WTO環保商品市場開放對我國之經濟影響

THE IMPACTOF THEWTO’s EFFORTS TO LIBERALIZE TRADE IN ENVIRONMENTAL GOODS ON THE TAIWANESE ECONOMY

2005 年世界貿易組織（WTO） 貿易與環境的談判進展更甚於以往， 其中杜哈部長宣言中第31.3 段環保商品與服務的關稅與非關稅貿易障礙削減， 不但是各會員國目前討論的焦點， 也將可能成為WTO 杜哈回合談判的具體成果項目。然而最引起爭議以及阻擾談判進展的議題在於環保商品的開放， 雖然預期可帶來全球環境的具體效益， 然而貿易上的利益卻絕大部分歸屬於已開發國家。這使得開發中國家躊躇不前， 要求貿易利益平衡（balancene gotiation）的呼聲不斷。本研究的目的旨在提供臺灣的開發中國家經驗，探討各國環保商品關稅自由化之利弊得失。由於我國2002年始加入WTO，短短幾年來累積不少參與國際談判之實務經驗。本篇論文彙整參與談判後之各項研究心得， 在研究方法上， 除彙整談判文件、國際與國內環保產業發展的統計資料外， 並包括一般均衡模型所進行的經濟衝擊分析，以及產業關聯性分析，屬於政策分析研究。本研究在過程中發現， 臺灣過去經驗顯示， 環保商品的開放不但帶來了環境上的具體效益， 改善了環境品質； 且進一步扶植了地區性的環保產業，所以開發中國家環保商品的市場開放應不至於完全喪失經濟利益。另外， 從一般均衡模型之模擬結果顯示，由於環保商品大都為各業別的投入項目，關稅的降低也造成各業別實質生產成本下降，對於各國的經濟發展也有明顯的貢獻。而產業關聯性分析更進一步指出環保商品在目前市場產業結構中大多屬於關鍵性或影響性產品，對產業之發展具有一定程度之意涵。

The provisions of Paragraph 31.3 of the WTO’s Doha Ministerial Declaration regarding reduction and elimination tariff and non-tariff barriers to trade in environmental goods and services are currently a key focus of discussion amongWTOMembers, and there is a strong possibility that significant, concrete results will be achieved. The aim of this paper is to examine the advantages and disadvantages of reducing or eliminating tariffs on environmental goods in light of Taiwan’s experience (as a developing nation) in this regard. This paper brings together the results of the research relating to these negotiations. Besides theWTO negotiations documents, the data used also include statistical data regarding the development of the environmental protection industry. The analysis of this data includes both analysis of the economic impact of the liberalization of trade in environmental goods and services (using the general equilibrium model) and inter-industry linkage analysis. The study finds that, on the basis of Taiwan’s past experience, not only does liberalizing trade in environmental goods and services lead to an improvement in the quality of the environment, it also helps to foster the growth of the local environmental protection industry. Fromthe point of viewof developing nations, therefore, the economic impact of liberalizing trade in environmental goods and services should not be wholly negative.