Abstract

Since the 1980s states have sought to harmonise economic standards to aid the flow of goods, services and finance across borders. The founding agreements of the World Trade Organisation (WTO), for example, harmonised standards on services, intellectual property and investment. However, mutlilateral trade negotiations in the WTO have since stalled. In response, the United States (US) has engaged in forum shopping, using preferential trade agreements at the bilateral, regional and multinational level to harmonise international standards. This article argues that through forum shopping the US has been able to export standards that support the commercial interests of US-based industries more than they encourage economic exchange across borders. Furthermore, because power asymmetries are starker in preferential trade negotiations smaller and middle power states should not enter trade agreements, which include regulatory harmonisation. This is illustrated with the case of the US-Australia free trade agreement, looking specifically at a copyright standard known as technological protection measures (TPMs). It was clear before, during and after the agreement was signed that Australia’s existing standard on TPMs was more popular than the US-style standard. Nevertheless, a US-style standard is in effect domestically because of the trade agreement.

摘要

自1980年代以来，各州一直在寻求统一经济标准，以帮助跨境的商品，服务和金融流通。例如，世界贸易组织（WTO）的创始协议就服务，知识产权和投资制定了统一标准。但是，世贸组织的多边贸易谈判此后陷入僵局。作为回应，美国（美国）参与了论坛购物，使用双边，区域和跨国级别的优惠贸易协议来协调国际标准。本文认为，通过论坛购物，美国能够出口支持美国工业商业利益的标准，而不是鼓励跨境经济交换。此外，由于权力不对称在优惠贸易谈判中更为明显，较小的中型国家不应签署包括监管统一的贸易协议。美国-澳大利亚自由贸易协定的案例就说明了这一点，它专门研究了一种称为技术保护措施（TPM）的版权标准。很明显，在签署协议之前，之中和之后，澳大利亚现有的TPM标准比美国标准更受欢迎。尽管如此，由于贸易协议的缘故，美国式标准在国内仍然有效。很明显，在签署协议之前，之中和之后，澳大利亚现有的TPM标准比美国标准更受欢迎。尽管如此，由于贸易协定的缘故，美国式标准在国内仍然有效。很明显，在签署协议之前，之中和之后，澳大利亚现有的TPM标准比美国标准更受欢迎。尽管如此，由于贸易协定的缘故，美国式标准在国内仍然有效。