2023年全國(guó)碩士研究生考試考研英語(yǔ)一試題真題(含答案詳解+作文范文)_第1頁(yè)
已閱讀1頁(yè),還剩25頁(yè)未讀, 繼續(xù)免費(fèi)閱讀

下載本文檔

版權(quán)說(shuō)明:本文檔由用戶(hù)提供并上傳,收益歸屬內(nèi)容提供方,若內(nèi)容存在侵權(quán),請(qǐng)進(jìn)行舉報(bào)或認(rèn)領(lǐng)

文檔簡(jiǎn)介

1、Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=caji20Download by: [New York University] Date: 22 January 2016, At: 01:32Australian Journal o

2、f International AffairsISSN: 1035-7718 (Print) 1465-332X (Online) Journal homepage: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/caji20The economic impact of the Australia–US free trade agreementShiro ArmstrongTo cite this article: Sh

3、iro Armstrong (2015) The economic impact of the Australia–US free trade agreement, Australian Journal of International Affairs, 69:5, 513-537, DOI: 10.1080/10357718.2015.1048777To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org

4、/10.1080/10357718.2015.1048777Published online: 30 Jul 2015.Submit your article to this journal Article views: 449View related articles View Crossmark datapreferential basis between agreement members. Before signing an a

5、greement with Singapore in 2003, apart from the bilateral Closer Economic Relations (CER) agreement with New Zealand that was signed in another era, Australia had not been party to any preferential trade agreements (PTAs

6、) since the era of British Imperial Preference. Although the Singapore agreement was a first for Australia, its economy was one of the most open internationally, it did not have an agricultural sector and it was not a ma

7、jor economic partner of Australia. A more significant potential sign of departure from the primacy of non- discriminatory liberalisation occurred with the negotiation of the Australia-US Free Trade Agreement (AUSFTA), wh

8、ich came into effect on January 1, 2005. Much controversy, therefore, surrounded the negotiation of the agreement in the lead up to its conclusion. There was debate about the likely impact on the Australian economy, the

9、implications for Australia’s other trade and investment relationships and its use in promoting other non-economic and diplomatic interests (Ranald 2009). As a result of the agreement, 97 percent of tariff lines covering

10、Australia’s non- agricultural exports to the United States (excluding textiles and clothing) became duty-free, subject to the meeting of the requirements of product-specific rules of origin, while 99 percent of US manufa

11、cturing exports to Australia became duty- free, again subject to origin rule requirements. All non-agriculture products will be free from duty by 2015. The agreement went well beyond tariff liberalisation. Investment fro

12、m the United States came to enjoy preferential treatment in Austra- lia’s foreign investment screening regime. AUSFTA included more stringent protections for intellectual property (IP) right holders, most notably US phar

13、maceutical companies and copyright holders. The agreement required changes to the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme, potentially impacting on the price and ability to sell generic medicines, and given that Australia was a n

14、et importer of IP meant the agreement was likely to result in increased transfers of IP rents to the United States. The fact that key US markets for Australian agricultural producers like beef and dairy were only partial

15、ly liberalised, and not liberalised at all in the case of sugar, added to the controversy about the agreement. Most ex ante studies estimated that AUSFTA would have little or no impact on the Australian economy. Andriama

16、nanjara and Tsigas (2003) estimated the FTA would have a miniscule effect, increasing Australia’s welfare by only US $44 million. In a comprehensive study, Dee (2005) estimated an increase in Australian economic welfare

17、of AUD $53 million a year and an increase in goods trade of around AUD $127 million. Other studies show results of a similar magnitude.2There were some studies that showed net negative effects from AUSFTA. Hilaire and Ya

18、ng (2003) predicted that AUSFTA would shrink the economy by 0.03 percent a year with US imports displacing more competitive imports from elsewhere—a result of the effects of ‘trade diversion’. A study by the Centre for I

溫馨提示

  • 1. 本站所有資源如無(wú)特殊說(shuō)明,都需要本地電腦安裝OFFICE2007和PDF閱讀器。圖紙軟件為CAD,CAXA,PROE,UG,SolidWorks等.壓縮文件請(qǐng)下載最新的WinRAR軟件解壓。
  • 2. 本站的文檔不包含任何第三方提供的附件圖紙等,如果需要附件,請(qǐng)聯(lián)系上傳者。文件的所有權(quán)益歸上傳用戶(hù)所有。
  • 3. 本站RAR壓縮包中若帶圖紙,網(wǎng)頁(yè)內(nèi)容里面會(huì)有圖紙預(yù)覽,若沒(méi)有圖紙預(yù)覽就沒(méi)有圖紙。
  • 4. 未經(jīng)權(quán)益所有人同意不得將文件中的內(nèi)容挪作商業(yè)或盈利用途。
  • 5. 眾賞文庫(kù)僅提供信息存儲(chǔ)空間,僅對(duì)用戶(hù)上傳內(nèi)容的表現(xiàn)方式做保護(hù)處理,對(duì)用戶(hù)上傳分享的文檔內(nèi)容本身不做任何修改或編輯,并不能對(duì)任何下載內(nèi)容負(fù)責(zé)。
  • 6. 下載文件中如有侵權(quán)或不適當(dāng)內(nèi)容,請(qǐng)與我們聯(lián)系,我們立即糾正。
  • 7. 本站不保證下載資源的準(zhǔn)確性、安全性和完整性, 同時(shí)也不承擔(dān)用戶(hù)因使用這些下載資源對(duì)自己和他人造成任何形式的傷害或損失。

最新文檔

評(píng)論

0/150

提交評(píng)論