基于绿色贸易壁垒视域的中国林产品出口贸易研究
|
摘要
随着关税壁垒和传统非关税壁垒作用的弱化,绿色贸易壁垒在国际贸易领域日益盛行,其作用和影响不断强化,对世界经济和国际贸易产生深远影响。作为世界林产品生产和贸易大国,我国林产品出口贸易发展受到绿色贸易壁垒的严重制约,绿色贸易壁垒已经成为我国林产品出口的重要障碍。因此,对林产品绿色贸易壁垒从理论到实证的研究,掌握绿色贸易壁垒的发展趋势,对于促进我国林产品出口贸易健康发展,占有国际市场,分享世界资源,推动林业产业结构升级和资源优化配置,提高林业企业国际竞争力具有重要的理论和现实意义。
本文在对国内外研究成果进行系统梳理的基础上,首先,对绿色贸易壁垒的内涵和本质进行界定,指出绿色贸易壁垒具有双重作用,一方面是修正市场失灵,通过政府制度安排,消除国际贸易的负外部性；另一方面是发达国家以实现社会公共目的为由,设置绿色贸易壁垒限制国外竞争性产品进入,对国内市场和产业提供经济意义上的保护。对绿色贸易壁垒的表现形式进行分析,从而归纳出绿色贸易壁垒的特点,指出由于绿色贸易壁垒具有灵活性、隐蔽性的特点,成为发达国家实施贸易保护的重要工具。
其次,运用制度经济学和博弈理论深入剖析绿色贸易壁垒形成的内在机理,揭示绿色贸易壁垒产生和逐步强化的原因。研究指出,绿色贸易壁垒的形成主要是基于修正市场失灵及各国之间经济和科技发展的不平衡。同时,一国是否设置绿色贸易壁垒,以及以何种程度设置绿色贸易壁垒,实质是各国政府间博弈的必然结果。在不完全信息条件下,发达国家对发展中国家具有主动设置绿色贸易壁垒的倾向性。在此基础上,分析了绿色贸易壁垒的数量控制机制、价格控制机制及动态抑制机制。系统研究了绿色贸易壁垒的经济效应。在理论假设的基础上,运用局部均衡分析方法,分析绿色贸易壁垒对进口国产生的经济效应。研究指出,绿色贸易壁垒的设置对进口国的生产和消费产生重要影响,通过社会福利的变化,可以判定设置绿色贸易壁垒对进口国而言,是否是一种帕累托改进。从贸易效应、贸易条件效应和社会福利效应三个方面,分析了绿色贸易壁垒对出口国产生的经济效应。
再次,分析了我国林产品出口遭遇绿色贸易壁垒的现状,剖析我国受绿色贸易壁垒限制的重点林产品和对我国实施绿色贸易壁垒的重点国家,指出影响我国林产品出口的绿色贸易壁垒主要形式,即严格的绿色技术标准、苛刻的卫生检验检疫措施和各种认证制度。阐释了绿色贸易壁垒的发展趋势,指出绿色贸易壁垒成为技术性贸易壁垒的主要发展方向。运用博弈分析方法,从国际方面和国内方面剖析我国林产品出口遭遇绿色贸易壁垒的深层原因。研究指出,国际贸易保护主义抬头,绿色贸易壁垒实施过程中的多米诺效应,以及绿色贸易壁垒制衡机制的缺失等因素导致我国林产品出口受阻。从理论上分析了绿色贸易壁垒对我国林产品出口贸易的影响。在此基础上,建立扩展的引力模型,定量研究欧盟实施的绿色贸易壁垒对我国木质家具出口的影响。研究显示,欧盟实施的绿色贸易壁垒对我国木质家具出口产生显著的负面影响,绿色技术标准越严格,对我国木质家具出口的阻碍作用越大。我国家具出口企业执行家具行业的国家标准,有利于提高企业的国际竞争力,促进木质家具的出口。我国经济发展水平的提高,对木质家具出口具有明显的推动作用。随着欧盟主要木质家具进口国人均收入的增长,消费者对符合绿色技术标准的木质家具需求增加。欧盟主要家具进口国的人口增长是影响我国木质家具需求的重要因素。
最后,本文分别从宏观、中观和微观三个不同层面,提出我国政府、行业协会和企业应对绿色贸易壁垒的策略,以期为政府和行业主管部门制定政策提供理论依据。
Since the tariff barriers and traditional non-tariff barriers have become weaker, the green trade barriers are becoming increasingly popular in the field of international trade. With the growing role and influence, it exerts a far-reaching impact on the world economy and international trade. As one of the production and trade powers in forest products, China's forest product exports is severely constrained from development by the green trade barriers which have become the major impediment to china's exports of forest products. Therefore, the research on forest products green trade barriers from theory to demonstration aiming to grasp its development trend, has important theoretical and practical significance for stimulating healthy development of china's exports of forest product, capturing international market share, sharing the global resources, and promoting forestry industrial structure upgrade and optimum distribution of resources, in order to improve the international competitiveness of China's forestry enterprises.
Based on a thorough review of relevant research results of green trade barriers at home and abroad, first, the paper defines the connotation and essence of green trade barriers, and indicates that green trade barriers serves the double purpose, playing a role in correction of market failures and elimination of the negative externality of international trade on the one hand, and providing economic protection for their domestic market and the industry for some developed countries who set up green trade barriers to restrict the entry of competitive products abroad on the grounds for achieving social public purpose on the other hand. Based on the analysis of the manifestation of the green trade barriers, the paper summarizes the characteristics of flexibility and hidden nature which makes it become an important tool for developed countries to provide trade protection.
Second, the paper makes a thorough analysis on the inherent mechanism of green trade barriers with institutional economics and game theory, and reveals the gradually strenghen the reasons for the formation of green trade barriers. The results indicate that the formation of green trade barriers is based on the correction of market failure and unbalanced economic and technological development in various countries. At the same time, the essence of setting up green trade barriers by a country and to what extent it is established is the objective results of playing games between governments in various countries, so that developed countries have the initiative of setting up green trade barriers to developing countries. Meanwhile, the paper reveals the quantity control mechanism of green trade barriers, price control mechanism and dynamic inhibition mechanism, and explores systematically the economic effect of green trade barriers. On the basis of theoretical assumptions, the paper analyzes the economic impact of green trade barriers on importing country with a partial equilibrium analytical method. The research points out that green trade barriers have a major impact on production and consumption of the importing country, and determines whether implementation of the green trade barriers is a kind of Pareto improvement for the importing countries based on the changes in social welfare. Under the conditions of exporting country, the paper analyzes the trade effects of green trade barriers, the effect of terms of trade and social welfare effects.
Third, the paper investigates the status of China's forest product exports encountering green trade barriers, analyzes main constrained forest products and major countries on the implementation of green trade barriers in china. It points out that the main forms of green trade barriers affecting forest product trade in China are strict green technology standards, stringent sanitary and phytosanitary measures, various forms of certification system. It states the development trend of green trade barriers and points out which has become the main direction of the development of technical barriers to trade. Through the game analysis, it makes an analysis on the underlying causes of green trade barriers constraint for China's forest product exports from an international and domestic side. It reveals that international trade protectionism, domino effect of green trade barriers in the implementation process, checks and balances of green trade barriers in deficit are the the main reasons for forest products exports obstructed. It reveals theoretically the impact of the green trade barriers on forest product exports in China. With the extended gravitational model, it quantitatively analyzes the impact of European Union's green trade barriers on China's wooden furniture exports. The research results demonstrates the green trade barrier implemented by the EU exerts a significant negative impact on wooden furniture exports of our country. The more stringent standards of green technology, the greater impediment of China's wooden furniture exports, so the implementation of the national standards contributes to enhancing the international competitiveness of furniture industry in China. Raising the level of China's economic development, the exports of wooden furniture are increased.With the growth of per capita income of the importing countries of the EU's main wooden furniture, consumers increased demand for wooden furniture line with the EU's green technology standards. The population growth of the EU main furniture importing countries is an important factor for China's wooden furniture exports.
Finally, the paper respectively proposes the strategies to green trade barriers for the government, industry associations and enterprises from the macro, middle and micro perspectives, in order to provide theoretical support for the government and competent industrial authorities when creating policies.
本文在对国内外研究成果进行系统梳理的基础上,首先,对绿色贸易壁垒的内涵和本质进行界定,指出绿色贸易壁垒具有双重作用,一方面是修正市场失灵,通过政府制度安排,消除国际贸易的负外部性；另一方面是发达国家以实现社会公共目的为由,设置绿色贸易壁垒限制国外竞争性产品进入,对国内市场和产业提供经济意义上的保护。对绿色贸易壁垒的表现形式进行分析,从而归纳出绿色贸易壁垒的特点,指出由于绿色贸易壁垒具有灵活性、隐蔽性的特点,成为发达国家实施贸易保护的重要工具。
其次,运用制度经济学和博弈理论深入剖析绿色贸易壁垒形成的内在机理,揭示绿色贸易壁垒产生和逐步强化的原因。研究指出,绿色贸易壁垒的形成主要是基于修正市场失灵及各国之间经济和科技发展的不平衡。同时,一国是否设置绿色贸易壁垒,以及以何种程度设置绿色贸易壁垒,实质是各国政府间博弈的必然结果。在不完全信息条件下,发达国家对发展中国家具有主动设置绿色贸易壁垒的倾向性。在此基础上,分析了绿色贸易壁垒的数量控制机制、价格控制机制及动态抑制机制。系统研究了绿色贸易壁垒的经济效应。在理论假设的基础上,运用局部均衡分析方法,分析绿色贸易壁垒对进口国产生的经济效应。研究指出,绿色贸易壁垒的设置对进口国的生产和消费产生重要影响,通过社会福利的变化,可以判定设置绿色贸易壁垒对进口国而言,是否是一种帕累托改进。从贸易效应、贸易条件效应和社会福利效应三个方面,分析了绿色贸易壁垒对出口国产生的经济效应。
再次,分析了我国林产品出口遭遇绿色贸易壁垒的现状,剖析我国受绿色贸易壁垒限制的重点林产品和对我国实施绿色贸易壁垒的重点国家,指出影响我国林产品出口的绿色贸易壁垒主要形式,即严格的绿色技术标准、苛刻的卫生检验检疫措施和各种认证制度。阐释了绿色贸易壁垒的发展趋势,指出绿色贸易壁垒成为技术性贸易壁垒的主要发展方向。运用博弈分析方法,从国际方面和国内方面剖析我国林产品出口遭遇绿色贸易壁垒的深层原因。研究指出,国际贸易保护主义抬头,绿色贸易壁垒实施过程中的多米诺效应,以及绿色贸易壁垒制衡机制的缺失等因素导致我国林产品出口受阻。从理论上分析了绿色贸易壁垒对我国林产品出口贸易的影响。在此基础上,建立扩展的引力模型,定量研究欧盟实施的绿色贸易壁垒对我国木质家具出口的影响。研究显示,欧盟实施的绿色贸易壁垒对我国木质家具出口产生显著的负面影响,绿色技术标准越严格,对我国木质家具出口的阻碍作用越大。我国家具出口企业执行家具行业的国家标准,有利于提高企业的国际竞争力,促进木质家具的出口。我国经济发展水平的提高,对木质家具出口具有明显的推动作用。随着欧盟主要木质家具进口国人均收入的增长,消费者对符合绿色技术标准的木质家具需求增加。欧盟主要家具进口国的人口增长是影响我国木质家具需求的重要因素。
最后,本文分别从宏观、中观和微观三个不同层面,提出我国政府、行业协会和企业应对绿色贸易壁垒的策略,以期为政府和行业主管部门制定政策提供理论依据。
Since the tariff barriers and traditional non-tariff barriers have become weaker, the green trade barriers are becoming increasingly popular in the field of international trade. With the growing role and influence, it exerts a far-reaching impact on the world economy and international trade. As one of the production and trade powers in forest products, China's forest product exports is severely constrained from development by the green trade barriers which have become the major impediment to china's exports of forest products. Therefore, the research on forest products green trade barriers from theory to demonstration aiming to grasp its development trend, has important theoretical and practical significance for stimulating healthy development of china's exports of forest product, capturing international market share, sharing the global resources, and promoting forestry industrial structure upgrade and optimum distribution of resources, in order to improve the international competitiveness of China's forestry enterprises.
Based on a thorough review of relevant research results of green trade barriers at home and abroad, first, the paper defines the connotation and essence of green trade barriers, and indicates that green trade barriers serves the double purpose, playing a role in correction of market failures and elimination of the negative externality of international trade on the one hand, and providing economic protection for their domestic market and the industry for some developed countries who set up green trade barriers to restrict the entry of competitive products abroad on the grounds for achieving social public purpose on the other hand. Based on the analysis of the manifestation of the green trade barriers, the paper summarizes the characteristics of flexibility and hidden nature which makes it become an important tool for developed countries to provide trade protection.
Second, the paper makes a thorough analysis on the inherent mechanism of green trade barriers with institutional economics and game theory, and reveals the gradually strenghen the reasons for the formation of green trade barriers. The results indicate that the formation of green trade barriers is based on the correction of market failure and unbalanced economic and technological development in various countries. At the same time, the essence of setting up green trade barriers by a country and to what extent it is established is the objective results of playing games between governments in various countries, so that developed countries have the initiative of setting up green trade barriers to developing countries. Meanwhile, the paper reveals the quantity control mechanism of green trade barriers, price control mechanism and dynamic inhibition mechanism, and explores systematically the economic effect of green trade barriers. On the basis of theoretical assumptions, the paper analyzes the economic impact of green trade barriers on importing country with a partial equilibrium analytical method. The research points out that green trade barriers have a major impact on production and consumption of the importing country, and determines whether implementation of the green trade barriers is a kind of Pareto improvement for the importing countries based on the changes in social welfare. Under the conditions of exporting country, the paper analyzes the trade effects of green trade barriers, the effect of terms of trade and social welfare effects.
Third, the paper investigates the status of China's forest product exports encountering green trade barriers, analyzes main constrained forest products and major countries on the implementation of green trade barriers in china. It points out that the main forms of green trade barriers affecting forest product trade in China are strict green technology standards, stringent sanitary and phytosanitary measures, various forms of certification system. It states the development trend of green trade barriers and points out which has become the main direction of the development of technical barriers to trade. Through the game analysis, it makes an analysis on the underlying causes of green trade barriers constraint for China's forest product exports from an international and domestic side. It reveals that international trade protectionism, domino effect of green trade barriers in the implementation process, checks and balances of green trade barriers in deficit are the the main reasons for forest products exports obstructed. It reveals theoretically the impact of the green trade barriers on forest product exports in China. With the extended gravitational model, it quantitatively analyzes the impact of European Union's green trade barriers on China's wooden furniture exports. The research results demonstrates the green trade barrier implemented by the EU exerts a significant negative impact on wooden furniture exports of our country. The more stringent standards of green technology, the greater impediment of China's wooden furniture exports, so the implementation of the national standards contributes to enhancing the international competitiveness of furniture industry in China. Raising the level of China's economic development, the exports of wooden furniture are increased.With the growth of per capita income of the importing countries of the EU's main wooden furniture, consumers increased demand for wooden furniture line with the EU's green technology standards. The population growth of the EU main furniture importing countries is an important factor for China's wooden furniture exports.
Finally, the paper respectively proposes the strategies to green trade barriers for the government, industry associations and enterprises from the macro, middle and micro perspectives, in order to provide theoretical support for the government and competent industrial authorities when creating policies.
引文
[1]宣亚南.绿色贸易保护与中国农产品贸易研究.南京农业大学博士论文,2002：112
[2]Josling,T. EU-US Trade Conflicts over Food Safety Legislation:An Economists's Viewpoint on Legal Stress Points That Will Concern the Industry.Paper Presented at the Forum for US-EU Legal-Economic Affairs, Helsinki,1999, (9):16-19
[3]Essaji, Azim, Technical Regulations and Specialization in International Trade. Journal of International Economics,2008,76(3):166-176
[4]Duncan Brack. International Trade and the Environment. International, Domestic and Regional Perspectives,1995, (10):133-145
[5]David J. Hornsby. WTO effectiveness in resolving transatlantic trade-environment conflict. Journal of International Trade Law and Policy,2010,9(3):297-309
[6]Meeta Keswani Mehra. Interaction between trade and environment policies with special-interest politics. Indian Growth and Development Review,2010,3(2):138-165
[7]Arrow, k.J., M.L. Cropper, GC.Eads etal. Is There a Role for Benefit-Cost Analysis in Environmental, Health and Safety Regulation? Science,1996, (272):221-232
[8]Engel, Charles, John. Rogers. How Wide is the Border. American Economic Review, 1996,86(5):1112-1125
[9]Susmu Imai etc. Protection for sale or surge protection? European Economic Review,2009, (53):675-688
[10]Keith E. Maskus, John S. Wilson.Quantifying the Impact of Technical Barriers to Trade:A Review of Past Attemps and the New Policy Context.Paper prepared for the World the Bank Workshop on "Quantifying the Trade Effect of Standards and Technical Barriers:Is it Possible?" 2000,4(27):Department of Economics,University of Colorado at Boulder
[11]Lionel Fontagne etal. A First Assessment of Environement-Related Trade Barriers.CEPII, Document detravail,2001:125 - 137
[12]Stum, Daniel M. Product Standards, Trade Disputes, and Protection. Canadian Economics Association,2006,39(2):564-581
[13]Das, Donnenfeld. Trade Policy and its Impact on Quality of Imports:A Welfare Analysis. Journal of International Economics.1987, (23):77-95
[14]Brander, Spence. Export Subsidies Market Share Rivalry. Journal of International Economic,1985, (18):83-100
[15]Barret, Christopher. Understanding Uneven Agricultral Liberaliaztion in Madagascar. The Journal of Modern African Studies,1994, (3):449-476
[16]H.C.Wallin.Why do food analyst need quality assurance? Accreditation and Quality Assurance,1996, (1):163 -170
[17]Henson, Spencer, Rupert Loader. Impact of Sanitary and Phytosanitary Standards on Developing Countries and the Role of the SPS Agreement. American Journal of Agricultural Ecomomics,1999,80(1):275 - 292
[18]John, S.,Wilson, Mirvat. Sewadeh. Saving Two in a Billion:A Case Study to Quantify the Trade Effect of European Food Safety Standards in African Exports. Food Policy, 2001,(26):495-514
[19]Christopher, B. Barret. Rational Incompatility with International Product Standards. Journal of International Economics,2001, (54):171-191
[20]Wye, Ashford, Kent. Impact of EU Oranic Product Certification Legislation on Chile Organic Exports. Food Policy,2004, (29):1-14
[21]Gebrehiwet, Y, S. Ngqangweni, J. F. Kirsten. Quantifying the Trade Effect of Sanitary and Phytosanitary Regulations of OECD Countries on South African Food Exports. Agrekon,2007,46 (1):23-29
[22]Chen, M. X. and A. Mattoo, Regionalism in Standards:Good or Bad for Trade? Canadian Journal of Economics,2008, (41):838-863
[23]Stefan Bojnec, Imre Ferto. Internet and international food industry trade. Industrial Management & Data Systems,2010,(5):744-761
[24]Lekha Laxman, Abdul Haseeb Ansari. GMOs, safety concerns and international trade: developing countries perspective, Journal of International Trade Law and Policy,2011,10 (3):281-307
[25]Mehmet Haluk Koksal, Tarek Kettaneh. Export problems experienced by high and low performing manufacturing companies:A comparative study. Asia Pacific Journal of Marketing and Logistics,2011,23(1):108-126
[26]Steven W. Popper, Victoria Greenfield, et al. Measuring Economic Effects of Technical Barriers to Trade on U.S. Working Paper of Export. Research and Development (RAND), 2004:95-100
[27]Anderson, J. and E.Van Wincoop, Trade Costs. Journal of Economic Literature,2004, (3):691-751
[28]Calvin, L.,B. Krissoff. Technical Barriers to Trade:A Case Study of Phytosanitary Barriers and U.S.-Japanese Apple Trade. Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, 1998,23(2):351-366
[29]Henry de Frahan, Bruno, and M. Vancauteren, Harmonization of Food Regulatons and Trade in the Single Market:Evidence from Disaggregated Data. European Review of Agricultural Economics,2006, (3):37-42
[30]Swann, P., P. Temple, M. Shunner. Standards and Trade Performance:The UK Experience. Economic Journal,1996, (106):1297-1313
[31]Czubala, Witold, Ben Chepherd, Mark Shurmer.Help or Hindrance? The Impact of Harmonized Standards on African Exports. The Journal of Modern African Studies, 2007,(4):396-401
[32]Jayasinghe, Sampath, John C. Beghin, GianCarlo Moschni. Determinants of World Demand for U. S. Corn Seed:The Role of Trade Costs. Working Paper.09-WP484,2009
[33]Thimany, Dawn D., Chrisropher B, Harret. Regulatory Barriers in an Integrating World Food Market. Review of Agricultural Economics,2007,19 (3):93-101
[34]Wilson, J.S. and T. Otsuki, To Spray or not to Spray:Pesticides, Banana Exports and Food Safety. Food Policy,2004,29(2):131-145
[35]Harrison,Glenn W.,Thomas F. Rutherford, David GTarr. Increased Competition and Completion of the Market in the European Union:Static and Steady State Effects. Journal of Economic Integration,1996, (3):332-365
[36]Yue, C., Beghin, J.C. and H. Jensen, Tariff equivalent of technical barriers to trade with imperfect substitution and trade costs. American Journal of Agricultural Economics,2008, 88(4):947-960
[37]Henry de Frahan, Bruno, and M. Vanauteren, Harmonization of Food Regulations and Trade in the Single Market:Evidence from Disaggregated Data. European Review of Agricultural Economic,2006,33(3):37-60
[38]Disder, A.-C., Fontagne, L. and M. Mimoui, The Impact of Regulations on Agricultural Trade:Evidence from SPS and TBT Agreements. American Journal of Agricultural Economics,2008,90(2):336-350
[39]Alberto, Portugal-Perez, Jose-Daniel Reyes and John S.Wilson, Beyond the Information Technology Agreement Harmonization of Standards and Trade in Electronics.The World Bank Working Paper No.4916,2009
[40]Abdul Haseeb Ansari, Nik Ahmad Kamal Nik Mahmod. Biosafety Protocol, SPS Agreement and export and import control of LMOs/GMOs. Journal of International Trade Law and Policy,2008,7(2):139-170
[41]Silpa Sagheer, Surendra S. Yadav, S.G. Deshmukh. An application of interpretative structural modeling of the compliance to food standards. International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management,2009,58(2):136-159
[42]吴玉萍.国际贸易中的绿色贸易壁垒.世界经济与政治,1995,(1)：45-48
[43]张宝珍.绿色壁垒：国际贸易保护主义的新动向.世界经济,1996,(12)：32-35
[44]冯德连.突破绿色贸易壁垒：政府策略的定位和细分.财贸研究,1998,(4)：1-4
[45]鲁丹萍.国际贸易壁垒战略研究.北京：人民出版社,2006：26
[46]朱永杰,刘俊昌.中国加入WTO后的林业对外政策问题研究.中国林业出版社,2004：182
[47]曾凡银.绿色壁垒的壳层结构及其效应研究.财贸经济,2004,(6)：70～74
[48]张媛媛.绿色贸易壁垒宏微观分析及应对策略.价格月刊,2009,(12)：23-25
[49]袁伟,贾建华.谈绿色贸易壁垒的新特征及对我国出口贸易的影响.商业时代,2011,(11)：15～18
[50]陈曙光.绿色贸易壁垒的WTO法律根源与对策.经济与社会发展,2007,(2)：25-26
[51]姜红.绿色贸易壁垒的经济效应分析.晋阳学刊,2007,(1)：34-37
[52]武力超.绿色贸易壁垒的国际比较及对我国的借鉴意义.理论与现代化,2010,(1)：42～48
[53]邵帆.绿色贸易壁垒成因的博弈分析.价格月刊,2011,,(08)：61-64
[54]邱亦雄,杨刚.绿色贸易壁垒对中国林产品出口的影响及对策.国际贸易问题,2007,(5)：23～28
[55]姜书竹,刘鹏.影响木制家具出口的贸易壁垒及对策.林业经济问题,2008,(6)：227-230
[56]郑仰南.绿色贸易壁垒对中国林产品出口贸易的影响及对策.中国林业企业,2004,(11)：12～15
[57]孙顶强,尹润生.全球林产品贸易格局变化及相关问题讨论.林业经济,2006,(5)：74～80
[58]米锋,吴卫红,杨静.森林认证对中国林产品进出口贸易的影响.防护林科技,2008,(6)：59～62
[59]宋维明,印中华.应对国际林产品贸易面临的新挑战.世界林业研究,2010,(5)：1-5
[60]李岩.突破绿色壁垒——林产品出口发展之路.中国人造板,2009,(12)：5～10
[61]李旋.绿色贸易壁垒对我国茶叶出口的影响分析.暨南大学硕士学位论文,2006：48
[62]王巾.浙江对日茶叶出口贸易研究—基于贸易引力模型.现代商贸,2010,(1)：100-103
[63]杨雅欣.基于引力模型的绿色贸易壁垒对我国食用菌出口影响研究.现代商贸工业,2010,(12)：117～119
[64]余佶.技术性贸易壁垒对农产品国际贸易的影响—一个经济学分析框架.上海：上海社会科学出版社,2009：22
[65]山丽杰.基于绿色壁垒制度框架下的中国蔬菜出口贸易研究.江南大学博士学位论文,2008：23
[66]王金南,夏友富.绿色壁垒与国际贸易.北京：中国环境科学出版社,2002：3
[67]姜国庆,王义龙.绿色贸易制度形成及演变.商业经济,2009,(11)：86-87
[68]联合国粮农组织林业部.森林资源综合利用.北京：中国农业科技出版社,1996：22
[69]程宝栋,张英豪,赵桂梅.世界林产品贸易发展现状及趋势分析.林产工业,2011,(4)：3-7
[70]夏自谦,董彬.世界林产品贸易状况及前景分析.北京林业大学学报(社会科学版),2002,(2)：28～31
[71]高爱芳.我国林产品出口贸易分析.国际贸易,2010,(4)：78～80
[72]唐宏,蒋敏元.大力培育森林资源,调整林产品贸易对策.哈尔滨商业大学学报(社会科学版),2005,(1)：49-52
[73]臧奇,缪冬玲,宋维明.金融危机对中国人造板出口的影响及对策.重庆科技学院学报(社会科学版),2010,(1)：23～25
[74]张克萍.强化木地板出口美国、加拿大的贸易壁垒探析.福建林业科技,2010,(3)：125～127
[75]杨丽华,尹利华.新形势下中国林产品贸易的困境与对策探讨.林业经济问题,2011,(4)：26～29
[76]林凤鸣,罗信坚.2008年我国主要林产品贸易分析—出口篇.人造板,2009,(9)：45-48
[77]张寒,聂影.中国林产品出口增长的动因分析：1997-2008.中国农村经济,2008,(4)：11～15
[78]叶克林,熊满珍.中美林产品贸易特点及发展趋势.木材工业,2009,(1)：7-110
[79]刘卓钦,张瑞,张志辉,郭仁宏.美国S.1600复合木制品甲醛标准法案的内容、影响及对策.检验检疫学刊,2011,(1)：74-76
[80]张英.欧盟绿色贸易壁垒新特点及对策研究.山东社会科学,2007,(8)：70-72
[81]张二槐.绿色贸易壁垒对我国家具企业出口的影响及对策分析.南京林业大学硕士学位论文,2009：44
[82]周中林.绿色壁垒理论与实证研究.北京：中国农业出版社,2009：84
[83]曹丹,包从军.如何解读木制品出口的“绿色贸易壁垒”.中国检验检疫,2011,(4)：27-28
[84]姜春前,徐秀英,于玲,沈月琴.中国木质林产品出口面临的技术性贸易壁垒研究.世界林业研究,2005,(5)：52-55
[85]于丹,孙志刚,刘鑫.森林认证对森林经营和林产品贸易的影响.林业勘查设计,2009,(4)：14～15
[86]黄晓玲,杨建州,谢志忠.林业企业实施森林认证与林产品贸易发展的规范分析.福建农业大学学报(哲学社会科学版),2009,(12)：42-45
[87]王连茂,程宝栋,唐帅.《雷斯法案》修正案对中美木质家具出口影响及对策分析.江西林业科技,2011,(1)：38～41
[88]印中华,李剑泉,田禾,周馥华,李智勇.欧盟木材法案对林产品国际贸易的影响及中国应对策略.农业现代化研究,2011,(5)：537-541
[89]刘小丽,郑小贤.FSC在我国的发展现状与趋势分析.北京林业大学学报(社会科学版),2010,(9)：86-90
[90]姜鹏芳.技术性贸易壁垒对我国茶叶出口的影响分析.经贸广场,2009,(3)：36-38
[91]夏菲.新一轮贸易保护主义的兴起与我国应对策略.中国集体经济,2009,(8)：114-115
[92]王群.生态文明背景下的林产品贸易绿色技术创新问题研究.江苏商论,2011,(2)：35～37
[93]李双元,李先波.世界贸易(WTO)法律问题专题研究.北京：中国方正出版社,2003：65
[94]王凡非,钱小瑜.我国人造板工业生产、贸易现状与展望.林产工业,2009,(5)：3-6
[95]邹望坤,欧阳叙回,邹悦.国际金融危机中我国林产品贸易现状与对策.湖南林业科技,2009,(3)：41～44
[96]韩雪琴.技术性贸易壁垒对我国出口贸易的影响及我国的应对措施.商业经济,2008,(4)：25～27
[97]王焕曦,孙炳娜.技术性贸易壁垒的形成机制与应对策略.东北林业大学学报,2010,(1)：57～61
[98]初光杰.从GATT到WTO框架下贸易与环境相关问题研究.亚太经济,2004,(5)：16
[99]朱光前.2010年我国木材及木制品市场概况及对2011年市场形势预测.中国人造板,2011,(6)：28～33
[100]鲍中华.技术性贸易壁垒的量度工具及其应用研究：文献述评.财贸经济,2010,(6)：89-97
[101]James Scott. Developing countries in the ITO and GATT negotiations. Journal of International Trade Law and Policy,2010,9(1):5-24
[102]Christopher E.S. Warburton. International trade law and trade theory. Journal of International Trade Law and Policy,2010,9(1):64-82
[103]Neelesh Gounder, Biman Chand Prasad. Regional trade agreements and the new theory of trade:Implications for trade policy in Pacific Island countries. Journal of International Trade Law and Policy,2011,10(1):49-63
[104]David J. Hornsby. WTO effectiveness in resolving transatlantic trade-environment conflict. Journal of International Trade Law and Policy,2010,9(3):297-309
[105]Mervyn Martin, Maryam Shademan Pajouh. Rebalancing the balance:How the WTO's HR policy impacts on its very objectives for welfare enhancement and development. Journal of International Trade Law and Policy,2011,10(3):243-254
[106]闫永哲.进化博弈论视角下的中美贸易摩擦问题.浙江纺织服装技术学院学报,2010,(3)：57-62
[107]邵华亮,郑进,姜纲炳.林业产业发展中的问题及对策分析.现代农业科学,2009,(4)：243～244
[108]王满.林业产业发展现状的分析与思考.林业经济,2009,(3)：3-5
[109]周洁敏.焦点透视中国林业产业发展潜力.中国林业产业,2009,(65)：46-47
[110]王群.WTO框架下林产品贸易与环境保护关系问题探讨.世界林业研究,2007,(6)：65～69
[2]Josling,T. EU-US Trade Conflicts over Food Safety Legislation:An Economists's Viewpoint on Legal Stress Points That Will Concern the Industry.Paper Presented at the Forum for US-EU Legal-Economic Affairs, Helsinki,1999, (9):16-19
[3]Essaji, Azim, Technical Regulations and Specialization in International Trade. Journal of International Economics,2008,76(3):166-176
[4]Duncan Brack. International Trade and the Environment. International, Domestic and Regional Perspectives,1995, (10):133-145
[5]David J. Hornsby. WTO effectiveness in resolving transatlantic trade-environment conflict. Journal of International Trade Law and Policy,2010,9(3):297-309
[6]Meeta Keswani Mehra. Interaction between trade and environment policies with special-interest politics. Indian Growth and Development Review,2010,3(2):138-165
[7]Arrow, k.J., M.L. Cropper, GC.Eads etal. Is There a Role for Benefit-Cost Analysis in Environmental, Health and Safety Regulation? Science,1996, (272):221-232
[8]Engel, Charles, John. Rogers. How Wide is the Border. American Economic Review, 1996,86(5):1112-1125
[9]Susmu Imai etc. Protection for sale or surge protection? European Economic Review,2009, (53):675-688
[10]Keith E. Maskus, John S. Wilson.Quantifying the Impact of Technical Barriers to Trade:A Review of Past Attemps and the New Policy Context.Paper prepared for the World the Bank Workshop on "Quantifying the Trade Effect of Standards and Technical Barriers:Is it Possible?" 2000,4(27):Department of Economics,University of Colorado at Boulder
[11]Lionel Fontagne etal. A First Assessment of Environement-Related Trade Barriers.CEPII, Document detravail,2001:125 - 137
[12]Stum, Daniel M. Product Standards, Trade Disputes, and Protection. Canadian Economics Association,2006,39(2):564-581
[13]Das, Donnenfeld. Trade Policy and its Impact on Quality of Imports:A Welfare Analysis. Journal of International Economics.1987, (23):77-95
[14]Brander, Spence. Export Subsidies Market Share Rivalry. Journal of International Economic,1985, (18):83-100
[15]Barret, Christopher. Understanding Uneven Agricultral Liberaliaztion in Madagascar. The Journal of Modern African Studies,1994, (3):449-476
[16]H.C.Wallin.Why do food analyst need quality assurance? Accreditation and Quality Assurance,1996, (1):163 -170
[17]Henson, Spencer, Rupert Loader. Impact of Sanitary and Phytosanitary Standards on Developing Countries and the Role of the SPS Agreement. American Journal of Agricultural Ecomomics,1999,80(1):275 - 292
[18]John, S.,Wilson, Mirvat. Sewadeh. Saving Two in a Billion:A Case Study to Quantify the Trade Effect of European Food Safety Standards in African Exports. Food Policy, 2001,(26):495-514
[19]Christopher, B. Barret. Rational Incompatility with International Product Standards. Journal of International Economics,2001, (54):171-191
[20]Wye, Ashford, Kent. Impact of EU Oranic Product Certification Legislation on Chile Organic Exports. Food Policy,2004, (29):1-14
[21]Gebrehiwet, Y, S. Ngqangweni, J. F. Kirsten. Quantifying the Trade Effect of Sanitary and Phytosanitary Regulations of OECD Countries on South African Food Exports. Agrekon,2007,46 (1):23-29
[22]Chen, M. X. and A. Mattoo, Regionalism in Standards:Good or Bad for Trade? Canadian Journal of Economics,2008, (41):838-863
[23]Stefan Bojnec, Imre Ferto. Internet and international food industry trade. Industrial Management & Data Systems,2010,(5):744-761
[24]Lekha Laxman, Abdul Haseeb Ansari. GMOs, safety concerns and international trade: developing countries perspective, Journal of International Trade Law and Policy,2011,10 (3):281-307
[25]Mehmet Haluk Koksal, Tarek Kettaneh. Export problems experienced by high and low performing manufacturing companies:A comparative study. Asia Pacific Journal of Marketing and Logistics,2011,23(1):108-126
[26]Steven W. Popper, Victoria Greenfield, et al. Measuring Economic Effects of Technical Barriers to Trade on U.S. Working Paper of Export. Research and Development (RAND), 2004:95-100
[27]Anderson, J. and E.Van Wincoop, Trade Costs. Journal of Economic Literature,2004, (3):691-751
[28]Calvin, L.,B. Krissoff. Technical Barriers to Trade:A Case Study of Phytosanitary Barriers and U.S.-Japanese Apple Trade. Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, 1998,23(2):351-366
[29]Henry de Frahan, Bruno, and M. Vancauteren, Harmonization of Food Regulatons and Trade in the Single Market:Evidence from Disaggregated Data. European Review of Agricultural Economics,2006, (3):37-42
[30]Swann, P., P. Temple, M. Shunner. Standards and Trade Performance:The UK Experience. Economic Journal,1996, (106):1297-1313
[31]Czubala, Witold, Ben Chepherd, Mark Shurmer.Help or Hindrance? The Impact of Harmonized Standards on African Exports. The Journal of Modern African Studies, 2007,(4):396-401
[32]Jayasinghe, Sampath, John C. Beghin, GianCarlo Moschni. Determinants of World Demand for U. S. Corn Seed:The Role of Trade Costs. Working Paper.09-WP484,2009
[33]Thimany, Dawn D., Chrisropher B, Harret. Regulatory Barriers in an Integrating World Food Market. Review of Agricultural Economics,2007,19 (3):93-101
[34]Wilson, J.S. and T. Otsuki, To Spray or not to Spray:Pesticides, Banana Exports and Food Safety. Food Policy,2004,29(2):131-145
[35]Harrison,Glenn W.,Thomas F. Rutherford, David GTarr. Increased Competition and Completion of the Market in the European Union:Static and Steady State Effects. Journal of Economic Integration,1996, (3):332-365
[36]Yue, C., Beghin, J.C. and H. Jensen, Tariff equivalent of technical barriers to trade with imperfect substitution and trade costs. American Journal of Agricultural Economics,2008, 88(4):947-960
[37]Henry de Frahan, Bruno, and M. Vanauteren, Harmonization of Food Regulations and Trade in the Single Market:Evidence from Disaggregated Data. European Review of Agricultural Economic,2006,33(3):37-60
[38]Disder, A.-C., Fontagne, L. and M. Mimoui, The Impact of Regulations on Agricultural Trade:Evidence from SPS and TBT Agreements. American Journal of Agricultural Economics,2008,90(2):336-350
[39]Alberto, Portugal-Perez, Jose-Daniel Reyes and John S.Wilson, Beyond the Information Technology Agreement Harmonization of Standards and Trade in Electronics.The World Bank Working Paper No.4916,2009
[40]Abdul Haseeb Ansari, Nik Ahmad Kamal Nik Mahmod. Biosafety Protocol, SPS Agreement and export and import control of LMOs/GMOs. Journal of International Trade Law and Policy,2008,7(2):139-170
[41]Silpa Sagheer, Surendra S. Yadav, S.G. Deshmukh. An application of interpretative structural modeling of the compliance to food standards. International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management,2009,58(2):136-159
[42]吴玉萍.国际贸易中的绿色贸易壁垒.世界经济与政治,1995,(1)：45-48
[43]张宝珍.绿色壁垒：国际贸易保护主义的新动向.世界经济,1996,(12)：32-35
[44]冯德连.突破绿色贸易壁垒：政府策略的定位和细分.财贸研究,1998,(4)：1-4
[45]鲁丹萍.国际贸易壁垒战略研究.北京：人民出版社,2006：26
[46]朱永杰,刘俊昌.中国加入WTO后的林业对外政策问题研究.中国林业出版社,2004：182
[47]曾凡银.绿色壁垒的壳层结构及其效应研究.财贸经济,2004,(6)：70～74
[48]张媛媛.绿色贸易壁垒宏微观分析及应对策略.价格月刊,2009,(12)：23-25
[49]袁伟,贾建华.谈绿色贸易壁垒的新特征及对我国出口贸易的影响.商业时代,2011,(11)：15～18
[50]陈曙光.绿色贸易壁垒的WTO法律根源与对策.经济与社会发展,2007,(2)：25-26
[51]姜红.绿色贸易壁垒的经济效应分析.晋阳学刊,2007,(1)：34-37
[52]武力超.绿色贸易壁垒的国际比较及对我国的借鉴意义.理论与现代化,2010,(1)：42～48
[53]邵帆.绿色贸易壁垒成因的博弈分析.价格月刊,2011,,(08)：61-64
[54]邱亦雄,杨刚.绿色贸易壁垒对中国林产品出口的影响及对策.国际贸易问题,2007,(5)：23～28
[55]姜书竹,刘鹏.影响木制家具出口的贸易壁垒及对策.林业经济问题,2008,(6)：227-230
[56]郑仰南.绿色贸易壁垒对中国林产品出口贸易的影响及对策.中国林业企业,2004,(11)：12～15
[57]孙顶强,尹润生.全球林产品贸易格局变化及相关问题讨论.林业经济,2006,(5)：74～80
[58]米锋,吴卫红,杨静.森林认证对中国林产品进出口贸易的影响.防护林科技,2008,(6)：59～62
[59]宋维明,印中华.应对国际林产品贸易面临的新挑战.世界林业研究,2010,(5)：1-5
[60]李岩.突破绿色壁垒——林产品出口发展之路.中国人造板,2009,(12)：5～10
[61]李旋.绿色贸易壁垒对我国茶叶出口的影响分析.暨南大学硕士学位论文,2006：48
[62]王巾.浙江对日茶叶出口贸易研究—基于贸易引力模型.现代商贸,2010,(1)：100-103
[63]杨雅欣.基于引力模型的绿色贸易壁垒对我国食用菌出口影响研究.现代商贸工业,2010,(12)：117～119
[64]余佶.技术性贸易壁垒对农产品国际贸易的影响—一个经济学分析框架.上海：上海社会科学出版社,2009：22
[65]山丽杰.基于绿色壁垒制度框架下的中国蔬菜出口贸易研究.江南大学博士学位论文,2008：23
[66]王金南,夏友富.绿色壁垒与国际贸易.北京：中国环境科学出版社,2002：3
[67]姜国庆,王义龙.绿色贸易制度形成及演变.商业经济,2009,(11)：86-87
[68]联合国粮农组织林业部.森林资源综合利用.北京：中国农业科技出版社,1996：22
[69]程宝栋,张英豪,赵桂梅.世界林产品贸易发展现状及趋势分析.林产工业,2011,(4)：3-7
[70]夏自谦,董彬.世界林产品贸易状况及前景分析.北京林业大学学报(社会科学版),2002,(2)：28～31
[71]高爱芳.我国林产品出口贸易分析.国际贸易,2010,(4)：78～80
[72]唐宏,蒋敏元.大力培育森林资源,调整林产品贸易对策.哈尔滨商业大学学报(社会科学版),2005,(1)：49-52
[73]臧奇,缪冬玲,宋维明.金融危机对中国人造板出口的影响及对策.重庆科技学院学报(社会科学版),2010,(1)：23～25
[74]张克萍.强化木地板出口美国、加拿大的贸易壁垒探析.福建林业科技,2010,(3)：125～127
[75]杨丽华,尹利华.新形势下中国林产品贸易的困境与对策探讨.林业经济问题,2011,(4)：26～29
[76]林凤鸣,罗信坚.2008年我国主要林产品贸易分析—出口篇.人造板,2009,(9)：45-48
[77]张寒,聂影.中国林产品出口增长的动因分析：1997-2008.中国农村经济,2008,(4)：11～15
[78]叶克林,熊满珍.中美林产品贸易特点及发展趋势.木材工业,2009,(1)：7-110
[79]刘卓钦,张瑞,张志辉,郭仁宏.美国S.1600复合木制品甲醛标准法案的内容、影响及对策.检验检疫学刊,2011,(1)：74-76
[80]张英.欧盟绿色贸易壁垒新特点及对策研究.山东社会科学,2007,(8)：70-72
[81]张二槐.绿色贸易壁垒对我国家具企业出口的影响及对策分析.南京林业大学硕士学位论文,2009：44
[82]周中林.绿色壁垒理论与实证研究.北京：中国农业出版社,2009：84
[83]曹丹,包从军.如何解读木制品出口的“绿色贸易壁垒”.中国检验检疫,2011,(4)：27-28
[84]姜春前,徐秀英,于玲,沈月琴.中国木质林产品出口面临的技术性贸易壁垒研究.世界林业研究,2005,(5)：52-55
[85]于丹,孙志刚,刘鑫.森林认证对森林经营和林产品贸易的影响.林业勘查设计,2009,(4)：14～15
[86]黄晓玲,杨建州,谢志忠.林业企业实施森林认证与林产品贸易发展的规范分析.福建农业大学学报(哲学社会科学版),2009,(12)：42-45
[87]王连茂,程宝栋,唐帅.《雷斯法案》修正案对中美木质家具出口影响及对策分析.江西林业科技,2011,(1)：38～41
[88]印中华,李剑泉,田禾,周馥华,李智勇.欧盟木材法案对林产品国际贸易的影响及中国应对策略.农业现代化研究,2011,(5)：537-541
[89]刘小丽,郑小贤.FSC在我国的发展现状与趋势分析.北京林业大学学报(社会科学版),2010,(9)：86-90
[90]姜鹏芳.技术性贸易壁垒对我国茶叶出口的影响分析.经贸广场,2009,(3)：36-38
[91]夏菲.新一轮贸易保护主义的兴起与我国应对策略.中国集体经济,2009,(8)：114-115
[92]王群.生态文明背景下的林产品贸易绿色技术创新问题研究.江苏商论,2011,(2)：35～37
[93]李双元,李先波.世界贸易(WTO)法律问题专题研究.北京：中国方正出版社,2003：65
[94]王凡非,钱小瑜.我国人造板工业生产、贸易现状与展望.林产工业,2009,(5)：3-6
[95]邹望坤,欧阳叙回,邹悦.国际金融危机中我国林产品贸易现状与对策.湖南林业科技,2009,(3)：41～44
[96]韩雪琴.技术性贸易壁垒对我国出口贸易的影响及我国的应对措施.商业经济,2008,(4)：25～27
[97]王焕曦,孙炳娜.技术性贸易壁垒的形成机制与应对策略.东北林业大学学报,2010,(1)：57～61
[98]初光杰.从GATT到WTO框架下贸易与环境相关问题研究.亚太经济,2004,(5)：16
[99]朱光前.2010年我国木材及木制品市场概况及对2011年市场形势预测.中国人造板,2011,(6)：28～33
[100]鲍中华.技术性贸易壁垒的量度工具及其应用研究：文献述评.财贸经济,2010,(6)：89-97
[101]James Scott. Developing countries in the ITO and GATT negotiations. Journal of International Trade Law and Policy,2010,9(1):5-24
[102]Christopher E.S. Warburton. International trade law and trade theory. Journal of International Trade Law and Policy,2010,9(1):64-82
[103]Neelesh Gounder, Biman Chand Prasad. Regional trade agreements and the new theory of trade:Implications for trade policy in Pacific Island countries. Journal of International Trade Law and Policy,2011,10(1):49-63
[104]David J. Hornsby. WTO effectiveness in resolving transatlantic trade-environment conflict. Journal of International Trade Law and Policy,2010,9(3):297-309
[105]Mervyn Martin, Maryam Shademan Pajouh. Rebalancing the balance:How the WTO's HR policy impacts on its very objectives for welfare enhancement and development. Journal of International Trade Law and Policy,2011,10(3):243-254
[106]闫永哲.进化博弈论视角下的中美贸易摩擦问题.浙江纺织服装技术学院学报,2010,(3)：57-62
[107]邵华亮,郑进,姜纲炳.林业产业发展中的问题及对策分析.现代农业科学,2009,(4)：243～244
[108]王满.林业产业发展现状的分析与思考.林业经济,2009,(3)：3-5
[109]周洁敏.焦点透视中国林业产业发展潜力.中国林业产业,2009,(65)：46-47
[110]王群.WTO框架下林产品贸易与环境保护关系问题探讨.世界林业研究,2007,(6)：65～69