本文選題：美國(guó)　切入點(diǎn)：印度　出處：《遼寧大學(xué)》2017年碩士論文　論文類型：學(xué)位論文

【摘要】：從20世紀(jì)80年代開始,全球服務(wù)貿(mào)易進(jìn)入一個(gè)新的發(fā)展階段,貨物貿(mào)易增加額已經(jīng)落后于服務(wù)貿(mào)易,世界經(jīng)濟(jì)的重心也逐漸從貨物貿(mào)易轉(zhuǎn)向服務(wù)貿(mào)易,服務(wù)貿(mào)易被一些學(xué)者賦予了全球經(jīng)濟(jì)增長(zhǎng)“新引擎”的稱號(hào)。服務(wù)貿(mào)易作為拉動(dòng)經(jīng)濟(jì)增長(zhǎng)的新動(dòng)力,那么各國(guó)為了繁榮本國(guó)經(jīng)濟(jì)就不免要和其他國(guó)家在該領(lǐng)域展開激烈競(jìng)爭(zhēng)。發(fā)達(dá)國(guó)家在服務(wù)貿(mào)易和貨物貿(mào)易的發(fā)展上比較均衡,特別是美國(guó),很早就開始發(fā)展服務(wù)貿(mào)易,并且在服務(wù)貿(mào)易領(lǐng)域有很強(qiáng)的比較優(yōu)勢(shì)。發(fā)達(dá)經(jīng)濟(jì)體的服務(wù)貿(mào)易占GDP的比重高達(dá)70%-80%,服務(wù)貿(mào)易的順差很大程度上彌補(bǔ)了其在貨物貿(mào)易上的短板,發(fā)展中國(guó)家的這一比例較低,但是近年來也有上升趨勢(shì)。本文選取的研究對(duì)象是美國(guó)和印度,這兩個(gè)國(guó)家在服務(wù)貿(mào)易發(fā)展上十分具有代表性,美國(guó)作為全球服務(wù)貿(mào)易的第一大國(guó),經(jīng)過多年的積累不僅在傳統(tǒng)服務(wù)貿(mào)易領(lǐng)域具備非常強(qiáng)的綜合競(jìng)爭(zhēng)力,而且在新型服務(wù)貿(mào)易的發(fā)展上也表現(xiàn)出強(qiáng)勁態(tài)勢(shì);印度雖然為發(fā)展中國(guó)家,但是印度在服務(wù)貿(mào)易的發(fā)展中憑借獨(dú)特的服務(wù)外包模式成為了一個(gè)服務(wù)貿(mào)易強(qiáng)國(guó)。美國(guó)和印度都在服務(wù)貿(mào)易領(lǐng)域取得了巨大成功,但是服務(wù)業(yè)產(chǎn)業(yè)內(nèi)貿(mào)易發(fā)展水平卻不盡相同,本文主要從以下幾個(gè)方面來研究美印的產(chǎn)業(yè)內(nèi)貿(mào)易水平:第二章從美印服務(wù)貿(mào)易的發(fā)展現(xiàn)狀和特點(diǎn)兩個(gè)方面闡述了這兩個(gè)國(guó)家的服務(wù)貿(mào)易概況,并借助顯示性比較優(yōu)勢(shì)指數(shù)(RCA指數(shù))和貿(mào)易競(jìng)爭(zhēng)力指數(shù)(TC指數(shù))對(duì)兩國(guó)服務(wù)貿(mào)易的競(jìng)爭(zhēng)力情況做了分析。第三章和第四章分別從產(chǎn)業(yè)內(nèi)貿(mào)易的靜態(tài)衡量指標(biāo)G-L指數(shù)和動(dòng)態(tài)衡量指標(biāo)MIIT指數(shù)、HIIT指數(shù)、VIIT指數(shù)對(duì)美印的服務(wù)業(yè)產(chǎn)業(yè)內(nèi)貿(mào)易水平進(jìn)行了比較研究,測(cè)算結(jié)果顯示美印兩國(guó)在旅游服務(wù)、運(yùn)輸服務(wù)、建筑服務(wù)、其他商業(yè)服務(wù)等傳統(tǒng)型服務(wù)貿(mào)易領(lǐng)域的產(chǎn)業(yè)內(nèi)貿(mào)易水平都很高,而在各自具有比較優(yōu)勢(shì)和競(jìng)爭(zhēng)力水平不高的服務(wù)貿(mào)易部門中產(chǎn)業(yè)內(nèi)貿(mào)易指數(shù)不高,表現(xiàn)出產(chǎn)業(yè)間貿(mào)易的貿(mào)易模式。在第五章中,筆者針對(duì)美印的服務(wù)業(yè)產(chǎn)業(yè)內(nèi)貿(mào)易的發(fā)展經(jīng)驗(yàn)提出了幾點(diǎn)帶給我們中國(guó)的啟示。
[Abstract]:Since 1980s, the global trade in services has entered a new stage of development, the increase of trade in goods has lagged behind trade in services, and the focus of the world economy has gradually shifted from trade in goods to trade in services. Trade in services has been given the title of "new engine" of global economic growth by some scholars. Trade in services serves as a new driving force for economic growth. Well, in order to prosper their own economies, countries inevitably have to engage in fierce competition with other countries in this field. Developed countries have a more balanced development of trade in services and goods, especially the United States, which began to develop trade in services very early. And it has a strong comparative advantage in the field of trade in services. The proportion of trade in services in GDP in developed economies is as high as 70% to 80%. The surplus in trade in services to a large extent makes up for the shortcomings of its trade in goods, which is relatively low in developing countries. However, in recent years, there has also been an upward trend. The research objects of this paper are the United States and India, which are very representative in the development of trade in services. The United States is the largest country in the world trade in services. After years of accumulation, India not only has a very strong comprehensive competitiveness in the field of traditional trade in services, but also shows a strong trend in the development of new trade in services; although India is a developing country, However, in the development of service trade, India has become a powerful country in services trade by virtue of its unique service outsourcing model. Both the United States and India have achieved great success in the field of trade in services, but the level of development of intra-industry trade in services is not the same. This paper mainly studies the level of intra-industry trade between the United States and India from the following aspects: chapter two expounds the general situation of the service trade of the two countries from the development status and characteristics of the service trade between the United States and India. The competitiveness of service trade between the two countries is analyzed by means of the comparative advantage index (RCA index) and the trade competitiveness index (TC index). Chapter 3 and chapter 4th respectively from the static measurement of intra-industry trade G-L index. A comparative study on the level of intra-industry trade in services between the United States and India was carried out by using the MIIT index and the dynamic measurement index. The results show that the United States and India have a high level of intra-industry trade in traditional services trade such as tourism services, transport services, construction services, other commercial services, etc. However, the intra-industry trade index is not high in the service trade sectors with their respective comparative advantages and low level of competitiveness, which shows the trade pattern of inter-industry trade. In Chapter 5th, The author puts forward some enlightenments to China in view of the development experience of intra-industry trade in service industry of America and India.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：遼寧大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2017
【分類號(hào)】：F746.18

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 張繼行;;美國(guó)服務(wù)貿(mào)易管理體制及其借鑒意義[J];國(guó)際經(jīng)濟(jì)合作;2016年10期

2 丁秀飛;仲鑫;;中國(guó)與歐盟發(fā)展服務(wù)業(yè)產(chǎn)業(yè)內(nèi)貿(mào)易的影響因素研究[J];宏觀經(jīng)濟(jì)研究;2016年02期

3 李晨;遲萍;;海運(yùn)服務(wù)貿(mào)易開放度對(duì)競(jìng)爭(zhēng)力的門檻效應(yīng)研究——基于26國(guó)2001—2013年的面板數(shù)據(jù)分析[J];改革與戰(zhàn)略;2015年12期

4 歐進(jìn)鋒;;中日服務(wù)業(yè)產(chǎn)業(yè)內(nèi)貿(mào)易動(dòng)態(tài)演變研究——基于不同貿(mào)易指數(shù)比較[J];市場(chǎng)經(jīng)濟(jì)與價(jià)格;2014年10期

5 楊曉桐;;中印服務(wù)貿(mào)易競(jìng)爭(zhēng)力比較[J];時(shí)代金融;2014年17期

6 周墻靜;;中韓服務(wù)業(yè)產(chǎn)業(yè)內(nèi)貿(mào)易探析[J];商場(chǎng)現(xiàn)代化;2014年14期

7 陳巧慧;戴慶玲;;中國(guó)與日韓服務(wù)業(yè)產(chǎn)業(yè)內(nèi)貿(mào)易水平分析[J];國(guó)際貿(mào)易問題;2014年05期

8 王文佳;左宇珊;;美國(guó)服務(wù)貿(mào)易發(fā)展對(duì)我國(guó)的啟示[J];對(duì)外經(jīng)貿(mào);2014年02期

9 王恕立;劉軍;胡宗彪;;FDI流入、動(dòng)機(jī)差異與服務(wù)產(chǎn)品垂直型產(chǎn)業(yè)內(nèi)貿(mào)易[J];世界經(jīng)濟(jì);2014年02期

10 謝國(guó)娥;楊逢珉;;內(nèi)地與香港服務(wù)業(yè)產(chǎn)業(yè)內(nèi)貿(mào)易實(shí)證研究[J];華東理工大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(社會(huì)科學(xué)版);2014年01期

相關(guān)會(huì)議論文 前1條

1 彭斯達(dá);潘黎;;FDI與美國(guó)服務(wù)貿(mào)易的發(fā)展[A];全國(guó)美國(guó)經(jīng)濟(jì)學(xué)會(huì)會(huì)長(zhǎng)擴(kuò)大會(huì)議暨“當(dāng)代世界經(jīng)濟(jì)格局下的中美經(jīng)貿(mào)關(guān)系”學(xué)術(shù)研討會(huì)論文集[C];2005年

相關(guān)博士學(xué)位論文 前1條

1 楊紅;美國(guó)服務(wù)貿(mào)易競(jìng)爭(zhēng)力的影響因素研究[D];吉林大學(xué);2015年

相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前6條

1 張譯丹;基于貿(mào)易結(jié)構(gòu)視角的中國(guó)—東盟通訊服務(wù)業(yè)產(chǎn)業(yè)內(nèi)貿(mào)易研究[D];云南師范大學(xué);2015年

2 潘暉;中美產(chǎn)業(yè)內(nèi)服務(wù)貿(mào)易指數(shù)及其影響因素分析[D];廣東財(cái)經(jīng)大學(xué);2015年

3 盧翠;中印服務(wù)貿(mào)易國(guó)際競(jìng)爭(zhēng)力比較研究[D];浙江大學(xué);2015年

4 施奕;印度服務(wù)貿(mào)易競(jìng)爭(zhēng)力分析[D];云南財(cái)經(jīng)大學(xué);2015年

5 彭娉婷;中印服務(wù)貿(mào)易出口結(jié)構(gòu)影響因素分析[D];海南大學(xué);2015年

6 張帆;服務(wù)貿(mào)易與貨物貿(mào)易互動(dòng)發(fā)展研究[D];寧波大學(xué);2015年

，

本文編號(hào)：1573360