01-02 WTO 2001 12
<> 1986 WTO WTO WTO, GDP 750, 13 17 (2000 ), WTO, WTO,,, EU, WTO, WTO WTO,, WTO,,,, HS,,, WTO CGE WTO 13 3, 10 1
,,,,,,,,,, 2001 11 2
3 < >
4
5
6
I II WTO 1 WTO 2 WTO WTO 1 2 WTO 1 2 3 4 WTO V 1 2 3 Executive Summary 7
<II -1> WTO <II -2> <III-1> WTO <III-2> <III-3> <III-4> III <III-6> WTO <III-7> <III-8> <III-9> <III-10> <III-11> <III-12> <-1> CGE <-2> <-3> <-4> <-5> <-6> WTO <-7> WTO <-8> WTO 3 <9> WTO 3 5 8
< II-1> <-1> CGE <-2> <-3> < <-5> <-6> <-7> <-8> <-9> <-10> <-11> <-12> <-13> GDP <-14> (EV) 9
I 1 1986 (GATT), 19951WTO WTO, 19991115 WTO 5 EU, 2001917 WTO 2 20011110 WTO WTO WTO, 13 960km 2 2000, 17 WTO,, 21 1 WTO 1990, WTO 15 9, 5, 2000 6 WTO (1996 ) Economist 1 WTO, 10
11 WTO WTO, WTO 2 WTO 19974, WTO (R Ruggiero)
12 Ianchovichina and McDougall(2000) Global Dynamic Model(GDYN)
13
II WTO II WTO, WTO 1 WTO WTO WTO, EU, WTO, WTO 11 ( I)14 ( II), 12 3, GATT WTO 1995 1 1 2 1997 1 1, GATT 1997 1 1 WTO GATT 1995 1 1, 2/3 3 WTO, 12 (Article XII Accession: 1 Any state or separate customs territory possessing full autonomy in the conduct of its external commercial relations and of the other matters provided for in this Agreement and the Multilateral Trade Agreement may accede to this Agreement, on terms to be agreed between it and the WTO Such accession shall apply to this Agreement and the Multilateral Trade Agreement annexed thereto 2 Decisions on accession shall be taken by the Ministerial Conference The Ministerial Conference shall approve the agreement on the terms of accession by a two-thirds majority of the Members of the WTO 3 Accession to a Plurilateral Trade Agreement shall be governed by the provisions of that Agreement) 14
< II-1> WTO 12 (WTO ) WTO - - WTO - -,, (WTO ) ( ) WTO - - WTO (WTO ) WTO ( 2/3 ) ( ) ( ) WTO ( 30 ) : (1999), WTO < II-1> WTO WTO WTO 12, WTO, WTO,, WTO 15
,, 142,,,,, WTO, 2/3 4, WTO WTO 30 WTO, WTO, 6 5 WTO 2001 10,,, EU 142 32 (Observer) 6 UN, OECD, UNCTAD, IMF, World Bank, FAO, WIPO 7 16
WTO 1995 WTO 76, 1995 36, 1996 16, 1997 4, 1998 1, 1999 2 2001 7 142 7 <II-1> WTO (2001 10 ) 1995 1 1 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 WTO 76 36 16 4 1 2 5 2 142 : WTO (wwwwtoorg) 142 WTO,,,,,,, 8 GATT ( 135 GATT ) WTO WTO 9 ( ),,, 32,,, 3 29 WTO, 20 8,,, 9, WTO, 21, WTO, 9 (Chinese Taipei) WTO 17
, 10, -,,,, WTO,,,, WTO,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, 26, WTO WTO,, - 3 26, 18 (memorandum), 7,,,, 26 14 1,,, 10,,,, ( ) 6 1 2 WTO GATT/WTO 1947GATT 1949 GATT 1980 19867GATT 1987 WTO, 13 GATT/WTO, EU,, 1994 GATT,,, 18
, 1995 WTO WTO, 1997 ( ) 1998 19991115 EU WTO <II-2> GATT/WTO 1948 5 1950 5 1964 3 198310 1986 7 1986 9 1987 3 1987 1989 6 12 1990 1 199412 1995 1 1997 8 1997 1998 6 1999 4 1999 5 1999 7 1999 9 1999 11 6 1999 1115 2000 5 19 2000 5 24 2000 9 19 2001 11 10, GATT ( ), GATT, GATT, GATT, GATT ( ), UR GATT - 7, GATT GATT WTO, WTO - (1,584 ), ( ) ( ), 199911 NATO - ( ), APEC -,, USTR ( ) -WTO EU-WTO PNTR PNTR WTO, WTO WTO WTO GATT, GATT, 1972 UN 19
,, WTO MFN WTO,, WTO 12-15 MFN WTO, 1 GDP,, EU,, GDP, 1999 11,,,, TPRM, 20
III WTO WTO, ( ) 1,, 1999 11, 1999 6,223 5,685 (HS 8 ) 11, 10-20% 5,685 2,167 ( 38%) 1-10% 1,550 27%, 20-30% 984 (173%) 30% 84%, 50% 23%132,,, 100%80% 5 75% 55% 2005 25%, 60-80%,,, 50% 21
<III-1> WTO (1999, %) 100 80-100 60-80 50-60 40-50 30-40 20-30 10-20 1-10 0 (, %) 9(02) 22(04) 32(06) 23(04) 46(08) 760(134) 984(173) 2167(381) 1550(273) 92(16) : WTO (%point) (%) 75 25 55 25 0-60 0-65 15-40 10-35 0-38 0-40 0-35 0-30 0-20 0-28 0-18 0-18 0-10 0-10 0 0 ( 25% ) <III-2 > 12,,,,,,,,, TV,,, CD,, <III-2> : WTO 22
,, < 2> 30% 88 16%, 30% 892 10% 88 30% 10-20% 21%1,204, 10% 712%(4,045 ) <III-3> (%) (HS 8 ) (%) 70 10 02 50 70 29 05 30 50 49 09 20 30 348 61 10 20 1,204 212 5 10 1,174 207 25 5 1,084 191 01 25 864 152 00 923 162 5,685 100 : III III 23
III ( ) (HS 8 ) (%) 10 40 07 75 100 18 03 50 75 204 36 25 50 3,146 553 01 25 1,330 234 00 947 167 5,685 100 : III (HS 8) (%) 2008 35 06 2007 - - 2006 5 01 2005 753 132 2004 936 165 2003 425 75 2002 808 142 2001 939 165 2000 1,784 314 5,685 100 : 1) 2) 2000 24
III 1) <III-6> WTO 2) (1999) 69 47 320 2002 240 200 167 2002 150 97 356 2004 24 17 295 2002 171 105 386 2005 44 44 00 2000 38 30 200 2000 71 59 169 2002 50 43 146 2005 221 119 461 2005 630 360 429 2005 254 103 597 2005 329 161 509 2005 215 175 186 2005 143 52 639 2005 147 54 631 2008 80 55 316 2005 114 69 394 2005 178 150 155 2004 89 51 421 2004 81 55 321 2004 III III 25
137 114 168 2004 413 147 644 2005 123 82 336 2005 181 90 502 2005 156 100 359 2005 218 164 248 2005 168 101 402 : 1) 2) GTAP Database version 4 3) <III-6>, 1999, 63% 41%, 33%25% 20% (24%), (22%), (22%), (22%) 10% (15%), (17%), (14%), (15%), (11%), (18%), (14%), (12%), (18%), (16%),,,, 10%, 64% 199941% 200515%, 639%631%, 2005 2008 52%54%, 2005 103%161%,,, 40% 30%,,,,,,,,,,,,, 10%, 40%, 1999 26
168% 2005 101% 14 WTO 50% 800 15, 6 30-50% 20-30%, 42 53% 10-20%, 257 800 (HS 10 ) 321% 5-10% 218 114 25-5% 01-25% 94,, 74% 27
<III-7> (%) (%) 50 1 01 30-50 6 08, 20-30 42 53, 10-20 257 321, 5-10 218 273 25-5 114 143, 01-25 94 118 (copper wire) 0 59 74, 9 11 800 100 : <III-8 > (%) (%) 30 3 04 20-30 17 21 10-20 270 338 5-10 370 463 25-5 41 513 01-25 23 29 0 67 84 9 11 800 100 : WTO, 3,, 17 20-30% 10-20%,, 270 5-10%, 370, 463% 28
25-5% 41 23 01-25%, 11%, 9 <III-9> (%) 50-30-50 20-30 10 20 5 10 - - - - - - - - - - -, - - -, - - -,, - - - - - -,, -,, - - - - - - - -, 29
25 5 01 25 0 -,, - - -, - - -, - - -, - (Copper wire) - - - - -,, 6 HS 870323, 55%, 16, 30-50% HS 870290 1998 127, 1999 331 1607%,,,, HS 870880 1998 6332% 20-30%,, 30
,, HS 271000, 1 1998 932 1999 11 1,654 24% HS 5407 (4 ) 23% 22% HS 852313 1998 1999 209% 148% HS 551219 1998 1267 1999 8,746, 2004 22%,, 21% HS 950490,, 1998 755 1999 344 545%, 1998 1999, 35%, HS 340290,, 21%, HS 840734 5685% 25% 1998 56 1999 374, 10-20% HS 580632 HS 580133 18% 31
1998 1,397 1999 2,077 487%, 1999 1,917 1998 388% 1999, 175% 16% HS 560122 1998 1,997 1999 1,497 251%,,, 15% HS 852721 1998 1999 422% 25,986, HS 850450 385% 1,927, HS 600192 HS 350699 1998 1999 474%214% HS 600293 HS 600110 15%, 1998 1999 82%107% HS 621790 14%, 1998 1999 199% 2,950 1998 36 1999 348 8664% HS 851730 135%, HS 847330 105%, 1998 1 1,055 1999 1 8,535 677% 10% 1998 1999 538% 1852 HS 841430, HS 580410 13% 1998 1999 739% 7,484 579% 4,048 5-10%,,, HS 390210 95% 32
01-25%, HS 740811 HS 740819 2%, 1999 4,409 4,914 HS 740710 1%, 1998 7,380 1999 7,029 48%,,,,, 2 17 WTO,, (III-10 ), 1999 25%(300 ), 2000 Economist 18, ( ), ( ), WTO 1999 4, WTO 5 WTO Economist A Survey of China: Now Comes the Hard Part 33
<III-10> : (2000), WTO WTO,,,, 1) WTO ( ) WTO,, GATT/WTO GATT 8 (Fees and Formalities connected with Importation and Exportation) WTO (WTO Agreement on Import Licensing Procedures) GATT 8, WTO 1979 (Agreement on Import Licensing Procedures), 34
,, WTO GATT 11 13 GATT 11, 13 GATT 3 2), ( ),, 19 1997 376, 246 1999 25%( ) (State MEP),, 19 USITC(1999) p3-10,,,,,,,, 35
,,,, 4 3) 1999 4 WTO,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, 4),,,,,,, 1999 300, 88, 44 22,,,,,,,,,,, 36
<III-11> ( : ) 37
38
: HS, (product labeling and registration) 20,,,, 39
1) WTO (STEs: State trading enterprises),, ( ),, WTO WTO WTO (GATT 1994 17 ) WTO, 2) (foreign trade right) (SETC; State Economic and Trade Commission) (MOFTEC) 20 12 40
,, 1996 (Sino foreign) 1999 WTO 6,000, 61 8,000 22,000 3),,,,,,,,,, WTO 4) 41
,,,,,,, WTO,, WTO WTO WTO,,,, (Tea),,,,,,, (Antimony), WTO, 3 42
1) WTO (TRIPs: Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights) WTO TRIPs, WTO 1999,, TRIPs,,, 2),,,,,, 100%,,,,,, IBM Intel, Bell 43
1990, 1996 WTO TRIPs 1992, 1997 20,,, 3),,,,,,, (SDPC) (MOFTEC), TRIPs WTO,,,,,, 44
45,, WTO, <III-12> <III-12> 1) WTO,
, 30,,,,,,,,,, WTO 2) GATT 1994 3 4, WTO, GATS(General Agreement on Trade in Services)TRIPs WTO,,,,,,,, 3) GATT 10,, 46
WTO, GATT 17, GATS, TRIPs,,,,,, WTO,, 4) GATT 10, WTO,,, 47
5),,,,,,,, 6) WTO,,,,,,,, WTO 7) TRIMs 1996 48
,,,,, 49
WTO 1 1997 WTO WTO GATT/WTO (, 1995), WTO (, 1999), GATT/WTO (, 1995), WTO (, 1995), WTO (, 1995a), WTO (, 1998) (1999) WTO, (1999)WTO ASEAN 1990 WTO WTO (Harris, 1997), (Feng and Huang, 1997, Bach, Martin, and Stevens, 1996), WTO (Wei, 1998, Lardy, 1996, Sheingming, 1997, Lei and Huang, 1997), (Geest, 1998), (Wang, 1997) (CGE) 50
51 <-1> CGE (1999) WTO, (1999) (2000)
: GTAPGlobal Trade Analysis Project : (2000),, p 6, <3> (2000) 1997 CGE,, ( ), GDP < >, GDP GDP (1999) (1999), (MFA), GDP,, WTO (1999) GTAP APEC ( ) (1999), MFA 52
22, WTO 12%,, 2 - (CGE), 23 CGE WTO, 1) CGE, CGE,,, <-1 > CGE 2005 92% 53
<-1 > CGE - - 1 2 54
- - 1 2 n 1 + + + = + + + 2 + + + = + + + + + + m + + + = = = = ),,, (Walras Law), (1) r r j l k = l (2) r r j ( ) j = k j l r k r r ( ) lr j kr j r j ( ), i q r (, ( ) 55
) r i (3) qr i = dcr i + d zr ji + x j s i sr i xsr r s i, i (3) r i d i d cr, j ji zr x, s i sr (3), (4) i mr i ji m cr m zr m = m + m (4) r i i cr j zr ji j ), - (Cobb-Douglas) (composite consumption) - 56
(5) ur i i i = δ r * cr, where δ r = 1 i i i δ r r i, ur r c i, r i, - CES i i c r (6) σ i c i (6) cr i i c d i cr mcr i c σ 1 σ i 1 c i i σ 1 = Ψ σ c + σ c i σ c i i, i ψ dcr r i i, mcr r i (duality) (6), CES (7)(8) i i i ci (7) d = c + σ cr r c{ p p di r cr} (8) cr { } i i i ci mi m = cr + σ c p p r cr c (composite price index), d ( ), m, r(c) ( ) (7)(8) ( σ c i ) 57
),, ( ), (9) (9) zr { } ji dr ji σ 1 = + mr ji σ 1 Φ σ σ σ σ 1 Φ, d m (6), (10) zr { } ji ji ji dji d = zr + σ p p r zr (11) zr { } ji ji ji mji m = zr + σ p p r zr ji r p r j i dji mji, pzr ( pzr ) r j ( ) i σ (10)(11) (11), (12) 58
(12) zsr { } ji ji mji mji m = mzr + σ m p p zr zsr zsr ( ) ji mji m p r zsr j s i ( ) (12) (12), (3) ) ( ) i ci p cif rs p rs i fi mi t rs, (fob ) p rs p r i srs i ci (13) p = p + rs rs t i rs fi mi (14) p = p rs r s i rs i rs " r s ", srs (export tax) (13) (shock) i i i (15) p = p r ξ * sr i ξ sr s sr r i ( s ) rs sr r mi (15) p ( cr mji 16), p ( 17) zr mi i (16) p = p + cr r t mi cr mji i (17) p = p + zr r t mji zr tcr mi ( tzr mji ) r ( ) i (15) (16)(17), (8)(11) 59
2) CGE - CGE, CGE CGE CGE Ianchovichina and McDougall(2000) GDYN GDYN GDYN (temporary disequilibrium approach),,,,,, GDYN (adaptive expectations) Ianchovichina and McDougall(2000), <-2> e ng EE e (18) r = ε [ k 100 K T ] 100 µ E T + r r r ge t e (19) [ ] r = µ r r r r r r r r r r r 60
(20) ng k 1 a ng (21) = [ + 100 T ] k r ge r µ ε r ng [ ] = ik ε i k k r ฯ r r r k K r r r r r r r r : r ge r t r e r e r a r r r r r k r ng r : r (%) : r (%) : r (shift variable) : r (gross) (RORGTARG(r)) (%) : r (%) k : r ng K r : r i r εr : r (%) : r EE µ r : r E r r k r : r µ : r (%) (%) µ : r ik ฯ r : r - T : (time), (,, t I(t) ) CGE,, Ianchovichina and McDougall(2000) ( T ), (T=0) 24, (T=1) T=0 ( 18), 61
, (Ianchovichina and McDougall ),,,, (19), (18), (20), Ianchovichina and McDougall(2000),, (21) (+) (20), < IV-2> (r e ) (K), (r a ) (K) ( ) (r t ) ( IV-2 ) 62
< IV-2> r a r e r t K 0 K *, (18), < IV-2> 1, (19)(20) (gradual equalization) ( IV-2 2) (r t ) GEMPACK (source code)< 3> (18) ~ (21),,, CGE,, 63
CGE,,,,, GTAP 25,, World Bank Global Economic Perspectives Data Base IMF Balances of Payments Statistics 3 47,, 4 (,, ), (EU ), (ASEAN ) ( ) 29, 3(,, ), 1 25 WTO, WTO 64
<IV-3> σ1 σ 2 σ3 CGE GTAP (σ1 1-3, 520 ( ) (σ 2 2 65
, 112-126, 024,, 3 1 2, WTO, (1998), GDYN III <IV-4> <IV-4> ( : %, ) EV GDP(%) (%) TOT(%) (%) (%) : EV (%) (equivalent variation) : 1997, 216 66
17 29,, 26 GDP, 087%GDP, GDP GDP Li and Zhai(2000) WTO GDP153%, Lejour(2000) 21%GDP Walmsley and Hertel(2000), Feng and Huang(1997), Fang and Zheng(2000), (1999) (2000) CGE,,, 02%,, 71%, 48% 10 1990 13% 12%, WTO,, 67
<IV-5>,, 27 1) 1 27, 29,, 1) <IV-5> ( 68
2) <IV- 6> :, 27 15,,,,,,,,,,,, 39 28,,,, 37, 11, 8,, (56 ), (13 ), (11 ) 69
7, 1,, Li and Zhai(2000) Lejour(2000),,, (MFA) EU,, ( ) MFA Li and Zhai (2000) Lejour (2000) Li and Zhai, Lejour Lejour,, Li and Zhai <IV-4> WTO GDP, <IV-5> ( )39 < IV-5> GDP GDP 1:1 ( ) GDP,, 70
2),,, 1990, 27 5, 22, (37%), (17%), (7%),,,,, 4-6%, 2-3%, 53, 10 64%, 10 9 ( 11) 1,,,,,,, 200024% 20%4% 71
024%, 41% 09%, 029%, 08%, 27% 46%,,,,,, 40% (66%), (46%), (41%), 10% (19%), (14%), (14%), (12%) (30 ), (25 ), (21 ), 5,,,, 1, 597% 46%, 509% 41%, 336%, 66%,,, 394%321%, 2% 3%, 29% ( 56 ) 72
, (2 ) (25 ) 14 7,,, 123 117, 6 <IV-6>, 123 117 28 44, 228%376% 1999, 206%308% WTO 73
<IV-6> WTO ( : %, ) 123(100%) 117(100%) 64 28(228%) 3( 24%) 25(203%) : : 44(376%) 13(111%) 31(265%) -16-10 -6 <IV-7> ( 74
,,, 56, 16, 3 13 10 7 WTO, 29 <IV-7>, 3,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, 30 60%51% 7, 15, 75
,,,, 31,, 3,, 1,, 1998,, 25 15 60%, 30%, WTO 3, <IV-8>, 3 298%, 231% 5 77%, 23% 76
<IV-8> WTO 3 1 298 579 317 2 231 80 206 3 104 72 152 4 73 63 130 5 64 58, 56 <IV-9> WTO 3 5 5 770 852 861 230 148 139 Total 100 100 100 WTO,,, WTO 4 WTO WTO, 5, WTO, 77
1995, 32 WTO 20, WTO ( ) (WTO ) 2 WTO (deviations) (FDI),,, GDP,, 1970, 1981 38% 1996 118% ( IV-3 ) 78
< IV-4> WTO ( ), < IV-4>,, (source), WTO, 10 5%,, WTO, WTO, 79
,,, WTO 10 WTO 1) < IV-5> 3 WTO 13,, WTO 80
WTO,, MFA ( IV-10 ), <IV-10> \ 1996 1998 956 1012 451 520 418 269 238 252 108 151 131 128 028 043 036 039 031 030 034 016 ( : ) : Werner International Management Consultants(1999), Hourly Labor Costs in the Apparel Industry, 1998 < IV-5>, < IV-6> WTO WTO 10, ( IV-7 ) WTO 5, 5 3-7% 5,, 81
,, WTO, ( IV-9 ) <IV-4> 10 17,, 82
14, 2) MFA WTO 6 77%, 83
, 12 2000 30%, 15%, WTO 5 116%, 10, (IV-5),,,, WTO, 2 2%7%, 2, -10%20% 84
< IV-11>,, WTO 6 140%,, WTO WTO (IV-4),,,,, (40% ) 10%,, (80% ) 10-20%, 85
WTO,, GATT/WTO (MFA) 1995 1 10, WTO 2005, WTO 10, 2005 4 33 5, WTO 5 2000 60% 5, 10 2000 10% 86
2000 GDP < IV-13>GDP WTO (deviations), 10 414% GDP 0869%, GDP < IV-13>, WTO 10 GDP, 10 GDP WTO GDP,,, 2020 GDP, (IV-3), WTO 87
GDP, GDP WTO, WTO (EV) GDP 6,, WTO, 5 114,, 10, (IV-4), GDP,, 88
WTO, WTO,, 89
V WTO, WTO,, 1999 168% 2005 101% 6,223 5,685,,,, (tariff peak),,,,,,,,, WTO WTO,, WTO 1 IV,,, WTO GDP, GDP WTO, WTO 90
,, ( ) WTO, <IV- 4>< IV-13>, GDP WTO, WTO, WTO, <IV-5>< IV-12>, WTO,, 34,, 2 WTO 2001 35,,, 2001), 91
,,,,, WTO, WTO WTO WTO, WTO,,, WTO,,,, R&D, WTO,,, (2001), 5%,, 92
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, (, 1999) WTO, (greenfield) (M&A),,,, 3 WTO, WTO IV, WTO, ( IV-9 ), WTO 93
10,,,,,,,,,, (, 1999, p 220), WTO, 2000, 2, 4050%,, 36,,, 94
, 3,, 1996, 93% 501%3, 406%, 90% 427%(1996 )329% MFN,,,,,,, WTO 1,,,, ( ),,,,,, 95
WTO 1999,, 3 WTO, 3, WTO 3,, 3 WTO, 3, WTO 96
[ ] 1997 1995a WTO, 8 4 : pp 6-37 1995b WTO - 1999 WTO 99-09 1995 WTO, 22 5 pp 104-109, 2000 1998 KIET, 21 1994 WTO 2001 8 1992 - : 1999 7 WTO KIEP 1995 GATT/WTO, 94, pp 7-24 1990-1985 - 2000 WTO 1997 1 WTO? -, 39, pp 8-13 1998 WTO 2 612 97
1997, 33 1999 WTO : WTO 1998 21 1-2, pp 24-45 1995 GATT/WTO, 1010: pp 47-56 [ ] 2000 WTO, 1 pp 82-97 2000 (TFP) CGE 2000, Vol 9 No 3 1999 [ ] 1998 1999 98
pp 358-394 1998 WTO 1997 No4, pp 54-65 1996, No12 pp 41-50 1998 1999 [ ] Bach, C, W Martin, and J A Stevens 1996 "China and the WTO: Tariff Offers, Exemptions, and Welfare Implications" Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv, Vol 132, No 3, pp 409-431 Economist, The 1996 "World Trade: All free traders now?" (December 7) 2000 A Survey of China: Now Comes the Hard Part (April 8) Ezaki, M and L Sun 1999 "Growth Accounting of China for National, Regional, and Provincial Economies: 1981-1995" Asian Economic Journal, Vol 13, No1, pp 39-71 Ezaki, M and S Ito 1995 "The Flying-Geese Pattern of Development in East Asia: A General Equilibrium Approach" Discussion Paper No 31 Graduate School of International Development Nagoya University Fan, M and Y Zheng 2000 China s Trade Liberalization for WTO Accession and Its Effects on China A Computable General Equilibrium Analysis Mimeo Peking: Chinese Academy of Social Sciences Feng, L and Y Huang 1997 "China's Trade Liberalization and Structural Adjustments for the World Economy" Asian Economic Journal, Vol 11, No3, pp 283-297 Feng, L and Y Huang 1997 "China's Trade Liberalization and Structural Adjustments for the World Economy," Asian Economic Journal, Vol 11, No 3, pp 283-297 Financial Times 1998 China hopes devaluation stance will boost application for WTO" (March 10) Garbaccio, R F 1995 US-China Trade Relations: 1972-95 Paper presented for the 4 th International Symposium on Societies and Economy in East Asia Osaka Japan (October 2-3) 99
Geest, W V D 1998 "Bring China into the Concert of Nations" Journal of World Trade, Vol 32, No 3, 99-115 Harris, S 1997 "The WTO and APEC: What role for China?" Australian National University AJRC Working Paper No 274 He, L 2000 Impacts of Globalization to China: An Assessment with regard to China s Reforms and Liberalization Paper presented at the 26 th Pacific Trade and Development Conference (PAFTAD 26) June 14-16 Seoul, Korea Hockman, B M and M M Kostecki 1995 The Political Economy of the World Trading System: From GATT to WTO WTO Ianchovichina, E I and R A McDougall 2000 Structure of Dynamic GTAP, GTAP Technical Paper Center for Global Trade Analysis Purdue University W Lafayette, US Lardy, N 1996 "China and the WTO" Brookings Policy Breifing No 10 Washington DC: Brookings Institute Lejour, A 2000 "China and the WTO: the impact on China and the world economy" Presented at the Third Annual Conference on Global Economic Analysis Melbourne Australia (June 27-30) Li, Kai, etc 1997a Trade Protection of the Automobile Industry and Its Impact Research News & Report(Special Issue), no2, APEC Policy Research Center, Chinese Academy of Social Sciences(June) 1997b Trade Protection in China and the Impact of Liberalization to Chinese Economy Research News & Report (Special Issue), no3, APEC Policy Research Center, Chinese Academy of Social Sciences(June) 1997c Effects of Market Protection and Liberalization of the Textile Industry Research News & Report (Special Issue), no4, APEC Policy Research Center, Chinese Academy of Social Sciences(June ) Li, S and F Zhai 2000 The Impact of Accession to WTO on China s Economy Development Research Center, China Maddison, A 1998 Chinese Economic Performance in the Long Run Development Center Studies OECD 100
Martin, W 1993 "Modeling the Post-Reform Chinese Economy" Journal of Policy Modeling, Vol15, pp 545-579 McDougall, R A, A Elbehri, and T P Troung (ed) 1998 Global Trade, Assistance and Protection: The GTAP 4 Data Base Center for Global Trade Analysis Purdue University W Lafayette US People's Republic of China 1998 "IAP (Individual Action Plan on Trade & Investment Liberalization and Facilitation)" APEC Home Page Shengming, Y 1997 "The WTO and China's Trade Strategies in the 1990s a Role for China?" Australian National University AJRC Working Paper No 271 Supachai, P 2001 China s WTO Entry: Key to the New World Trade Order? The 2 nd Urata, S 1994 "Trade Liberalization and Productivity Growth in Asia: Introduction and Major Findings" The Developing Economies, XXXII-4, pp 363-372 USITC 1999 Assessment of the Economic Effects on the US of China's Accession to the WTO Investigation No 332-403 Washington D C: USITC Walmsley, T L and T W Hertel 2000 China s Accession to the WTO: timing is Everything Mimeo Center for Global Trade Analysis Purdue University Wang, Z 1997 China and Taiwan Access to the World Trade Organization: Implications for US Agricultural and Trade Agricultural Trade, Vol 17, pp 239-264 Wang, Z and Z Fan 1998 "Tariff Reduction, Tax Replacement, and Implications for Income Distribution in China" Journal of Comparative Economics, Vol26, pp 358-387 Wei, Z 1998 China's WTO Accession: Commitments and Prospects" Journal of World Trade, Vol 32, No 3, pp 51-75 Werner International Management Consultants 1999 Hourly Labor costs in the Apparel Industry, 1998 New York World Bank 1997 Old Age Security: Pension Reform in China A World Bank Country Study Washington D C: The World Bank WTO 1999 The Legal Text: the result of the Uruguay Round of Multilateral Trade Negotiations Cambridge University Press, p12 Yang, Y 1995 Policy Options for China in the Uruguay Round Trade Liberalization In China and East Asia Trade Policy Volume : China and the World Trading System Pacific Economic Papers 250 (December) 81-826 101
Yang, Y 1996 "China's WTO membership: What's at stake?" The World Economy, Vol 19, No 6, pp 661-682 Zhang, X and P Warr 1995 "China's Entry to GATT: A general Equilibrium Analysis of Tariff Reduction" In China and Asia Trade Policy Volume : China and the World Trading System Pacific Economic Papers 250 (December): 31-319 Zhai, Fan and L Shantong 2000 "The Implications of Accession to WTO on China's Economy" Presented at the Third Annual Conference on Global Economic Analysis Melbourne Australia (June 27-30) Zhang, Y and L K Chenjing 1998 "Trade Impediments and Impact of Liberalization in China" Impediments to Trade in APEC: The Case of China, Indonesia and the Philippines APEC Study Center Institute of Developing Economies Tokyo pp1-82 102
( ) (199511) (199511) (199511) (1995721) (1996222) (2000614) (199511) (19951025) (199511) (199511) (199511) (199511) (199511) (199511) (199511) (19961213) (199593) (199511) (199511) (199539) (199511) (1999210) (1999210) ((1995531) (199511) (199511) (1996522) (2001531) (199591) (19951117) (199511) (1995531) (199511) (1995531) (199511) (199511) (199511) (1995531) (1995826) (2001727) (1995531) (199511) (1997129) (199511) (199511) (199511) (199511) (199511) (1996222) (199511) (199511) (199511) (1995531) (1995912) (1995723) (199511) (199663) (1996121) (199511) (1995730) (199511) (199511) (199511) (1996221) (1996726) (199511) (199511) (199511) (199511) (199571) (199511) (199511) (1995730) (1995723) (199511) (1996410) (199511) (199511) (1996130) (199511) (200098) (19961123) (199511) (19991113) (1996121) (199557) (199511) (2000119) (199511) (199511) (199511) (2000411) (199511) (199511) (199511) (1995421) (1995630) (199511) (199511) (199511) (199511) (199539) (199511) (19961023) (1995531) (1995531) (199535) (19961019) (199511) (199511) (19951213) (1996113) (199511) (199511) (199511) (199511) (1995430) (1997327) (199711) (1995420) (199511) (20001130) (19981220) 103
(199511) (199511) (1995326) (1995531) (1995329) (199531) (199796) (199511) (199511) (199669) (199511) (199511) (199571) (199511) (1996114) (199511) (199511) (199511) (199511) (199511) : 2001 726 : wwwwtoorg 104
< 2> (25% ) 105
106
: WTO 107
Ianchovichina, E I and R A McDougall(2000), Theoretical Structure of Dynamic GTAP 108
109
110
111
112
113
114
Summary Economic Effects of China s WTO Accession and Policy Implications for Korea Inkyo Cheong This study aims to estimate the economic impact of China s accession to the WTO and to find policy implications for the facilitation of trade and investment between Korea and China There are many previous studies on the economic impact of China s membership in the WTO, but most of these estimate the economic impact of the expansion of market access to China, under imaginary scenarios of tariff reduction In contrast, this study analyzes the concession of tariff reduction by item agreed upon in a protocol between China and the US, using the practical liberalization schedule for the estimation of the impact It also makes a qualitative estimate of the impact of the tariff reduction on Korea s major exporting items to China and the improvement of its trade rules closely related to market access, on trade between them According to the results, the following changes will greatly contribute to the improvement of trade between Korea and China: the relaxation of import licensing and quota system; the improvement of state trading rights; and the opening of the government procurement market Especially, the relaxation of import licensing, applied to 25% of total imports to China in 1999, will play the most important role in expediting trade with China Finally, tariff reduction and the improvement of China s trade system will greatly contribute to the expansion of trade between two countries In order to estimate impacts of the expansion of market access to China on the world economy, this study uses a multi sector and multi region CGE model To begin with, the comparative static analysis shows that tariff reduction, following China s accession to the WTO, will improve the welfare and GDP of countries all over the world as well as of China Above all, it is expected that China, whose efficiency in resource allocation is considerably improved from reductions in trade barriers, will enjoy the highest benefits, followed by Japan and Korea In addition, China s international competitiveness will improve with the improved efficiency of its resource allocation According to the results, the improvement of China s international 115
competitiveness will lead to the expansion of its exports ($123 billion), which will exceed the increase in its imports ($117 billion) Accordingly, $600 million in improvements is expected in China s trade balance against the world On the other hand, a considerable portion of its increase in trade is expected to come from trade with Japan and Korea, which were estimated in the analysis to account for 228% and 376% respectively of total increases in China s exports and imports In the short-term, the trade balances of Korea and Japan seem to improve However, if export competition in the world market intensifies, following the improvement of China s international competitiveness, it may have a negative impact on the trade balances of the two countries On the other hand, during the implementation period of its WTO concession, China may suffer some of the social pains of structural adjustment Namely, a shrink in production activity is expected in the industries that so far have been protected by tariff and non-tariff barriers, especially in the automobile and auto parts industries, one of the weakest industries in China Only the apparel industry, in which China has high international competitiveness, seems able to absorb a large number of workers released from weak industries While the static analysis has the advantage of comparing the economic impact of policy changes, it has the disadvantage of being unable to analyze the process of structural adjustment after it Especially, since the implementation of tariff reduction is scheduled to be completed by 2008, it seems to be appropriate to reflect the gradual tariff reduction into the model and analyze its impacts Therefore, this study analyzed its dynamic impacts, by internalizing an investment decision system into the existing static model and establishing a new dynamic model The application of the model shows that in several aspects, the result from the analysis is similar to that of the static analysis For example, the exports and GDP of China were also estimated to increase in the dynamic analysis, which results largely from the increase in inflows of Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) to China, the result appears only in the dynamic analysis In other words, the productivity of production resources will improve for the increase in inflows of the FDI to China, eventually raising its exports and GDP On the other hand, the result shows that most macroeconomic indicators will be improved for 10 years after its membership in the WTO, but thereafter, the rate of improvement tends to lag more or less However, if the facilitation of competition and the increasing returns to scale, through the improvement of its trade system, are reflected, these economic indicators could continue to improve even beyond 116
ten years As in the static analysis, Korea and Japan seem to benefit more than any other country The results from the fact that these three countries are economically and geographically close and have strong complementary relations in trade structure In contrast, Southeast Asian countries, with strong competitive relations with China in trade structure, are expected to suffer losses It also provides implications for Korea that unless an effort is made to strengthen its international competitiveness, through reform and technological innovation, Korea s existing overseas market could collapse in the long-run, with the rise of China Furthermore, in the dynamic analysis, the GDP and welfare of Southeast Asian countries is estimated to record minus growth, stemming from the transfer of FDI from Southeast to Northeast Asia, due to the increase in the expected rate of return on investment of foreign investors, favorable to China The economic growth of China, following its accession to the WTO, may bring about side effects, which include the following: the worsening of pollution across borders in Northeast Asia, due to the expansion of the manufacturing industry in China; the possibility of dumping exports of Chinese agricultural products to the world market; and the intensification of competition among exporters in the third world market China s accession to the WTO implies that policies must be established to minimize side effects and maximize positive effects as discussed above To begin with, China should implement the agreement for its WTO accession thoroughly, which will bring to the country substantial economic benefits by increasing the inflows of FDI through tariff reduction and the improvement of its economic system In addition, the country should introduce policies for minimizing social conflicts generated from structural adjustment in the process of market opening Next, for Korean enterprises, it implies the need for their strategic entry to the Chinese market in response to China s strengthened international competitiveness Mainly, it includes entry to the Chinese market based on competitiveness, the expansion of entry to the service market, the management of brands and the strengthening of marketing for domestic demand, and the diversification of investment schemes, eg, joint investment with Chinese companies Finally, for the Korean government, it implies the need for overcoming conflicts with China, which could be caused by the increased trade and 117
investment It should be focused on the preparation for a logical response against the request of the Chinese government for the correction of trade imbalances between Korea and China and against the sudden increase in the import of cheaply priced Chinese goods to the Korean market (1985) Michigan State University (1995), (, E-mail: ikcheong@kiepgokr) :, (, 1999) -, (, 2000) FTA?(2001) 118