學術產出-Theses
Article View/Open
Publication Export
-
題名 試析世貿組織電子商務複邊談判之前景
The Future of the Plurilateral Negotiations under the WTO Joint Statement Initiative on E-Commerce作者 馮小蓁
Feng, Hsiao Chen貢獻者 楊光華
Yang, Guang-Hwa
馮小蓁
Feng, Hsiao Chen關鍵詞 電子商務聯合聲明倡議
電子商務複邊談判
電子契約
電子簽章與驗證
透明化
開放政府資料
線上消費者保護
垃圾郵件
無紙化貿易
開放網際網路接取
Joint Statement Initiative on Electronic Commerce
Plurilateral negotiations under the WTO Joint Statement Initiative on E-Commerce
Electronic signatures and authentication
Electronic contracts
Online consumer protection
Spam
Open government data
Transparency
Paperless trading
Open internet access日期 2023 上傳時間 1-Sep-2023 15:21:11 (UTC+8) 摘要 在世貿組織電子商務複邊談判展開之初，已有論者指出三大主要參與方在關鍵議題上存有不易化解之分歧。然而，該複邊談判的三位主席卻於2021年底宣布有望於2022年底就大多數談判議題達成共識，之後又表示目標為於2023年底實質完成談判。這究竟僅是鼓舞成員士氣，以利談判之推動？抑或是確實有具體進展而距談判完成不遠？答案將關係到包含我國在內的WTO成員對未來發展電子商務國際規範應採取之策略，故有探究之必要。檢視前述主席聲明中指出已有共識之8項條文，對照主要成員各自已經締結之雙邊或區域貿易協定中可茲對應的電子商務規範，結果發現主要成員在上述8項議題的立場原本即無重大差異，顯非透過本複邊談判才化解歧異，故三位主席表示複邊談判有實質性進展，而對談判前景樂觀應該只是職責所在的表面文章。為了全球電子商務的未來發展，建議包含我國在內的WTO成員，對於上述複邊談判考慮收割部分談判成果之可能性，或在其他場域同步推動電子商務談判。
At the beginning of the World Trade Organization`s e-commerce plurilateral negotiations, some scholar pointed out significant differences among the three major participants on key issues. However, the three co-convenors of the negotiations (including Australia, Japan and Singapore) announced at the end of 2021 that they anticipated reaching consensus on most negotiation issues by the end of 2022, and later on further expressed that the goal would be substantively completing the negotiations by the end of 2023. Is this merely to boost member morale and facilitate negotiation progress, or is there indeed tangible progress that brings the negotiations closer to completion? The answer will affect the strategic direction that WTO members, including my country, should take regarding the development of international norms for e-commerce. Therefore, it is worth of finding out. By comparing the eight issues that the co-convenor’s statements indicated have reached consensus, with the corresponding e-commerce provisions in the bilateral or regional trade agreements signed by the major participants of this plurilateral, there is no significant difference, and obviously it is not the plurilateral negotiation that has resolved the difference. Therefore, the assertion by the three co-convenors that substantive progress has been made in the plurilateral negotiations, and that an optimistic outlook for the negotiation`s prospects might be more a matter of fulfilling their responsibilities than a true representation of the situation. For the future development of global e-commerce, it is recommended that WTO members, including Taiwan, consider whether to early harvest some provisions that have consensus, or on the other hand concurrently pursue e-commerce negotiations in some other fora.參考文獻 一、中文文獻（一）研討會論文薛景文，從Schrems I & II 論美歐隱私權保障落差對於自由貿易規範之影響，第21屆國際經貿法學發展學術研討會，經濟部國際貿易局以及國立政治大學國際經貿組織暨法律研究中心，2021年9月9日。二、外文文獻（一）期刊Antoine Martin & Bryan Mercurio. 2017. Doha Dead and Buried in Nairobi: Lessons for the WTO. Journal of International Trade Law and Policy 16:49-66.Ines Willemyns. 2020. Agreement Forthcoming? A Comparison of EU, US, and Chinese RTAs in Times of Plurilateral E-Commerce Negotiations. Journal of International Economic Law 23:221-244.（二）專書論文Catherine L. Mann and Sarah Cleeland Knight. 2000. Electronic Commerce in the WTO. Pp 253-266 in The WTO After Seattle, 3, edited by Jeffrey Schott. Washington, DC: Institute for International Economics.Craig VanGrasstek. 2013. The conduct of the Doha Round. Pp. 413-461 in The History and Future of the World Trade Organization, Geneva: Atar Roto Presse SA.Henry Gao. 2021. Across the Great Wall. Pp. 295-318 in Artificial Intelligence and International Economic Law, edited by Shin-yi Peng, Ching-Fu Lin and Thomas Sreinz. UK: Cambridge University Press.（三）WTO相關文件Communication from the European Communities and their Member States, Preparations for the 1999 Ministerial Conference, Electronic Commerce, WTO Work Programme on Electronic Commerce, WTO Doc. WT/GC/W/306 (Aug. 9, 1999).Communication from Hong Kong, China; Japan and the Separate Customs Territory of Taiwan, Penghu, Kinmen and Matsu, Discussion Draft Decision for MC11, WTO Doc. JOB/GC/138 (Oct. 6, 2017).Communication from New Zealand, Canada and Ukraine, Joint Statement on Electronic Commerce, Transparency in WTO Negotiations and Application to the JSI E-Commerce Negotiation, WTO. Doc. INF/ECOM/42/Rev.2 (Feb. 10, 2020).Communication from Hong Kong, China; Japan and the Separate Customs Territory of Taiwan, Penghu, Kinmen and Matsu, Discussion Draft Decision for MC11, WTO Doc. JOB/GC/138 (Oct. 6, 2017).Communication from the European Union, Joint Statement on Electronic Commerce EU Proposal for WTO Disciplines and Commitments Relating to Electronic Commerce, WTO Doc. INF/ECOM/22 (Apr. 26, 2019).Communication from China, Joint Statement on Electronic Commerce, WTO Doc. INF/ECOM/19 (Apr. 24, 2019).Joint Ministerial Statement, Declaration on the Establishment of a WTO Informal Work Program for MSMEs, WTO Doc. WT/MIN(17)/58 (Dec. 13, 2017).Joint Ministerial Statement on Investment Facilitation for Development, WTO Doc. WT/MIN(17)/59 (Dec. 13, 2017).Joint Ministerial Statement on Electronic Commerce, WT/MIN(17)/60 (Dec. 13, 2017).Joint Ministerial Statement on Services Domestic Regulation, WT/MIN(17)/61(Dec. 13, 2017).Joint Statement Initiative on Electronic Commerce, WTO Doc. WT/L/1056 (Jan. 25, 2019).Submission by the United States, Work Programme on Electronic Commerce, WTO Doc. WT/GC/16 (Feb. 12, 1999).WTO, Declaration on Global Electronic Commerce adopted on 20 May 1998, WTO Doc. WT/MIN(98)/DEC/2 (May 25, 1998).WTO, Ministerial Decision of 7 December 2013 on Agreement on Trade Facilitation, WTO Doc. WT/MIN(13)/36 (Dec. 7, 2013).WTO, Singapore Ministerial Declaration Adopted on 13 December 1996 ¶¶ 20-21, WTO Doc. WT/MIN(96)/DEC (Dec. 13, 1996).WTO, Nairobi Ministerial Declaration, Adopted on 19 December 2015, ¶ 30, WTO Doc. WT/MIN(15)/DEC (Dec. 19, 2015).WTO, Doha Ministerial Declaration Adopted on 14 November 2001 ¶ 47, WTO Doc. WT/MIN(01)/DEC/1 (Nov. 20, 2001).Work Programme on Electronic Commerce, Communication from Canada, Chile, Colombia, Côte d`Ivoire, the European Union, the Republic of Korea, Mexico, Montenegro, Paraguay, Singapore and Turkey, JOB/GC/97/Rev.3 (Aug. 01, 2016).WTO, Work Programme on Electronic Commerce Draft Ministerial Decision of 13 December 2017, WTO Doc. WT/MIN(17)/W/6 (Dec. 13, 2017).WTO, The Work Programme on Electronic Commerce, Statement by the African Group, ¶ 3.7 WTO Doc. WT/MIN(17)/21 (Dec. 6, 2017).WTO, WTO Electronic Commerce Negotiations, Consolidated Negotiating Text-December 2020, WTO Doc. INF/ECOM/62/Rev.1 (Dec. 14, 2020).Work Programme on Electronic Commerce, Communication from Canada, Chile, Colombia, Côte d`Ivoire, the European Union, the Republic of Korea, Mexico, Montenegro, Paraguay, Singapore and Turkey, JOB/GC/97/Rev.3 (Aug. 01, 2016).WTO, WTO Electronic Commerce Negotiations, Consolidated Negotiating Text-December 2020, WTO Doc. INF/ECOM/62/Rev.1 (Dec. 14, 2020). 描述 碩士
國立政治大學
國際經營與貿易學系
108351046資料來源 http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0108351046 資料類型 thesis dc.contributor.advisor 楊光華 zh_TW dc.contributor.advisor Yang, Guang-Hwa en_US dc.contributor.author (Authors) 馮小蓁 zh_TW dc.contributor.author (Authors) Feng, Hsiao Chen en_US dc.creator (作者) 馮小蓁 zh_TW dc.creator (作者) Feng, Hsiao Chen en_US dc.date (日期) 2023 en_US dc.date.accessioned 1-Sep-2023 15:21:11 (UTC+8) - dc.date.available 1-Sep-2023 15:21:11 (UTC+8) - dc.date.issued (上傳時間) 1-Sep-2023 15:21:11 (UTC+8) - dc.identifier (Other Identifiers) G0108351046 en_US dc.identifier.uri (URI) http://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/147018 - dc.description (描述) 碩士 zh_TW dc.description (描述) 國立政治大學 zh_TW dc.description (描述) 國際經營與貿易學系 zh_TW dc.description (描述) 108351046 zh_TW dc.description.abstract (摘要) 在世貿組織電子商務複邊談判展開之初，已有論者指出三大主要參與方在關鍵議題上存有不易化解之分歧。然而，該複邊談判的三位主席卻於2021年底宣布有望於2022年底就大多數談判議題達成共識，之後又表示目標為於2023年底實質完成談判。這究竟僅是鼓舞成員士氣，以利談判之推動？抑或是確實有具體進展而距談判完成不遠？答案將關係到包含我國在內的WTO成員對未來發展電子商務國際規範應採取之策略，故有探究之必要。檢視前述主席聲明中指出已有共識之8項條文，對照主要成員各自已經締結之雙邊或區域貿易協定中可茲對應的電子商務規範，結果發現主要成員在上述8項議題的立場原本即無重大差異，顯非透過本複邊談判才化解歧異，故三位主席表示複邊談判有實質性進展，而對談判前景樂觀應該只是職責所在的表面文章。為了全球電子商務的未來發展，建議包含我國在內的WTO成員，對於上述複邊談判考慮收割部分談判成果之可能性，或在其他場域同步推動電子商務談判。 zh_TW dc.description.abstract (摘要) At the beginning of the World Trade Organization`s e-commerce plurilateral negotiations, some scholar pointed out significant differences among the three major participants on key issues. However, the three co-convenors of the negotiations (including Australia, Japan and Singapore) announced at the end of 2021 that they anticipated reaching consensus on most negotiation issues by the end of 2022, and later on further expressed that the goal would be substantively completing the negotiations by the end of 2023. Is this merely to boost member morale and facilitate negotiation progress, or is there indeed tangible progress that brings the negotiations closer to completion? The answer will affect the strategic direction that WTO members, including my country, should take regarding the development of international norms for e-commerce. Therefore, it is worth of finding out. By comparing the eight issues that the co-convenor’s statements indicated have reached consensus, with the corresponding e-commerce provisions in the bilateral or regional trade agreements signed by the major participants of this plurilateral, there is no significant difference, and obviously it is not the plurilateral negotiation that has resolved the difference. Therefore, the assertion by the three co-convenors that substantive progress has been made in the plurilateral negotiations, and that an optimistic outlook for the negotiation`s prospects might be more a matter of fulfilling their responsibilities than a true representation of the situation. For the future development of global e-commerce, it is recommended that WTO members, including Taiwan, consider whether to early harvest some provisions that have consensus, or on the other hand concurrently pursue e-commerce negotiations in some other fora. en_US dc.description.tableofcontents 第一章 緒論 1第一節 研究動機與目的 4第二節 研究方法 5第三節 研究架構 7第二章 WTO電子商務談判歷程之回顧 8第一節 WTO電子商務多邊談判發展之困難 8第二節 WTO電子商務談判取徑從多邊轉向複邊 11第三節 電子商務JSI複邊談判之發展狀況 13第三章 複邊談判主要成員間之歧異 16第一節 中國立場上與美、歐之分歧：資料跨境傳輸以及資料在地化 17第二節 美、歐立場間之分歧：個人資料的跨境傳輸 20第三節 小結 22第四章 8項議題於談判之初是否為爭議性議題 24第一節 各體系所參考之RTA或FTA 25第二節 電子契約及電子簽章與驗證 30第三節 線上消費者保護及垃圾郵件 34第四節 透明化及開放政府資料 40第五節 無紙化貿易 44第六節 開放網際網路接取 47第七節 小結 49第五章 結論 51參考文獻 53 zh_TW dc.format.extent 2713818 bytes - dc.format.mimetype application/pdf - dc.source.uri (資料來源) http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0108351046 en_US dc.subject (關鍵詞) 電子商務聯合聲明倡議 zh_TW dc.subject (關鍵詞) 電子商務複邊談判 zh_TW dc.subject (關鍵詞) 電子契約 zh_TW dc.subject (關鍵詞) 電子簽章與驗證 zh_TW dc.subject (關鍵詞) 透明化 zh_TW dc.subject (關鍵詞) 開放政府資料 zh_TW dc.subject (關鍵詞) 線上消費者保護 zh_TW dc.subject (關鍵詞) 垃圾郵件 zh_TW dc.subject (關鍵詞) 無紙化貿易 zh_TW dc.subject (關鍵詞) 開放網際網路接取 zh_TW dc.subject (關鍵詞) Joint Statement Initiative on Electronic Commerce en_US dc.subject (關鍵詞) Plurilateral negotiations under the WTO Joint Statement Initiative on E-Commerce en_US dc.subject (關鍵詞) Electronic signatures and authentication en_US dc.subject (關鍵詞) Electronic contracts en_US dc.subject (關鍵詞) Online consumer protection en_US dc.subject (關鍵詞) Spam en_US dc.subject (關鍵詞) Open government data en_US dc.subject (關鍵詞) Transparency en_US dc.subject (關鍵詞) Paperless trading en_US dc.subject (關鍵詞) Open internet access en_US dc.title (題名) 試析世貿組織電子商務複邊談判之前景 zh_TW dc.title (題名) The Future of the Plurilateral Negotiations under the WTO Joint Statement Initiative on E-Commerce en_US dc.type (資料類型) thesis en_US dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 一、中文文獻（一）研討會論文薛景文，從Schrems I & II 論美歐隱私權保障落差對於自由貿易規範之影響，第21屆國際經貿法學發展學術研討會，經濟部國際貿易局以及國立政治大學國際經貿組織暨法律研究中心，2021年9月9日。二、外文文獻（一）期刊Antoine Martin & Bryan Mercurio. 2017. Doha Dead and Buried in Nairobi: Lessons for the WTO. Journal of International Trade Law and Policy 16:49-66.Ines Willemyns. 2020. Agreement Forthcoming? A Comparison of EU, US, and Chinese RTAs in Times of Plurilateral E-Commerce Negotiations. Journal of International Economic Law 23:221-244.（二）專書論文Catherine L. Mann and Sarah Cleeland Knight. 2000. Electronic Commerce in the WTO. Pp 253-266 in The WTO After Seattle, 3, edited by Jeffrey Schott. Washington, DC: Institute for International Economics.Craig VanGrasstek. 2013. The conduct of the Doha Round. Pp. 413-461 in The History and Future of the World Trade Organization, Geneva: Atar Roto Presse SA.Henry Gao. 2021. Across the Great Wall. Pp. 295-318 in Artificial Intelligence and International Economic Law, edited by Shin-yi Peng, Ching-Fu Lin and Thomas Sreinz. UK: Cambridge University Press.（三）WTO相關文件Communication from the European Communities and their Member States, Preparations for the 1999 Ministerial Conference, Electronic Commerce, WTO Work Programme on Electronic Commerce, WTO Doc. WT/GC/W/306 (Aug. 9, 1999).Communication from Hong Kong, China; Japan and the Separate Customs Territory of Taiwan, Penghu, Kinmen and Matsu, Discussion Draft Decision for MC11, WTO Doc. JOB/GC/138 (Oct. 6, 2017).Communication from New Zealand, Canada and Ukraine, Joint Statement on Electronic Commerce, Transparency in WTO Negotiations and Application to the JSI E-Commerce Negotiation, WTO. Doc. INF/ECOM/42/Rev.2 (Feb. 10, 2020).Communication from Hong Kong, China; Japan and the Separate Customs Territory of Taiwan, Penghu, Kinmen and Matsu, Discussion Draft Decision for MC11, WTO Doc. JOB/GC/138 (Oct. 6, 2017).Communication from the European Union, Joint Statement on Electronic Commerce EU Proposal for WTO Disciplines and Commitments Relating to Electronic Commerce, WTO Doc. INF/ECOM/22 (Apr. 26, 2019).Communication from China, Joint Statement on Electronic Commerce, WTO Doc. INF/ECOM/19 (Apr. 24, 2019).Joint Ministerial Statement, Declaration on the Establishment of a WTO Informal Work Program for MSMEs, WTO Doc. WT/MIN(17)/58 (Dec. 13, 2017).Joint Ministerial Statement on Investment Facilitation for Development, WTO Doc. WT/MIN(17)/59 (Dec. 13, 2017).Joint Ministerial Statement on Electronic Commerce, WT/MIN(17)/60 (Dec. 13, 2017).Joint Ministerial Statement on Services Domestic Regulation, WT/MIN(17)/61(Dec. 13, 2017).Joint Statement Initiative on Electronic Commerce, WTO Doc. WT/L/1056 (Jan. 25, 2019).Submission by the United States, Work Programme on Electronic Commerce, WTO Doc. WT/GC/16 (Feb. 12, 1999).WTO, Declaration on Global Electronic Commerce adopted on 20 May 1998, WTO Doc. WT/MIN(98)/DEC/2 (May 25, 1998).WTO, Ministerial Decision of 7 December 2013 on Agreement on Trade Facilitation, WTO Doc. WT/MIN(13)/36 (Dec. 7, 2013).WTO, Singapore Ministerial Declaration Adopted on 13 December 1996 ¶¶ 20-21, WTO Doc. WT/MIN(96)/DEC (Dec. 13, 1996).WTO, Nairobi Ministerial Declaration, Adopted on 19 December 2015, ¶ 30, WTO Doc. WT/MIN(15)/DEC (Dec. 19, 2015).WTO, Doha Ministerial Declaration Adopted on 14 November 2001 ¶ 47, WTO Doc. WT/MIN(01)/DEC/1 (Nov. 20, 2001).Work Programme on Electronic Commerce, Communication from Canada, Chile, Colombia, Côte d`Ivoire, the European Union, the Republic of Korea, Mexico, Montenegro, Paraguay, Singapore and Turkey, JOB/GC/97/Rev.3 (Aug. 01, 2016).WTO, Work Programme on Electronic Commerce Draft Ministerial Decision of 13 December 2017, WTO Doc. WT/MIN(17)/W/6 (Dec. 13, 2017).WTO, The Work Programme on Electronic Commerce, Statement by the African Group, ¶ 3.7 WTO Doc. WT/MIN(17)/21 (Dec. 6, 2017).WTO, WTO Electronic Commerce Negotiations, Consolidated Negotiating Text-December 2020, WTO Doc. INF/ECOM/62/Rev.1 (Dec. 14, 2020).Work Programme on Electronic Commerce, Communication from Canada, Chile, Colombia, Côte d`Ivoire, the European Union, the Republic of Korea, Mexico, Montenegro, Paraguay, Singapore and Turkey, JOB/GC/97/Rev.3 (Aug. 01, 2016).WTO, WTO Electronic Commerce Negotiations, Consolidated Negotiating Text-December 2020, WTO Doc. INF/ECOM/62/Rev.1 (Dec. 14, 2020). zh_TW
