http://chineseinput.net/에서 pinyin(병음)방식으로 중국어를 변환할 수 있습니다.
변환된 중국어를 복사하여 사용하시면 됩니다.
개별검색 DB통합검색이 안되는 DB는 DB아이콘을 클릭하여 이용하실 수 있습니다.
통계정보 및 조사
예술 / 패션
<해외전자자료 이용권한 안내>
- 이용 대상 : RISS의 모든 해외전자자료는 교수, 강사, 대학(원)생, 연구원, 대학직원에 한하여(로그인 필수) 이용 가능
- 구독대학 소속 이용자: RISS 해외전자자료 통합검색 및 등록된 대학IP 대역 내에서 24시간 무료 이용
- 미구독대학 소속 이용자: RISS 해외전자자료 통합검색을 통한 오후 4시~익일 오전 9시 무료 이용
※ 단, EBSCO ASC/BSC(오후 5시~익일 오전 9시 무료 이용)
Cross-border investment (FDI) rapidly increased in the 1990s, and their contribution to economies around the world is of increasing significance. The significance of such FDI and its contribution to economic growth has already been pointed out in papers submitted by the WTO member country at the time of the launch of the Working Group on Trade and Investment in 1997. On the other hand, with this sharp growth in FDI, many investors concerns about various problems over investment issues on the part of investors, and request on urgent solution to these issues. Serious concerns are, for example, the lack of transparency and the frequent changes of investment-related rules. Providing a high level of transparency is crucial to creating a favorable climate for foreign investment as it enables foreign investors to make decisions under minimum uncertainty and reduced risk. Most bilateral investment treaties (BITs) do not explicitly address the issue of transparency. Compared to bilateral investment treaties, multilateral investment rules may provide a unified set of regulations regarding the transparency of investment regimes. However, the adoption by OECD countries of the two Codes of Liberalization helped gradually to establish relevant liberalization principles and a model of effective machinery for their implementation, but even at the OECD, efforts at comprehensive investment protection failed. Moreover, Yet FDI has no multilateral rules while foreign trade has GATT (WTO) rules. The Uruguay Round agreements include numerous provisions concerning investment issues as well as dispute settlement procedures. The TRIMs, GATS expand the GATT/WTO framework to include a variety of foreign direct investment issues. The WTO Agreements, especially, TRIMs Agreement and GATS, SCM Agreement are important for both investment issues and dispute settlement procedures because it establishes the umbrella institutional framework, policy process, and administrative structure for all FDI matters. But the TRIMs Agreement is designed to promote liberalization of international trade rather than international investment. Although intended to bring trade-related investment measures within the GATT, the Agreement merely reiterates what was already in GATT, providing no new protections or remedies for foreign investors. On the other hand, the GATS Agreement includes foreign direct investment within the scope of its application by defining trade in services to include, inter alia, “the supply of a service by a service supplier of one Member, through commercial presence in the territory of any other Member.” The GATS includes provisions concerning notification, transparency, most favored nation treatment, national treatment, market access, subsidies, and foreign exchange restrictions on capital account and current account transactions. However, GATS provides little meaningful protection for foreign investment. Thus, the spillover from that framework into the area of FDI, through the GATS and the agreement on TRIMs, has rendered more evident the need for a corresponding effort with respect to FDI. The future issue of multilateral investment agreement under the WTO regime, is important. But the future of a real multilateral agreement on investment is uncertain because such an agreement, in large part, depends on the political will of member countries. Developing countries still have concerns over restrictive MNE practices and diminished control over national development. However, developing country attitudes toward FDI have changed since the end of the Uruguay Round and many now actively pursue direct investment. Thus, Developed country negotiators should make a sincere effort to understand and incorporate the concerns of developing countries into WTO investment discussions rather than rushing to secure an investment agreement or simply trying to impose their MAI “high standards” on developing countries. Only through developed-developing country cooperation and a