本文選題：WTO規(guī)則 + 農(nóng)產(chǎn)品補貼　； 參考：《西南政法大學(xué)》2011年碩士論文

【摘要】：發(fā)達(dá)國家的農(nóng)產(chǎn)品補貼制度在國際上備受爭議,近來年,歐盟、美國等國將本國的農(nóng)產(chǎn)品補貼由“黃箱”政策逐漸向“綠箱”政策轉(zhuǎn)變,將本國的農(nóng)產(chǎn)品補貼與環(huán)境保護相掛鉤,從而可免于《農(nóng)業(yè)協(xié)定》的削減義務(wù)的約束。與此同時,發(fā)展中國家由于受本國的經(jīng)濟條件限制,對農(nóng)產(chǎn)品環(huán)境補貼的數(shù)額與發(fā)達(dá)國家不可同日而語。另外,與發(fā)達(dá)國家相比,對給予農(nóng)產(chǎn)品環(huán)境補貼的環(huán)境標(biāo)準(zhǔn)較低,致使較易遭受發(fā)達(dá)國家對其出口的農(nóng)產(chǎn)品征收環(huán)境反補貼稅,這將給予發(fā)展中國家的農(nóng)產(chǎn)品國際貿(mào)易更大的壓力。 農(nóng)產(chǎn)品環(huán)境補貼一方面有利于改善國內(nèi)環(huán)境,優(yōu)化農(nóng)業(yè)資源的配置,促進農(nóng)業(yè)產(chǎn)業(yè)升級,增強國內(nèi)農(nóng)產(chǎn)品出口競爭力等;另外一方面也存在被濫用的風(fēng)險,以至于造成更大的環(huán)境損害并且極有可能扭曲國際農(nóng)產(chǎn)品貿(mào)易。目前WTO體制下對農(nóng)產(chǎn)品環(huán)境補貼的規(guī)制主要是《建立WTO協(xié)定》、《農(nóng)業(yè)協(xié)定》、《補貼與反補貼協(xié)定》及GATT1994,但無一對農(nóng)產(chǎn)品環(huán)境補貼作出明確的界定。農(nóng)產(chǎn)品環(huán)境補貼本屬于《補貼與反補貼協(xié)定》中的不可訴補貼,但不可訴補貼的條款終止適用后,未能就其延期適用達(dá)成一致意見。《農(nóng)業(yè)協(xié)定》的“和平條款”失效之后,對于《農(nóng)業(yè)協(xié)定》與《補貼與反補貼協(xié)定》中對農(nóng)產(chǎn)品環(huán)境補貼的相關(guān)規(guī)定的適用關(guān)系研究顯得尤為重要。 本文包括引言及六章。在引言部分一方面根據(jù)中國所面臨的農(nóng)產(chǎn)品國際貿(mào)易形勢及WTO的相關(guān)規(guī)則提出農(nóng)產(chǎn)品環(huán)境補貼研究中存在的問題,另一方面對目前的研究狀況及研究成果進行梳理。第一章對農(nóng)產(chǎn)品環(huán)境補貼的概念及其范圍進行界定,與其他相關(guān)規(guī)則的關(guān)系進行了比較。第二章通過對貿(mào)易與環(huán)境的關(guān)系及各國制定農(nóng)產(chǎn)品環(huán)境補貼的理論依據(jù)進行論述,分析了農(nóng)產(chǎn)品環(huán)境補貼的必要性和可能性。第三章對WTO體制下與農(nóng)產(chǎn)品環(huán)境補貼相關(guān)的規(guī)則進行了梳理,提出相關(guān)規(guī)則的缺陷之所在。第四章通過WTO的案例對農(nóng)產(chǎn)品環(huán)境補貼規(guī)則的適用及在適用過程中的相互關(guān)系進行實證分析,提出《農(nóng)業(yè)協(xié)定》與《補貼與反補貼協(xié)定》應(yīng)累積適用的觀點,并提出真正屬于“綠箱”措施的農(nóng)產(chǎn)品環(huán)境補貼仍然可免于申訴,但如果能夠證明對貿(mào)易有嚴(yán)重的扭曲作用則可提出相關(guān)的申訴。第五章選取了歐盟、美國作為發(fā)達(dá)國家的農(nóng)產(chǎn)品環(huán)境補貼制度的代表,印度作為發(fā)展中國家的農(nóng)產(chǎn)品環(huán)境補貼制度的代表,從其發(fā)展歷程、經(jīng)濟貿(mào)易現(xiàn)狀及當(dāng)前多哈回合談判中的立場著手對當(dāng)前國際上的農(nóng)產(chǎn)品環(huán)境補貼制度的立法實踐進行分析。第六章針對本國的農(nóng)產(chǎn)品貿(mào)易現(xiàn)狀及環(huán)境補貼法律制度現(xiàn)狀進行研究,提出本國在國際層面對農(nóng)產(chǎn)品環(huán)境補貼制度改革的立場和國內(nèi)層面對農(nóng)產(chǎn)品環(huán)境補貼制度進行完善的對策。
[Abstract]:In recent years, the European Union, the United States and other countries have gradually changed their agricultural product subsidies from a "yellow box" policy to a "green box" policy. National agricultural subsidies are linked to environmental protection, so that they are exempt from the abatement obligations of the Agreement on Agriculture. At the same time, due to the constraints of their own economic conditions, the amount of environmental subsidies for agricultural products in developing countries is not comparable to that of developed countries. In addition, compared with developed countries, environmental subsidies for agricultural products are subject to lower environmental standards, making them more vulnerable to environmental countervailing duties imposed on agricultural products exported by developed countries. This will put greater pressure on international trade in agricultural products in developing countries. On the one hand, environmental subsidies for agricultural products are conducive to improving the domestic environment, optimizing the allocation of agricultural resources, promoting the upgrading of agricultural industries, and enhancing the competitiveness of domestic agricultural exports; on the other hand, there is also the risk of abuse. That would cause greater environmental damage and would most likely distort international agricultural trade. At present, the regulation of agricultural product environmental subsidy under WTO system is mainly "establishing WTO Agreement", "Agriculture Agreement", "subsidy and countervailing Agreement" and GATT 1994, but there is no clear definition of agricultural product environmental subsidy. Environmental subsidies for agricultural products are originally non-actionable subsidies in the Agreement on subsidies and countervailing, but after the provisions on non-actionable subsidies have ceased to apply, they have failed to reach an agreement on their extension. After the "Peace clauses" of the Agreement on Agriculture have expired, It is particularly important to study the relationship between the agricultural products environmental subsidies and the relevant provisions in the Agreement on Agriculture and the Agreement on subsidies and countervailing. This article includes introduction and six chapters. In the introduction part, on the one hand, according to the international trade situation of agricultural products faced by China and the relevant rules of WTO, put forward the existing problems in the research of agricultural products environmental subsidies, on the other hand, comb the current research situation and research results. The first chapter defines the concept and scope of agricultural environmental subsidy, and compares it with other related rules. The second chapter discusses the relationship between trade and environment and the theoretical basis of establishing agricultural product environmental subsidy, and analyzes the necessity and possibility of agricultural product environmental subsidy. The third chapter combs the rules related to agricultural products environmental subsidy under the WTO system, and puts forward the defects of the relevant rules. The fourth chapter analyzes the application of environmental subsidy rules of agricultural products and the relationship between them in the process of application through the case of WTO, and puts forward the viewpoint that the Agreement on Agriculture and the Agreement on subsidies and countervailing should be applied cumulatively. Environmental subsidies for agricultural products, which are truly "green box" measures, are still exempt from complaints, but if serious trade-distorting effects can be demonstrated, relevant complaints can be filed. The fifth chapter selects the European Union, the United States as the representative of the developed countries' environmental subsidy system of agricultural products, India as the representative of the developing countries' environmental subsidy system of agricultural products, from its development process. The present situation of economic and trade and the position in the current Doha Round negotiation begin to analyze the current international legislation practice of agricultural products environmental subsidy system. The sixth chapter studies the current situation of agricultural products trade and environmental subsidy legal system in our country. This paper puts forward the position of our country to reform the agricultural product environmental subsidy system at the international level and the countermeasures to perfect the agricultural product environment subsidy system at the domestic level.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：西南政法大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2011
【分類號】：D996.1

【參考文獻】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 黃河;;論我國農(nóng)業(yè)補貼法律制度的構(gòu)建[J];法律科學(xué)(西北政法學(xué)院學(xué)報);2007年01期

2 樂波;;歐盟的農(nóng)業(yè)環(huán)境保護政策[J];湖北社會科學(xué);2007年03期

3 姜雙林;;歐盟農(nóng)業(yè)環(huán)境補貼法律制度的嬗變及其對中國的啟示[J];法治研究;2008年06期

4 曲格平;社會主義市場經(jīng)濟下的環(huán)境管理(上)[J];環(huán)境保護;1999年04期

5 尚清;;農(nóng)業(yè)綠色補貼研究[J];今日南國(理論創(chuàng)新版);2009年02期

6 陳真亮;王寶臻;陳真英;;山區(qū)農(nóng)業(yè)環(huán)境補貼法律制度研究[J];農(nóng)業(yè)環(huán)境與發(fā)展;2009年04期

7 田野青;接玉梅;張鳳娟;;論美國的農(nóng)業(yè)補貼政策——由“巴西狀告美國高地棉花補貼貿(mào)易糾紛案”談起[J];山東農(nóng)業(yè)大學(xué)學(xué)報(社會科學(xué)版);2006年04期

8 董運來;趙慧娥;王大超;;國外農(nóng)業(yè)補貼的經(jīng)驗及借鑒[J];沈陽工業(yè)大學(xué)學(xué)報(社會科學(xué)版);2008年04期

9 姚愛萍;;環(huán)境補貼對國際貿(mào)易的影響及我國應(yīng)采取的對策[J];世界貿(mào)易組織動態(tài)與研究;2005年04期

10 張時霖;美國農(nóng)業(yè)綠色補貼計劃[J];世界農(nóng)業(yè);2000年05期

相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前1條

1 胡霞;有害環(huán)境的補貼政策研究[D];浙江大學(xué);2007年

，

本文編號：1885165