Trade Liberalization in the WTO” World Trade Review, Vol. 17, Iss. 3, pp. 405-426. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1474745617000295
Wolfe, R., 2009. “The WTO Single Undertaking as Negotiating Technique and Constitutive Metaphor” Journal of International Economic Law, Vol. 12, Iss. 4, pp. 835-858, https://doi.org/10.1093/jiel/jgp038.
Wolfe, R., 2013. “First diagnose, then treat: what ails the Doha Round?” Robert Schuman Centre for Advanced Studies Research Paper, No. 2013/85.
Zampetti, A., Low, P. and Marvroidis, P., 2022. “Consensus Decision-Making and Legislative Inertia at the WTO: Can International Law Help?” Journal of World Trade, Vol. 56, Iss. 1, pp. 1-26. https://doi.org/10.54648/trad2022001.
新聞資料
Inside US Trade, 2011. “USTR Exploring Options to Expand Product Coverage, Countries in ITA” Inside US Trade, 22 Apr. 2011. Retrieved from ProQuest Database. Available: 2024/12/16.
Inside US Trade, 2011. “Tech Companies Press Obama for ITA Expansion Commitment at APEC” Inside US Trade, 14 Oct. 2011. Retrieved from ProQuest Database. Available: 2024/12/16.
Inside US Trade, 2012. “US, EU at Odds over How to Move Forward with ITA Expansion Talks” Inside US Trade, 27 Jan. 2012. Retrieved from ProQuest Database. Available: 2024/12/17.
Inside US Trade, 2012. “Punke Outlines US-EU Differences on ITA Expansion, New Services Deal” Inside US Trade, 23 Mar. 2012. Retrieved from ProQuest Database. Available: 2024/12/17.
Inside US Trade, 2012. “China Lends Support to Expanding ITA, Giving Effort Critical Boost” Inside US Trade, 6 Apr. 2012. Retrieved from ProQuest Database. Available: 2024/12/17.
Inside US Trade, 2012. “EU Throws Support behind ITA Expansion Approach Advocated By US” Inside US Trade, 18 May 2012. Retrieved from ProQuest Database. Available: 2024/12/17.
Inside US Trade, 2012. “EU Proposal on Non-Tariff Barriers Faces Resistance from ITA Members” Inside US Trade, 17 Aug 2012. Retrieved from ProQuest Database. Available: 2024/12/17.
Inside US Trade, 2012. “China, India Begin to Engage with Domestic Industries on ITA Expansion” Inside US Trade, 28 Sep 2012. Retrieved from ProQuest Database. Available: 2024/12/17.
Inside US Trade, 2012. “ITA Negotiators Circulate Revised Product List Featuring Modest Changes.” Inside US Trade, 21 Dec 2012. Retrieved from ProQuest Database. Available: 2024/12/17.
Inside US Trade, 2013. “ITA Expansion Proponents Aggressively Cut Back Proposed Product List” Inside US Trade, 25 Jan 2013. Retrieved from ProQuest Database. Available: 2024/12/17.
Inside US Trade, 2013. “China Tables Concrete Demands in ITA Negotiations, Wants List Narrowed” Inside US Trade, 29 Mar 2013. Retrieved from ProQuest Database. Available: 2024/12/17.
Inside US Trade, 2013. “China Poses New Roadblock To Concluding ITA Expansion Talks In July” Inside US Trade, 28 Jun 2013. Retrieved from ProQuest Database. Available: 2024/12/17.
Inside US Trade, 2013. “US and Others Suspend ITA Talks To Pressure China To Soften Its Stance” Inside US Trade, 19 Jul 2013. Retrieved from ProQuest Database. Available: 2024/12/17.
Inside US Trade, 2013. “China Commits To Limit ITA 'Sensitivities; APEC Urges Deal By Year End” Inside US Trade, 11 Oct 2013. Retrieved from ProQuest Database. Available: 2024/12/17.
Inside US Trade, 2013. “ITA Expansion Talks Suspended Again; No Timeline For Resumption Set” Inside US Trade, 22 Nov 2013. Retrieved from ProQuest Database. Available: 2024/12/17.
Inside US Trade, 2013. “EU Drops Duty On Flat-Panel Displays, Ending Long Trade Fight With U.S.” Inside US Trade, 1 Nov 2013. Retrieved from ProQuest Database. Available: 2024/12/17.
Inside US Trade, 2014.” Froman Reports 'Progress' In ITA Talks With China, But No Breakthrough” Inside US Trade, 23 May 2014. Retrieved from ProQuest Database. Available: 2024/12/17.
Inside US Trade, 2014. “Hopes For ITA Breakthrough Fall Flat As China Tells Others To Compromise” Inside US Trade, 27 Jun 2014. Retrieved from ProQuest Database. Available: 2024/12/17.
Inside US Trade, 2014. “ITA Breakthrough Spurs Talk of Concluding Agreement in December” Inside US Trade, 11 Nov 2014. Retrieved from ProQuest Database. Available: 2024/12/17.
Inside US Trade, 2014. “US, China Reach ITA ‘Breakthrough’; Duty Phaseout to Reflect 1996 Deal” Inside US Trade, 14 Nov 2014. Retrieved from ProQuest Database. Available: 2024/12/17.
Inside US Trade, 2015.” Taiwan, Korea, China Plan to Engage in New Talks to End ITA Stalemate” Inside US Trade, 13 Feb 2015. Retrieved from ProQuest Database. Available: 2024/12/17.
Inside US Trade, 2015. “ITA Expansion Participants Begin to Pressure Korea to Drop Objections”
Inside US Trade, 5 Jun 2015. Retrieved from ProQuest Database. Available: 2024/12/17.
Inside US Trade, 2015. “Taiwan, Thailand Formally Join ITA Deal; Now Covers All Major Producers” Inside US Trade, 31 Jul 2015. Retrieved from ProQuest Database. Available: 2024/12/17.
Maggs, J., 1995. “U.S. pushes plan to abolish tariffs on computers, software” Journal of Commerce, 27 Apr. 1995: p. 14. Retrieved from ProQuest Database. Available: 2024/12/30.
Rushford, G., 1996. “What Failed in Vancouver Will Fail in Singapore” The Wall Street Journal, 7 Aug. 1996: p. 10. Retrieved from ProQuest Database. Available: 2024/12/30.
網路資源
APEC, 1996. “1996 Leaders' Declaration in Subic, The Philippines” in APEC official website: https://www.apec.org/meeting-papers/leaders-declarations/1996/1996_aelm. Available: 2025/01/16.
APEC, 2011. “2011 Leaders' Declaration in Honolulu, Hawaii, The United States” in APEC official website: https://www.apec.org/meeting-papers/leaders-declarations/2011/2011_aelm. Available: 2024/12/16.
Denamiel, T., Schleich, M. and Reinsch, W., 2024. “Insight into the 13th WTO Ministerial Conference” in CSIS website: https://www.csis.org/analysis/insight-13th-wto-ministerial-conference. Available: 2024/12/30.
G7, 1996. “Communique of 28th Quadrilateral Trade Ministers Meeting in Kobe” in G7/G20 Documents Database: https://g7g20-documents.org/. Available: 2024/12/30.
G7, 1996. “Communique of 29th Quadrilateral Trade Ministers Meeting in Seattle, Washington” in G7/G20 Documents Database: https://g7g20-documents.org/. Available: 2024/12/30.
G7, 1997. “Communique of 30th Quadrilateral Trade Ministers Meeting in Toronto, Canada” in G7/G20 Documents Database: https://g7g20-documents.org/. Available: 2024/12/30.
Geneva Trade Platform, “WTO Plurilaterals” in WTO Plurilaterals: https://wtoplurilaterals.info/. Available: 2024/5/4.
Reinsch, W., Benson, E. and Puga, C., 2021. “Environmental Goods Agreement: A New Frontier or an Old Stalemate?” in Center for Strategic and International Studies website: https://www.csis.org/analysis/environmental-goods-agreement-new-frontier-or-old-stalemate. Available: 2024/5/4.
USITC, 1996. “Advice Concerning the Proposed Modification of Duties on Certain Information Technology Products and Distilled Spirits, Inv. 332-380 (Final)” in United States International Trade Commission publication library: https://www.usitc.gov/commission_publications_library. Available: 2025/1/16.
WTO, “Agreement on Government Procurement” in WTO official website: https://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/gproc_e/gp_gpa_e.htm. Available: 2024/12/31.
WTO, “Concept Paper for The Expansion of The ITA” in WTO Documents, G/IT/W/36, 2 May 2012.
WTO, “Declaration on The Expansion of Trade in Information Technology Product - Communication from the European Union” in WTO Documents, WT/L/956, 28 July, 2015.
WTO, “Joint Statement Initiative on E-commerce” in WTO Documents, WTO/INF/ECOM/87, 26 July 2024.
WTO, “Joint Statement Initiative on E-commerce” in WTO official website: https://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/ecom_e/joint_statement_e.htm. Available: 2024/12/31.
WTO, “Ministerial Declaration on Trade in Information Technology Products” in WTO Documents, WT/MIN(96)/16, 13 Dec. 1996.
WTO, “Plurilaterals: of minority interest” in WTO official website: https://www.wto.org/english/thewto_e/whatis_e/tif_e/agrm10_e.htm. Available: 2024/12/31.
WTO, “Pre-WTO legal texts - Tokyo Round codes” in WTO official website: https://www.wto.org/english/docs_e/legal_e/prewto_legal_e.htm. Available: 2024/12/31.
WTO, “WTO legal texts” in WTO official website: https://www.wto.org/english/docs_e/legal_e/legal_e.htm. Available: 2024/12/31. |
| Description: | 碩士
國立政治大學
外交學系
111253002 |
| Source URI: | http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0111253002 |
| Data Type: | thesis |
| Appears in Collections: | [外交學系] 學位論文
|
Files in This Item:
| File |
Description |
Size | Format | |
|---|
| 300201.pdf | | 2003Kb | Adobe PDF | 0 | View/Open |
|
All items in 政大典藏 are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved.
|
