臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

英國已經正式啓動退出歐盟的程序，退出歐盟無疑會對英國與歐盟（注：本文中歐盟皆指除英國外的歐盟27國）的雙邊貿易産生衝擊，衝擊的幅度將取决於雙方可能達成的新貿易協定，特別是英國能否維持與歐盟現有的自由貿易。英國在退出歐盟後，勢必將與其他國家謀求新的貿易關係，如FTA（Free Trade Agreement，自由貿易協定），以彌補退歐給自己帶來的經濟損失。同時，歐盟對土耳其和EFTA（European Free Trade Association，歐洲自由貿易聯盟，由瑞士、挪威、冰島和列支敦斯登組成）在貿易上的影響力，可能會擴大英國的經濟損失。本文研究了英國退出歐盟、尤其是失去英-歐自由貿易，對英國和歐盟的經濟影響；同時也研究了英國與其他主要貿易國的FTA和歐盟對土耳其/EFTA的影響力，又會如何左右退歐所造成的不利影響。本文的實證研究採用了基於可計算一般均衡模型（Computable General Equilibrium Model，CGE Model）的全球貿易分析模型（Global Trade Analysis Project，GTAP）。
本文的實證結果顯示，退歐會給英國帶來較大的經濟損失，而歐盟的損失則較小。基準情境中，英國的損失是-1.290%~-2.957%，歐盟的損失是-0.114%~-0.262%，只有英國的8.8%~8.9%。在終止英-歐自由貿易后，英國與其他主要貿易國的FTA不能為英國彌補退歐損失：基準情境中，不同程度的FTA只能為英國彌補約31.8%~73.4%的退歐損失。相反，歐盟則能比較容易地通過與第三國的FTA，完全彌補退歐損失。
短期中，英國的資本收益率有較大幅度的下降，導致長期中英國資本外逃的程度比較高，從而進一步挫傷英國的經濟。英國與第三國的FTA能適當緩解英國的資本外逃問題。英國對外貨物運輸能力提高10%，並不會顯著影響基準情境中的結論。Arminton替代彈性的提高會顯著降低英國退歐的經濟損失。但是，即便Arminton替代彈性提高50%，也不足以使得英國通過與第三國的FTA完全彌補退歐損失。
終止英-歐自由貿易給歐盟和英國造成的邊際損失之比在各種情境及穩健性檢驗中都很小（7.9%~12.3%），這表明英國在英-歐自由貿易的談判中，完全處於不利的地位。本文建議英國政府在退歐談判中，在其他非核心問題上適當妥協，換取歐盟對英-歐自由貿易關係的維持，以减小退歐所帶來的經濟損失。

The United Kingdom has started the formal process of Brexit – the departure of the UK from the European Union. Brexit will have great impacts on the trade between the UK and the EU (the EU refers to the remaining 27 EU member states hereafter), the magnitude of which will depend on the possible new trade agreement between them, especially on whether the UK would remain the current free trade relation with the EU market. The UK will certainly seek new trade agreements, such as FTAs (Free Trade Agreement), with other countries to make up the loss due to Brexit. On the other hand, the influence of the EU on the trade policy of Turkey and the EFTA (European Free Trade Association, comprised of Iceland, Liechtenstein, Norway and Switzerland) may increase the UK’s loss from Brexit. This paper examines the possible economic impacts on the UK and the EU from Brexit, especially from the loss of the UK-EU free trade, and how these impacts will interact with the UK’s new FTAs with her other major trading partners and the influence of the EU on Turkey and the EFTA. The empirical analysis is conducted with the GTAP (Global Trade Analysis Project) model which is based on the CGE Model (Computable General Equilibrium Model).
The empirical results show that the GDP loss of the UK from Brexit is large and substantial while that of the EU is relatively small. In the basic scenarios, the GDP losses of the UK are around 1.29%~2.96%, and those of the EU are around 0.11%~0.26%, only 8.8%~8.9% of those of the UK. The possible FTAs between the UK and her other major trading partners will only make up 31.8%~73.4%, not the total, of the losses due to Brexit depending on the scope of the FTAs. On the contrary, it is quite easy for the EU to make up her total GDP losses from Brexit by new FTAs with her other major trading partners.
The rate of return of the capital in the UK drops substantially in the short run after Brexit, and this will result in capital flight out of the UK in the long run, which will make the UK’s economy even worse. The UK’s new FTAs will dampen the problem of the capital flight. It will not affect the major conclusion from the basic scenarios if the shipping technology between the UK and other countries improves by 10%. Although the GDP losses in the basic scenarios are quite sensitive to the Arminton elasticity of substitution assumed in the GTAP model, it is still not enough for the UK to make up her total GDP losses from Brexit by her new FTAs even if the Arminton elasticity of substitution increases by 50%.
The ratio of the marginal losses between the EU and the UK from the termination of the free trade between the EU and the UK is as low as 7.9%~12.3% in all scenarios as well as the robust tests, which renders the UK an absolute unfavorable position in the negotiation for the UK-EU free trade after Brexit. This paper suggests that the UK government compromise on other non-core issues to secure free trade with the EU to dampen the economic shock from Brexit.

中文摘要 I
ABSTRACT III
目 录 V
圖目錄 VIII
表目錄 IX
第1章 緒論 1
1.1 研究動機 1
1.2 研究問題 3
1.3 研究方法和創新 3
1.4 研究流程 4
第2章 英國退歐背景 6
2.1 英國退歐之法律程序 6
2.2 英國退歐之失 6
2.2.1 脫離歐洲單一市場 6
2.2.2 可能影響與第三國的經貿關係 10
2.2.3 支付退歐費用 12
2.2.4 其他 12
2.3 英國退歐之得 12
2.3.1 與第三國協商FTA 12
2.3.2 控制國內法律和移民 13
2.3.3 免去歐盟會費 13
2.4 英國與歐盟的談判目標 13
2.5 英國退歐後與歐盟的關係 14
2.5.1 挪威模式 14
2.5.2 瑞士模式 15
2.5.3 土耳其模式 16
2.5.4 FTA模式 17
2.5.5 WTO模式 18
2.5.6 香港模式 19
2.6 附錄：英國與歐盟的對外貿易統計 20
第3章 文獻綜述 23
3.1 對於NTB的實證研究 23
3.2 對於英國退歐的研究 24
3.2.1 Booth et al.（2015） 24
3.2.2 Dhingra et al.（2016） 24
3.2.3 其他 25
3.3 對於英國與第三國FTA的研究 25
3.4 既有文獻的不足 26
第4章 GTAP模型 27
4.1 GTAP模型基本假設 27
4.2 GTAP模型基本架構 28
4.3 供給面 29
4.4 需求面 31
4.5 全球運輸部門 32
4.6 全球銀行 32
4.7 封閉法則 33
第5章 實證結果分析 35
5.1 研究設定 35
5.1.1 GTAP資料庫設定 35
5.1.2 情境假設 35
5.1.3 衝擊設定 37
5.2 初探主流模式 37
5.2.1 歐盟因素 37
5.2.1 與既有文獻的比較 38
5.2.2 小結 39
5.3 關稅 39
5.3.1 歐盟因素 40
5.3.2 土耳其因素 40
5.3.3 英國FTA因素 42
5.3.4 各國關稅影響的獨立性 44
5.3.5 减稅幅度的影響 45
5.3.6 小結 46
5.4 NTB 46
5.4.1 歐盟因素 46
5.4.2 土耳其/EFTA因素 49
5.4.3 英國FTA因素 50
5.4.4 各國NTB影響的獨立性 51
5.4.5 小結 52
5.5 基準情境：再探主流模式 52
5.5.1 情境假設 52
5.5.1 結果分析 56
5.5.2 小結 58
5.6 短期情境 59
5.7 穩健性檢驗 64
5.7.1 英國對外運輸技術 64
5.7.2 Arminton替代彈性 67
5.8 歐盟與第三國的FTA 71
第6章 結論、政策建議與展望 75
6.1 本文結論 75
6.2 政策建議 76
6.3 未來研究的方向 76
參考文獻 78

中文部分
彭開瓊，2005，<台灣地區石化產業的現況與 WTO 影響分析> ，《華岡經濟論叢》，4(2)，1-27。

英文部分
Berden, K. G., Francois, J., Thelle, M. M., Wymenga, M. P., & Tamminen, M. S. (2009). “Non-tariff Measures in EU-US Trade and Investment–An Economic Enalysis.” ECORYS Nederland BV, Rotterdam.
Booth, S., Howarth, C., Persson, M., Ruparel, R., & Swidlicki, P. (2015). “What if …? The Consequences, Challenges and Opportunities Facing Britain outside the EU.” Open Europe Report, No. 3, London.
Busch, B., & Matthes, J. (2016). “Brexit–the Economic Impact -- A Meta-Analysis.” IW-Report, (10), Cologne Institute for Economic Research, Cologne.
Chang, W. W. (2017). “Brexit and Its Economic Consequences.” Brexit Roundtable Discussion Paper, SUNY Buffalo.
Chen, S. & Li, D. (2017). “China-United Kingdom Free Trade Area: Likely Impact on the Economy and on Specific Industry Sectors in both Countries.” Journal of Chinese Economic and Foreign Trade Studies, Vol. 10 Issue: 1, pp.111-126.
Ciuriak, D., Xiao, J., Ciuriak, N., Dadkhah, A., Lysenko, D., & Narayanan, G. B. (2015). “The Trade-Related Impact of a UK Exit from the EU Single Market.” Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2620718.
Costinot, A., & Rodriguez-Clare, A. (2013). “Trade Theory with Numbers: Quantifying the Consequences of Globalization.” NBER Working Paper No. 18896.
Dhingra, S., & Sampson, T. (2016). “Life After Brexit: What Are the UK’s Options Outside the European Union?” CEP Brexit Analysis, CEP-Brexit-01, the Centre for Economic Performance, London School of Economics and Political Science, London.
Fontagné, L., Mitaritonna, C., & Signoret, J. (2016). “Estimated Tariff Equivalents of Services NTMs.” CEPII Working Paper 2016-20, The Centre d''Études Prospectives et d''Informations Internationales, Paris.
Francois, J., Berden, K., Tamminen, S., Thelle, M., & Wymenga, P. (2013). “Non-tariff Measures in EU-US Trade and Investment: An Economic Analysis.” IIDE Discussion Papers, No. 20090806, Institute for International and Development Economics, Rotterdam.
Francois, J., Van-Meijl, H. & Van-Tongeren, F. (2005). “Trade Liberalization in the Doha Development Round.” Economic Policy, Vol. 20, pp.349–391.
Hertel, T. W. (1997). Global Trade Analysis: Modeling and Applications. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Hertel, T., McDougall, R., & Itakura, K. (2001). “GTAP Model Version 6.0.” Center for Global Trade Analysis, Purdue University, West Lafayette.
HM Government (2013). “Review of the Balance of Competences between the United Kingdom and the European Union: The Single Market White Paper.”
HM Government (2017). “The United Kingdom’s Exit from and New Partnership with the European Union White Paper.”
HM Treasury (2013). “European Union Finances 2013: Statement on the 2013 EU Budget and Measures to Counter Fraud and Financial Mismanagement White Paper.”
Hornok, C. & Koren, M. (2015). “Administrative Barriers to Trade.” Journal of International Economics, Vol. 96, pp.110–122.
Lejour, A. M., Veenendaal P., Verweij G., & Van Leeuwen N. (2006). “WorldScan: A Model for International Economic Policy Analysis.” CPB Document 111, CPB Netherlands Bureau for Economic Policy Analysis, Hague.
Ottaviano, G., Pessoa, J., Sampson, T., & Reenen, J. (2014). “The Costs and Benefits of Leaving the EU.” CFS Working Paper No. 472.
Petri, P. A., Plummer, M. G., & Zhai, F. (2012). The Trans-Pacific Partnership and Asia-Pacific Integration: A Quantitative Assessment (Vol. 98). Peterson Institute for International Economics.
PwC (2016). “Leaving the EU: Implications for the UK Economy.” PwC UK, London.
Rojas-Romagosa H. (2016). “Trade Effects of Brexit for the Netherlands.” CPB Background Document, CPB Netherlands Bureau for Economic Policy Analysis, Hague.
Roy, A., & Mathur, S. K. (2016). “Brexit and India–EU Free Trade Agreement.” Journal of Economic Integration, 31(4), pp.740-773.
Schoof, U., Petersen, T., Aichele, R., & Felbermayr, G. (2015). “Brexit–Potential Economic Consequences if the UK Exits the EU.” Policy Brief, 5, Archive of European Integration, University of Pittsburgh.
Schwok, R., & Najy, C. (2012). “UK Returning to EFTA: Divorce at 40 and Going Back to Mom and Dad?” Available at Website of the Parliament of the UK https://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201213/cmselect/cmfaff/writev/futunion/m21.pdf