外文翻譯---淺析郵政服務(wù)與快遞服務(wù)的異同

1、<p>　　SERVICES: THE CASE OF POSTAL VERSUS EXPRESS DELIVERY SERVICES</p><p>　　Michael G. Plummer</p><p>　　1 Introduction </p><p>　　In developed countries, services continue to c

2、onstitute by far the largest share of national economies. For example, in the EU and the United States, approximately seventy and eighty percent, respectively, of the economy falls under the general rubric of services. S

3、ervices have also increased in importance in trade: in the year 2000, the share of services in total exports came to approximately 28 percent in the United States and 22 percent in the EU, with an average for the entire

4、OECD coming to</p><p>　　The same trend is observable in developing countries. During the development process, it is typical that: (1) agriculture falls as a percentage of GDP; (2) manufacturing first rises a

5、nd then falls as the economy matures; but (3) services continue to grow throughout the</p><p>　　development process. As a percentage of trade, services exports of developing countries have risen from nine pe

6、rcent in 1980 (approximately half the share of developed countries) to about eighteen percent in 2000, on a par with that of the developed countries.</p><p>　　Given the complicated and diverse nature of trad

7、e in services, liberalization at the global level can be more delicate and in many ways more difficult than trade in goods. Services can be high tech or low tech; inputs and/or final products; privately-provided or publi

8、cly-provided; and closely related to other areas, such as foreign direct investment</p><p>　　(“FDI”). Many services areas, however, still include government involvement, and state prerogatives in certain are

9、as are recognized</p><p>　　by the GATS. Moreover, trade in goods tends to be separate from FDI, though clearly there exist indirect links between trade and FDI. In the area of services, however, trade in ser

10、vices can be intricately linked to FDI; in some sectors, trade in services is impossible without FDI.</p><p>　　In this chapter, we will focus on the need for services liberalization in the global economy, wi

11、th a focus on developing countries. Moreover, we will use the process and complications associated with the liberalization of express delivery services as a case study. This area is particularly interesting because: (a)

12、it is an industry that has become</p><p>　　highly international; (b) it has become an important input to a variety of emerging industries and a key ingredient in the competitiveness of firms and countries; (

13、c) liberalization runs up against various competition policy issues, especially since it potentially affects private and public services5; and (d) it is exactly the type of industry where greater international access cre

14、ated through global agreements can produce major benefits to developed and developing countries alike.</p><p>　　2 Services Liberalization and the Stakes for Economic Development</p><p>　　A serie

15、s of multilateral negotiations under the auspices of the GATT/WTO have been very successful in bringing down barriers to trade in manufactured goods. Developing country tariffs are, in general, much higher than in the de

16、veloped world, but a large majority of developing countries has liberalized substantially trade in manufactures over the past fifteen years. In fact, most of the benefits that would accrue to global free trade would go t

17、o developing countries, according to various computat</p><p>　　The developing world is a different story. Agriculture continues to play an important role in the economy in general and in trade in particular

18、in the least-developed countries and in many middle-income countries. In order to be successful, the Doha Round will have to include at least some agricultural liberalization if the developing countries are going to agre

19、e to any accord. Still, as the development process unfolds, manufactures and, especially, services will become increasingly important. A</p><p>　　An association between rapid real economic growth and rapid g

20、rowth in services trade does not mean that the latter caused the former. Such estimation is much more complicated; indeed, there exists a chicken-and-egg simultaneity problem here. However, regardless of which causes whi

21、ch, the development of the services sector is clearly an important part of the development process.</p><p>　　The case for economic reform and liberalization is just too strong. Countries that have sustained

22、economic liberalization have prospered; the ones that have not prospered generally do not have outward-oriented policies to blame but rather other economic-contextual problems. It is hard to promote growth—let alone long

23、-term development—in an atmosphere of hyper-inflation or civil war. China has used economic reform to transform the world’s most populous country from a least-developed, autarkic eco</p><p>　　3 The Case for

24、Separating Postal from Express Delivery Services in GATS</p><p>　　Express delivery services constitute an interesting case study in service-sector liberalization. Their importance in the day-to-day activitie

25、s of firms has increased substantially over the past fifteen years, as evidenced by rapid growth in the industry. Indeed, express delivery services have now become an essential “infrastructure” to doing business for many

26、 companies, as well as being an increasingly important service for individuals. Moreover, express delivery services are particularly necess</p><p>　　A. The General Problem</p><p>　　This is where

27、 the difficulty lies: express delivery services are often considered a competitor to postal-service providers, which are almost invariably state-owned. Hence, liberalization in this area has been tricky, constrained by c

28、ompeting interests from bothdeveloped and developing countries and based on a misunderstanding of the market in which basic postal services are confused with express delivery services (we argue below that they are relate

29、d but distinct). It will be argued in this chap</p><p>　　Express delivery services need to be thoroughly differentiated from traditional postal services, both because of the clear substantive differences bet

30、ween the two and the defined purview of GATS. Failure to do so will lead to mixing apples and oranges to the detriment of member states, be they developed or developing countries. It could also thwart progress in Doha Ag

31、enda negotiations.</p><p>　　B. Current Classifications</p><p>　　Express delivery services are currently classified by theWTOServices Classification List (W/120), under both “postal” and “courier

32、” services. The only distinction between postal and courier services is that the former refer to public-sector offered services, whereas the latter are private. Hence, it has to do with ownership rather than product, whi

33、ch is unusual in the area of international trade. This type of classification leads to a great deal of confusion of the issues, as well as complicatio</p><p>　　The US Postal Service is an independent governm

34、ent organization that essentially has a monopoly on delivery of letters and other activities. In the United States, like other countries, the postal service area is dominated by domestic issues rather than international

35、ones. But, while the United States and EU have much at stake, failure to separate clearly USO-related from express-delivery services would be even more to the disadvantage of developing countries. Thus, in many ways, inc

36、lusion of exp</p><p>　　C. Existing Positions Regarding Liberalization</p><p>　　As the WTO begins its preparations for the Doha Trade Agenda, express delivery services will likely play a greater

37、role than they ever have in the past. The industry has been growing rapidly and has become very international, even without GATS-related liberalization helping to foster it. At present, the situation does not lend itself

38、 to too much optimism, as a number of proposals that have been tabled thus far are conservative and will probably do little.</p><p>　　Thus far, there have been a number of proposals tabled in the general are

39、a of postal and courier services, made by developing (MERCOSUR, Bolivia, and Hong Kong) and developed (EU, US, New Zealand) economies. One approach19 involves eliminating a distinction between postal services and courier

40、 services. Another approach defines express delivery services specifically as being separate from courier and postal services and having a single heading. Under this approach, then, member-states would be ab</p>&

41、lt;p><b>　　4 Summary</b></p><p>　　The salient results of this study can be summarized as follows:</p><p>　　Services in general and trade in services in particular have become incre

42、asingly important to developed and developing countries, both as final products and as inputs to other productive activities.</p><p>　　The relationship between services and FDI (under mode 3) is extremely st

43、rong; hence, services liberalization is important as a means of attracting FDI, which has proven to be a key catalyst in the development process.</p><p>　　Developing-country stakes are, therefore, particular

44、ly high in global services liberalization, as efficient services are necessary in order to help these countries compete internationally and attract foreign firms as partners in the development process.</p><p&g

45、t;　　GATS has taken on great significance in the 21st Century, particularly for developing countries, and successful liberalization of services under the Doha Trade Agenda will be extremely important in setting the course

46、 for the future.</p><p>　　We have used the express delivery services case as an example of how this process plays out in the complicated political economy of services liberalization. We have stressed that it

47、 is imperative to separate postal services from express delivery services, as they are separate sectors and reform of the latter can actually help promote the former through its complementarity and general enhancement of

48、 efficiency. It is in the interest of all parties to do this. However, if a separation is not clear</p><p>　　淺析郵政服務(wù)與快遞服務(wù)的異同</p><p>　　Michael G. Plummer</p><p><b>　　1引言</b&g

49、t;</p><p>　　在發(fā)達(dá)國(guó)家，服務(wù)業(yè)占國(guó)民經(jīng)濟(jì)的份額很大。例如，在歐盟和美國(guó)，經(jīng)濟(jì)發(fā)展過(guò)程中大約百分之七十、百分之八十都開(kāi)展了服務(wù)專欄。貿(mào)易增加了服務(wù)的重要性，在2000年，大約28％和22％的服務(wù)來(lái)自于歐盟、美國(guó)的出口總，占整個(gè)經(jīng)合組織的19%左右。在發(fā)展中國(guó)家同樣呈現(xiàn)這種趨勢(shì)：農(nóng)業(yè)占GDP的比重下降；制造業(yè)首次上升，但隨著經(jīng)濟(jì)的日趨成熟又下降；在整個(gè)開(kāi)發(fā)過(guò)程中，服務(wù)業(yè)水平不斷提高；發(fā)展中國(guó)家的服務(wù)出口

50、貿(mào)易的比例，已從1980年的9%(大約是發(fā)達(dá)國(guó)家一半的份額)上升到2000年的18%。</p><p>　　鑒于貿(mào)易的復(fù)雜性和多樣化的特點(diǎn)，全球貿(mào)易自由化更加細(xì)膩。服務(wù)是提供高科技或低科技投入的產(chǎn)品，私人或公開(kāi)提供密切相關(guān)的其他產(chǎn)品，如外國(guó)直接投資(“FDI”)。然而，很多服務(wù)領(lǐng)域，還包括政府的參與，或是某些領(lǐng)域的國(guó)家特權(quán)由“服務(wù)貿(mào)易總協(xié)定”確認(rèn)。此外，在貨物貿(mào)易方面，往往是外國(guó)直接投資，顯然存在著貿(mào)易和外國(guó)直接

51、投資之間不直接的聯(lián)系。在服務(wù)領(lǐng)域，貿(mào)易可以直接投資在某些行業(yè)，但是服務(wù)貿(mào)易是不可能由外國(guó)直接投資的。</p><p>　　本文將專注于全球經(jīng)濟(jì)的貿(mào)易自由化，以發(fā)展中國(guó)家為研究重點(diǎn)，以快遞服務(wù)自由化作為研究對(duì)象?？爝f服務(wù)領(lǐng)域特別有趣，因?yàn)樗牵?1)一個(gè)高度國(guó)際化的產(chǎn)業(yè);(2)已成為各種新興產(chǎn)業(yè)，并是企業(yè)和國(guó)家競(jìng)爭(zhēng)力的關(guān)鍵因素;(3)自由化的特點(diǎn)有可能影響私營(yíng)部門(mén)和公共服務(wù)行業(yè);(4)這種行業(yè)類型，可以通過(guò)全球協(xié)議

52、可以對(duì)發(fā)達(dá)國(guó)家和發(fā)展中國(guó)家產(chǎn)生重大的影響，創(chuàng)造更大的國(guó)際接入點(diǎn)。</p><p>　　2服務(wù)貿(mào)易自由化與經(jīng)濟(jì)發(fā)展的關(guān)系</p><p>　　一系列關(guān)貿(mào)總協(xié)定在世貿(mào)組織的主持下，各國(guó)的多邊談判已經(jīng)非常成功，從而降低了制成品的貿(mào)易壁壘。在一般情況下，發(fā)展中國(guó)家的關(guān)稅比發(fā)達(dá)國(guó)家高得多，但絕大多數(shù)的發(fā)展中國(guó)家在過(guò)去十五年開(kāi)始大幅減少制成品貿(mào)易。事實(shí)上，全球自由貿(mào)易會(huì)給發(fā)展中國(guó)家?guī)?lái)更大的利益，根據(jù)

53、各種計(jì)算和一般均衡模型已可以估算出這種影響。</p><p>　　發(fā)展中國(guó)家的農(nóng)業(yè)在一般貿(mào)易中繼續(xù)發(fā)揮著重要的作用，特別是在最不發(fā)達(dá)國(guó)家和許多中等收入國(guó)家中。為了要取得農(nóng)業(yè)的進(jìn)步，發(fā)展中國(guó)家要同意任何協(xié)議，多哈回合談判有至少包括一項(xiàng)農(nóng)業(yè)自由化的政策。不過(guò)，隨著發(fā)展進(jìn)程的不斷深入，生產(chǎn)和服務(wù)將變得越來(lái)越重要。如上所述，服務(wù)的重要性已容易提升，并已構(gòu)成對(duì)發(fā)展中國(guó)家出口份額的18％。經(jīng)濟(jì)的快速增長(zhǎng)和服務(wù)貿(mào)易的快速增長(zhǎng)之

54、間的存在著一定的關(guān)聯(lián)，卻并不意味著后者導(dǎo)致前者。事實(shí)上，這種估計(jì)比較復(fù)雜，存在著雞和蛋的同時(shí)性問(wèn)題。然而，無(wú)論其中原因是什么，服務(wù)業(yè)已經(jīng)成為發(fā)展過(guò)程中的重要組成部分。</p><p>　　經(jīng)濟(jì)改革和貿(mào)易自由化已逐步深入，國(guó)家存在可持續(xù)的經(jīng)濟(jì)繁榮，一些沒(méi)有繁榮的國(guó)家由于缺乏外向型經(jīng)濟(jì)政策的支持，無(wú)法取得經(jīng)濟(jì)上的繁榮，更不用說(shuō)加產(chǎn)生惡性通貨膨脹或內(nèi)戰(zhàn)的風(fēng)氣。若把世界上人口最多的國(guó)家打造成一個(gè)外向型的經(jīng)濟(jì)強(qiáng)國(guó)，從最不發(fā)

55、達(dá)的自給自足的國(guó)家，轉(zhuǎn)為一個(gè)外向型的經(jīng)濟(jì)強(qiáng)國(guó)是存在很大難度的。越南改革使貧困率總?cè)丝诘膹亩种豢s減到五分之一，經(jīng)歷了漫長(zhǎng)的15年，可見(jiàn)經(jīng)濟(jì)改革是不能一蹴而就的。發(fā)展中國(guó)家的經(jīng)濟(jì)自由化發(fā)展到最后，一般留下的是服務(wù)業(yè)。</p><p>　　3郵政服務(wù)與快遞服務(wù)的不同</p><p>　　快遞服務(wù)的自由化，成為文章的主要研究對(duì)象。郵政服務(wù)與快遞服務(wù)在公司日?；顒?dòng)中的重要性已大幅增加，在過(guò)去的十

56、五年中，見(jiàn)證了行業(yè)的快速增長(zhǎng)。事實(shí)上，快遞服務(wù)已成為一個(gè)重要的“基礎(chǔ)設(shè)施”，許多公司的業(yè)務(wù)已經(jīng)為個(gè)人提供日益重要的服務(wù)。此外，由于容易獲得通過(guò)快遞供應(yīng)商的市場(chǎng)，特別是在發(fā)展中國(guó)家，并且能吸引外國(guó)直接投資的流入，故此快遞服務(wù)對(duì)跨國(guó)公司來(lái)說(shuō)尤為必要。</p><p><b>　　A、一般問(wèn)題</b></p><p>　　這是困難所在：通常被認(rèn)為是快遞服務(wù)郵政服務(wù)供應(yīng)商，幾

57、乎都是國(guó)有的競(jìng)爭(zhēng)對(duì)手。因此，在這一領(lǐng)域的自由化一直是棘手的，限制競(jìng)爭(zhēng)在發(fā)展中國(guó)家的利益的基礎(chǔ)上，產(chǎn)生混淆基本的郵政服務(wù)，快遞服務(wù)市場(chǎng)的誤解。它將在這一章可以說(shuō)，目前的現(xiàn)實(shí)，強(qiáng)調(diào)必須分開(kāi)郵政活動(dòng)快遞服務(wù)?？爝f服務(wù)需要徹底從傳統(tǒng)的郵政服務(wù)分化，一方面是因?yàn)閮烧咧g的“服務(wù)貿(mào)易總協(xié)定”的定義范圍明確的實(shí)質(zhì)性分歧。如果不這樣做將導(dǎo)致?lián)p害成員國(guó)的混合蘋(píng)果和桔子，無(wú)論是發(fā)達(dá)國(guó)家還是發(fā)展中國(guó)家。它也可以阻止在多哈議程談判的進(jìn)展情況。</p>

58、;<p><b>　　B、當(dāng)前分類</b></p><p>　　快遞服務(wù)目前分類WTO服務(wù)分類表（W/120的），同時(shí)根據(jù)“郵政”和“快遞”服務(wù)。郵政及速遞服務(wù)之間唯一的區(qū)別是，前者是指公共部門(mén)提供的服務(wù)，而后者則是私人的。因此，它這樣做不是產(chǎn)品在國(guó)際貿(mào)易領(lǐng)域，而是不尋常的所有權(quán)。這種類型的分類導(dǎo)致很大的混亂的問(wèn)題，以及有關(guān)競(jìng)爭(zhēng)政策的并發(fā)癥。</p><p&

59、gt;　　美國(guó)郵政服務(wù)公司是一個(gè)獨(dú)立的政府組織，基本上有一個(gè)交付的信件和其他活動(dòng)的壟斷。像其他國(guó)家一樣，在美國(guó)，郵政服務(wù)區(qū)為主，而不是國(guó)際的國(guó)內(nèi)問(wèn)題。但是，美國(guó)和歐盟的利益攸關(guān)的，不能分開(kāi)，明確普遍服務(wù)義務(wù)的相關(guān)快遞送貨服務(wù)將更加對(duì)發(fā)展中國(guó)家不利。因此，在許多方面，包括快遞服務(wù)作為一個(gè)單獨(dú)的項(xiàng)目在多哈貿(mào)易議程的郵政服務(wù)自由化將是更重要的是發(fā)展中國(guó)家，而不是發(fā)達(dá)國(guó)家。</p><p>　　C、關(guān)于自由化的現(xiàn)有職位&

60、lt;/p><p>　　由于世貿(mào)組織多哈貿(mào)易議程開(kāi)始的籌備工作，快遞服務(wù)，可能比以往任何時(shí)候會(huì)發(fā)揮更大的作用。該行業(yè)已迅速增長(zhǎng)，已成為非常國(guó)際化，即使沒(méi)有“服務(wù)貿(mào)易總協(xié)定”有關(guān)的幫助，也可以促進(jìn)它的自由化。目前的情況并不適合過(guò)于樂(lè)觀，作為建議已提交迄今是保守的，可能會(huì)做小的數(shù)目。</p><p>　　到目前為止，已經(jīng)有一個(gè)在郵政及速遞服務(wù)的一般發(fā)展（南錐體共同市場(chǎng)，玻利維亞和香港）和發(fā)達(dá)國(guó)家（

61、歐盟，美國(guó)，新西蘭）經(jīng)濟(jì)區(qū)，提交提案的數(shù)量。一種方法涉及消除郵政服務(wù)和快遞服務(wù)之間的區(qū)別。另一種方法定義快遞服務(wù)，特別是作為獨(dú)立的快遞和郵政服務(wù)，一個(gè)有單一的航向。然后，根據(jù)這一辦法，成員國(guó)將能夠直接提出快遞服務(wù)自由化。本項(xiàng)就可以成為一個(gè)全球化的供應(yīng)鏈管理中的運(yùn)輸活動(dòng)范圍更廣的一部分。</p><p><b>　　4總結(jié)</b></p><p>　　這項(xiàng)研究的突出成果

62、，可以概括如下：</p><p>　　在貿(mào)易自由化的服務(wù)已經(jīng)成為越來(lái)越重要的發(fā)達(dá)國(guó)家和發(fā)展中國(guó)家，無(wú)論是作為最終產(chǎn)品或是其他生產(chǎn)活動(dòng)的投入，服務(wù)和外國(guó)直接投資之間的關(guān)系逐漸加強(qiáng)。因此，服務(wù)貿(mào)易自由化的重要手段吸引外國(guó)直接投資，這已成為發(fā)展中國(guó)家在發(fā)展過(guò)程中的關(guān)鍵催化劑。對(duì)于發(fā)展中國(guó)家特別是在全球服務(wù)自由化的當(dāng)今世界，高效的服務(wù)是必要的，幫助這些國(guó)家提升國(guó)際競(jìng)爭(zhēng)力和吸引外國(guó)企業(yè)來(lái)投資，建立長(zhǎng)久的合作伙伴關(guān)系。在21

63、世紀(jì)“服貿(mào)總協(xié)定”，特別是對(duì)發(fā)展中國(guó)家，具有十分重要的意義，多哈貿(mào)易議程將在未來(lái)的課程重新設(shè)置，這是極其重要的議程。作為一個(gè)例子，如何在這個(gè)過(guò)程中扮演復(fù)雜的關(guān)系，呈現(xiàn)服務(wù)貿(mào)易自由化的快遞服務(wù)。我們一直強(qiáng)調(diào)，郵政服務(wù)與快遞服務(wù)是截然不同的，是兩個(gè)獨(dú)立的個(gè)體，因?yàn)樗鼈兪仟?dú)立的部門(mén)和后續(xù)的改革，實(shí)際上可以通過(guò)它們的互補(bǔ)和效率來(lái)提升效率。然而，如果沒(méi)有明確分離，在多哈回合談判取得進(jìn)展是不可能的，提供特定的政治現(xiàn)實(shí)，可能會(huì)產(chǎn)生一定的誤解。<