1、<p>　　中文5000字，2700單詞，1.5萬英文字符</p><p>　　出處：George B P, Henthorne T L. Tourism and the general agreement on trade in services[J]. International Journal of Social Economics, 2007, 34(3):136-146.</p>

2、<p>　　Tourism and the general agreement on trade in services</p><p>　　Sustainability and other developmental concerns</p><p>　　Babu P. George Tony L. Henthorne</p><p><b>

3、;　　Abstract</b></p><p>　　Purpose – The paper is developed around, and aims to focus on, the possible impacts of the General Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS) for sustainable development of tourism,

4、 especially in the context of the third world.</p><p>　　Design/methodology/approach – The paper is an exploration of the issues.</p><p>　　Findings – Findings generally imply that the historica

5、l development of GATS is not in tune with the aspirations of the small and medium scale enterprises in tourism, especially those located in the South. The agreements show only scant regard for the principles of sustainab

6、le development, too.</p><p>　　Practical implications – On a pragmatic level, the paper highlights the opportunities and threats to the stakeholders. It focuses on the most disadvantaged ones in tourism devel

7、opment and provides a set of guidelines for informed action.</p><p>　　Originality/value – The paper tries to explain the meaning and intent of technical and arcane treaty clauses in understandable terms and

8、provide a set of guidelines within which the treaty has to be structured for the best results. The paper offers valuable inputs for the negotiators, the tourism business community, the NGOs, the governments, and other st

9、akeholder groups.</p><p>　　Keywords Tourism management, Sustainable development, Developing countries</p><p>　　Introduction</p><p>　　We live in a world where large transnational cor

10、porations wield tremendous economic power in the negotiations with state and national governments concerning international trade agreements. Truly, many such agreements are born out of the need of transnationals for incr

11、eased access to those territories and markets which were before inaccessible. Services industries in both the European Union and the USA along with their state governments have been actively lobbying and pushing for furt

12、her General </p><p>　　One of the distinguishing features of trade at the end of the twentieth century and at the start of the new millennium has been the expansion of regional trade agreements and the multil

13、ateral agreements. The internationalization of services is at the core of today’s economic globalization. GATS, created as part of the formation of the World Trade Organization (WTO) in 1994, are expected to have crucial

14、 implications for the daily lives and living environment of people all over the world. Already,</p><p>　　Political economy of sustainable tourism: theory and practice Tourism as an industry is increasing rap

15、idly in developing countries. Owing to the historical inequality in global trading relationships on the basis of core-periphery dependency, globalization and liberalized free trade, mainstream mass tourism reinforces the

16、 social and economic disadvantages of southern destinations. Hence, some view modern tourism as an extension of colonialism (Palmer, 1994).</p><p>　　Critics have, over the years, constructed a discourse of i

17、nternational tourism in terms dependency theory. Exploration, hunting, and trading dominated touristic purposes at least until the mid-nineteenth century (Chachage, 1999). Extractive as is the nature of such tourism, gai

18、ns were made and directions of development controlled by the colonial powers and their agents. Such activities caused a heavy depletion of ecological resources in the colonies. Still today, tourism remains the privilege

19、of</p><p>　　Worldview of the developed West tends to stress the “development” part of sustainable development, while the Eastern worldview in general attaches relatively</p><p>　　more importance

20、 to the “sustainability” part, independent of whether such an approach leads to development or not in the strict material sense of the term. Tourism theoreticians, especially the sociological school, try to take a middle

21、 path in an attempt</p><p>　　to be comprehensive. For them, sustainable tourism is that which is developed and maintained in a form such that it is viable over an indefinite period of time and does not degra

22、de or alter the physical and human environment to an extent that it prohibits the successful development and well being of other activities and processes (Jafari, 2000).</p><p>　　The confusion, according to

23、some, lies in our failure to appreciate in total the diverse conceptions that different communities hold – worldviews that are gestalts (Clark, 1991) which effectively prohibit attempts to compound these conceptions (

24、each of which are meaningful to at least the members of the espousing community) into a richer and more encompassing reality. Such an encompassing reality would be more agreeable to the ecological school than is the econ

25、omic counterpart which tends to </p><p>　　The material presented above is only to suggest that the complexity involved in constructing knowledge in different contextual frames make the entire debate on GATS

26、and sustainable tourism extremely problematic, especially since stake holding communities are spread across continents and cultures.</p><p>　　What is GATS and what is its present status?</p><p>

27、　　The GATS is an international treaty within the WTO system establishing the multilateral trade rules governing cross-border trade in services. The three negotiating principles defining GATS are to:</p><p>　

28、　create a multilateral framework of principles and rules regarding services trade and elaboration of possible disciplines for individual services sectors;</p><p>　　expand trade in services in a transparent m

29、anner and through a continuous process of liberalization; and</p><p>　　promote the economic growth of all trading partners and the development of developing countries through progressive services market open

30、ing.</p><p>　　Four modes of service supply</p><p>　　GATS identifies four modes of supply of services:</p><p>　　“cross-border supply of services” (in which the service is supplied fr

31、om the territory of one member into the territory of another member);</p><p>　　“consumption abroad” (in which the service is supplied in the territory of one member to a service consumer coming from another

32、member);</p><p>　　“commercial presence” (in which the service is supplied by setting up a business or professional establishment in the territory of one member by a service supplier of another member); and&l

33、t;/p><p>　　“movement of natural persons” (in which a human being from one WTO member going to the territory of another member to provide a service there for short-term, non-immigrant, business-related purposes)

34、.</p><p>　　It may be noted that among the four modes of supply for services previewed by GATS – cross border supply, consumption abroad, commercial presence, and presence of natural persons – tourism is spec

35、ifically represented in the mode of “consumption abroad.” Examples of the four modes include the following:</p><p>　　A Thai sex tourism provider offering virtual sex service in India and facilitating electro

36、nic booking of packages to Pattaya, Thailand.</p><p>　　An Indian national on a trip to the US catered by the US hotelier. (The percentage of members putting no restriction on market access is highest

37、here.)</p><p>　　A US destination developer acquiring the rural tourism resources in the backwater regions of Kerala, India as a separate subsidiary corporation under Indian laws.</p><p>　　This s

38、ame US-based corporation sends a US planner to oversee the operations in India. (This is the mode which has received the stiffest resistance.)</p><p>　　Some key challenges</p><p>　　The travel an

39、d tourism industry is a multilateralizing industry regulated on a global, national, and regional basis. The full liberalization of tourism services should be a win-win situation for all. However, the potentially predator

40、y practices of a few dominant suppliers in the world tourism markets are creating inequities. None-the-less, global decision makers have determined to take the world through the path of free trade. Therefore, the best po

41、ssible course of action for interested parties </p><p>　　Governments should recognize that the GATS process is not all positive. GATS, in some cases, may be a one-way street toward increased limitations on e

42、nvironmentally and socially responsible policies. Once countries adopt increased commitments in particular sectors, it is virtually impossible to reverse course. Countries can list limitations on their commitm

43、ents, but once they have done so, they can only increase those limitations or reverse a commitment altogether after waiting three </p><p>　　Liberalization of international tourism can be extremely positive f

44、or development and for the environment, particularly when compared with some of the rather restrictive development models employed in many parts of the world. It can open countries and cultures to currents of free

45、 thoughts and democracy, international</p><p>　　understanding and peace, good governance, and respect for human rights. It can lead to the replacement of inefficient, polluting technology with more modern

46、 equipment. It can generate the wealth needed to address development problems. A rising standard of living will usually lead to a stronger demand for environmental quality. However, it must be remembered that these oppor

47、tunities are also challenges. The fruition of these opportunities is contingent upon how we meet the associated cha</p><p>　　Prove and exemplify that sustainability issues offer one and the only mea

48、ns for developing truly sustainable international tourism.</p><p>　　Frame guidelines for future negotiations in such a manner that when implemented, only sustainable use of touristic resources will result in

49、 profit. This is one of the best ways for trade liberalization efforts to regain the lost legitimacy.</p><p>　　Ensure that the rounds of negotiations are open to all legitimate parties, including governmenta

50、l tourism bodies (NTOs) and their inter-governmental (IGOs) counterparts, destination and attraction owners, intermediaries, accessibility and amenity providers, representatives of the labor force, local communities at t

51、he destinations, NGOs, and other grassroots level organizations.</p><p>　　Demand commitment and cooperation of suppliers of air, land, and maritime infrastructure, construction and management services, and o

52、ther entities, in the sustainable development programs of international and regional organizations.</p><p>　　Ensure that international trade negotiations are not carried out in isolation and do not undermine

53、 concerted efforts in multiple forums to promote sustainable development, thereby preventing conflicting legal obligations for governments.</p><p>　　Demand the establishment of local chapters within the WTO

54、organization with reasonable autonomy to take into account local priorities and concerns and incorporate them into a wider bottom-up framework.</p><p>　　Provide educational and training drives aimed at the d

55、eveloping world to enable or empower them to take advantage of increased open trade. Awareness programs in the areas of gender equitability and related issues should also be designed.</p><p>　　Ensure that tr

56、ade policy issues do not impose themselves into other policy areas that are weaker and less market supported, but possibly better reflecting the essence of human culture.</p><p>　　Lobby for a special annex o

57、n tourism since heterogeneity of the industry makes it virtually impossible to monitor progressive liberalization and its impacts. One probable solution is a cluster approach modifying the World Tourism Organization’s TS

58、A. This will, in addition, not fundamentally thwart the “negotiate as a package” requirement.</p><p>　　Concluding remarks</p><p>　　International cooperation in trading services is not new, but t

59、he GATS represents the first multilateral trade agreement effort to establish rules governing services trade, including travel and tourism, and to provide a framework for multilateral negotiations on improved market acce

60、ss for foreign services and service suppliers. It reflects a growing realization of the economic importance of trade in services, as well as the need for closer cooperation among nations in a world with growing in<

61、;/p><p>　　GATS schedules remains by and large untested and the complexity involved in the provision of tourism services makes the likelihood of a wrong calculation very probable. At the St Petersburg WTO trade

62、summit on July 17, 2006, G8 and the þ 5(i.e. China, Brazil, India, South Africa, and Mexico) country leaders underlined the need to conclude the Doha deal, and called on their negotiators to resume talks with a view

63、 to bridging existing gaps within a month. However, no deal was made and it was agree</p><p>　　Tourism as a topic of debate has not been championed by any country worth mentioning, except a few voices here a

64、nd there like that from the Dominican Republic. In the absence of a strong democratic voice from the South, no agreement can help the small and medium players in this region. Tourism public policy makers too should be wa

65、ry of this: as stated elsewhere in the present paper, autonomy in public policymaking in tourism may be compromised by GATS – in terms of redistributive growth policies</p><p>　　tourism products, etc.) that

66、may be seen as barriers to entry but are in sympathy with more sustainable ways of assuring tourism growth.</p><p>　　The debate on GATS and its impacts have gone through a radical shift in the post-9/11 worl

67、d. Potentially diverse conceptions of terms and their diverse practical</p><p>　　realizations in different communities, cultures, and among competing stakeholders can restrict the scope of them (Mattoo and S

68、ubramanian, 1998). However, as noted by Cleverdon and Kalisch (2000), lack of consensus should not be construed as an opportunity to bulldoze upon all the vested opinions of the mighty.</p><p><b>　　旅游服

69、務(wù)貿(mào)易總協(xié)定</b></p><p>　　可持續(xù)發(fā)展與其他發(fā)展問題</p><p>　　Babu P. George Tony L. Henthorne</p><p><b>　　摘要</b></p><p>　　目的——本文著眼于第三世界中《服務(wù)貿(mào)易總協(xié)定》（GATS）對(duì)旅游可持續(xù)發(fā)展可能產(chǎn)生的影響。&

70、lt;/p><p>　　設(shè)計(jì)/方法論/途徑——本文是對(duì)此問題的探索。</p><p>　　調(diào)查結(jié)果——調(diào)查結(jié)果大體上意味著《服務(wù)貿(mào)易總協(xié)定》的發(fā)展歷史與中小規(guī)模企業(yè)對(duì)旅游業(yè)的愿望不一致，尤其是那些位于南方的企業(yè)。同時(shí)，協(xié)定只顯示了可持續(xù)發(fā)展原則的不足。</p><p>　　現(xiàn)實(shí)意義——從務(wù)實(shí)的層面來講，本文強(qiáng)調(diào)了對(duì)利益相關(guān)者的機(jī)遇和挑戰(zhàn)，側(cè)重于旅游業(yè)發(fā)展中的弱勢(shì)群體，并

71、提供了一套明智的行動(dòng)準(zhǔn)則。</p><p>　　獨(dú)創(chuàng)性/價(jià)值——本文試圖以便于理解的口吻解釋技術(shù)性深?yuàn)W的協(xié)議條款的意義和目的，并提供了一套使協(xié)議最佳結(jié)構(gòu)化的指導(dǎo)方針。本文為談判專家、旅游商界、非政府組織、政府和其他利益相關(guān)者群體提供了有價(jià)值的建議。</p><p>　　關(guān)鍵詞：旅游管理、可持續(xù)發(fā)展、發(fā)展中國家</p><p><b>　　引言</b&

72、gt;</p><p>　　在我們所生活的世界里，有關(guān)國際貿(mào)易協(xié)定方面，大型跨國公司在與國家和政府的談判中執(zhí)掌巨大的經(jīng)濟(jì)力量。誠然，許多這樣的協(xié)議并非出自于跨國公司對(duì)那些以前無法進(jìn)入的地區(qū)和市場(chǎng)增加的準(zhǔn)入要求的需要。歐洲和美國以及他們的州政府的服務(wù)業(yè)已經(jīng)在積極游說和進(jìn)一步推動(dòng)《服務(wù)貿(mào)易總協(xié)定》（GATS）的自由化。他們的主要游說團(tuán)體包括歐洲服務(wù)業(yè)論壇和美國服務(wù)行業(yè)聯(lián)盟。部分地出于這個(gè)原因，關(guān)于企業(yè)道德商業(yè)慣例和尋

73、求一個(gè)更加公平的貿(mào)易體系的呼聲逐漸增加（Sinclair, 2000）。</p><p>　　20世紀(jì)結(jié)束和新世紀(jì)開始時(shí)，貿(mào)易的一個(gè)顯著特征是區(qū)域貿(mào)易協(xié)定和多邊協(xié)議的擴(kuò)張。服務(wù)的國際化是當(dāng)今經(jīng)濟(jì)全球化的核心。服務(wù)貿(mào)易協(xié)定作為世界貿(mào)易組織（WTO）于1994年形成的結(jié)構(gòu)的一部分，被期待著將對(duì)全世界人民的日常生活及生活環(huán)境產(chǎn)生至關(guān)重要的影響。自從談判在高度壓縮的時(shí)間表中實(shí)施以來，該框架的真正影響就已經(jīng)開始出現(xiàn)了。服務(wù)

74、業(yè)預(yù)計(jì)占全球GDP的61%，是當(dāng)今跨國生產(chǎn)鏈條中塑造全球經(jīng)濟(jì)的關(guān)鍵因素。包含旅游業(yè)（據(jù)一部分人稱是開啟世界全球化進(jìn)程的消費(fèi)主義的終極范例）的服務(wù)部門走在極致的前列（Handszuh, 2001）。旅游業(yè)占服務(wù)貿(mào)易總協(xié)定承諾的最大一部分比例（128）。不論是什么發(fā)展水平，旅游部門都是所有國家展示具體的和量化的貿(mào)易機(jī)會(huì)的服務(wù)部門中的一員（Paton, 2003）。然而，服務(wù)貿(mào)易總協(xié)定的終極目標(biāo)是使每個(gè)世界貿(mào)易組織國家的每個(gè)服務(wù)部門商業(yè)化，包

75、含諸如醫(yī)療保健、教育和飲用水等的基礎(chǔ)服務(wù)業(yè)。</p><p>　　可持續(xù)旅游的政治經(jīng)濟(jì)學(xué)理論：在發(fā)展中國家，理論和實(shí)踐旅游業(yè)作為一個(gè)產(chǎn)業(yè)正在迅速增加。由于基于中心-邊緣依賴、全球化和自由貿(mào)易的全球貿(mào)易關(guān)系的歷史性不平等，主流大眾旅游加劇了南部目的地的社會(huì)和經(jīng)濟(jì)缺點(diǎn)。因此，一些人認(rèn)為現(xiàn)代旅游業(yè)是殖民主義的延伸（Palmer, 1994）。</p><p>　　多年以來，評(píng)論家已經(jīng)構(gòu)建了一個(gè)國

76、際旅游方面依附理論的論述。至少直到19世紀(jì)中期，探索、狩獵和貿(mào)易主宰了旅游業(yè)的目的（Chachage, 1999）。因?yàn)樗魅∈沁@種旅游的本質(zhì)，所以殖民列強(qiáng)及其代理控制了收益和發(fā)展方向。這些活動(dòng)在殖民地中引發(fā)了生態(tài)資源的巨大消耗。直到今天，旅游仍然是少數(shù)人的特權(quán)。世界貿(mào)易組織預(yù)測(cè)，到2020年，只有7%的世界人口會(huì)出國旅行。我們可以看到隱藏在當(dāng)今“探險(xiǎn)旅游”和“生態(tài)旅游”的發(fā)展中的是對(duì)“異國風(fēng)情”探索的推動(dòng)力（Poon, 1998）。即使

77、是在今天，控制和訪問游客數(shù)量的機(jī)制和策略，以及發(fā)送國和東道國在保留旅游支出上的斗爭(zhēng)，都沒有本質(zhì)上的區(qū)別。盡管在比較優(yōu)勢(shì)上擁有豐富的資源，發(fā)展中國家和他們的旅游實(shí)體仍然比發(fā)達(dá)的商業(yè)（國家）伙伴承受著更強(qiáng)烈的成本和發(fā)展壓力（Hindley and Smith, 1994）。不考慮所有的浪漫主義，現(xiàn)實(shí)的底線是，旅游是一個(gè)“商業(yè)交易，是在世界市場(chǎng)上待售的商品”。從不同的觀點(diǎn)出發(fā)，在傳統(tǒng)觀念上認(rèn)為單一地說旅游業(yè)好是有問題的（Grassl, 199

78、9）。</p><p>　　西方發(fā)達(dá)國家的世界觀趨向于強(qiáng)調(diào)“發(fā)展”是可持續(xù)發(fā)展的一部分，但是東方的世界觀通常認(rèn)為“可持續(xù)”部分更重要，而不依賴于是否這種方法在術(shù)語的嚴(yán)格意義上導(dǎo)致了發(fā)展。旅游理論家，尤其是社會(huì)學(xué)派，試圖嘗試全面的中間途徑。對(duì)他們來說，可持續(xù)旅游是以開發(fā)和維護(hù)的形式存在的，它在無限時(shí)間內(nèi)是可行的，并不降低或改變自然和人文環(huán)境，它在某種程度上阻止了其他活動(dòng)和進(jìn)程的運(yùn)作（Jafari, 2000）。&l

79、t;/p><p>　　一些人認(rèn)為，我們的困惑在于對(duì)不同概念的理解錯(cuò)誤——世界觀是有效地阻止那些試圖混淆更豐富更圍繞現(xiàn)實(shí)的概念（至少每個(gè)概念對(duì)擁護(hù)團(tuán)隊(duì)的成員來說是有意義的）的完全形態(tài)（Clark, 1991）。相比經(jīng)濟(jì)，對(duì)手傾向于通過精確的、科學(xué)的、良好定義的目標(biāo)和計(jì)量方法來達(dá)到目的，圍繞現(xiàn)實(shí)對(duì)生態(tài)來說更令人愉快。一些“科學(xué)”的經(jīng)濟(jì)學(xué)家的堅(jiān)決的態(tài)度背叛了他們的知識(shí)慣性，他們忘記了市場(chǎng)理性不是別的，而是對(duì)市場(chǎng)的個(gè)人理解的

80、——因?yàn)樵谝恍└邔哟蔚募w理解之下，一個(gè)人對(duì)集體理解變成了當(dāng)下他的個(gè)人理解，這些難以控制的思想導(dǎo)致了螺旋式的無休止的重復(fù)。</p><p>　　以上提出的材料只是顯示出在不同的環(huán)境架構(gòu)里，所涉及的結(jié)構(gòu)知識(shí)的復(fù)雜性會(huì)對(duì)服務(wù)貿(mào)易總協(xié)定和可持續(xù)旅游業(yè)造成及其不確定的爭(zhēng)論，尤其是因?yàn)槔嫦嚓P(guān)團(tuán)體逐步傳遍各大洲和不同文化之間。</p><p>　　什么是GATS和它目前的狀態(tài)是什么？</p&

81、gt;<p>　　《服務(wù)貿(mào)易總協(xié)定》是世界貿(mào)易組織管轄的一項(xiàng)多邊貿(mào)易協(xié)議，是WTO服務(wù)貿(mào)易法的基本規(guī)范和核心規(guī)范。《服務(wù)貿(mào)易總協(xié)定》的三個(gè)典型的談判原則是︰</p><p>　?。?）針對(duì)個(gè)別服務(wù)部門，創(chuàng)建一個(gè)原則和規(guī)則上的多邊性框架，內(nèi)容關(guān)于服務(wù)貿(mào)易和可能紀(jì)律的細(xì)分;</p><p>　?。?）在透明度和逐步自由化的條件下，擴(kuò)大全球服務(wù)貿(mào)易;</p><

82、p>　　（3）通過服務(wù)市場(chǎng)的不斷開放，促進(jìn)各成員的經(jīng)濟(jì)增長(zhǎng)和發(fā)展中國家服務(wù)業(yè)的發(fā)展。</p><p>　　四種方式的國際貿(mào)易服務(wù)</p><p>　　《服務(wù)貿(mào)易總協(xié)定》規(guī)定國際服務(wù)貿(mào)易具體包括四種方式：</p><p>　　（1）"跨境交付"（從一成員境內(nèi)向任何其他成員境內(nèi)提供服務(wù)）;</p><p>　?。?）&q

83、uot;境外消費(fèi)"（在一成員境內(nèi)向任何其他成員的服務(wù)消費(fèi)者提供服務(wù)）;</p><p>　?。?）"商業(yè)存在"（一成員的服務(wù)提供者在任何其他成員境內(nèi)以商業(yè)存在提供服務(wù)）;</p><p>　?。?）“自然人流動(dòng)”（一成員的服務(wù)提供者在任何其他成員境內(nèi)以自然的存在提供服務(wù)）。</p><p>　　通過《服務(wù)貿(mào)易總協(xié)定》呈現(xiàn)出的四種服務(wù)貿(mào)易

84、的方式—跨境交付、境外消費(fèi)、商業(yè)存在和自然人流動(dòng)—旅游業(yè)是“境外消費(fèi)”這一模式的典型代表。四種模式的示例包括以下內(nèi)容︰</p><p>　?。?)泰國色情旅游提供者在印度提供虛擬性服務(wù)，并且使被服務(wù)者通過電子預(yù)約到泰國芭提雅享用服務(wù)變得更方便。</p><p>　?。?) 一位印度的公民在美國旅游的過程中，被美國的旅館老板服務(wù)。（在這里，沒有限制的市場(chǎng)準(zhǔn)入成員的百分比是最高的）。</

85、p><p>　?。?)美國的地產(chǎn)開發(fā)商在印度喀拉拉邦的一個(gè)未被開發(fā)的地區(qū)獲得一處田園旅游資源，此處則會(huì)作為在印度法律管理下的印度子公司。</p><p>　?。?）上述的美國總公司派送了一名美國的計(jì)劃者去監(jiān)督印度公司的運(yùn)營(yíng)。</p><p><b>　　一些關(guān)鍵的挑戰(zhàn)</b></p><p>　　旅游和旅游業(yè)是一個(gè)在全球的、

86、國家和地區(qū)的基礎(chǔ)上管制的多邊型產(chǎn)業(yè)。旅游服務(wù)的全面開放對(duì)所有方面來說都應(yīng)該是一個(gè)雙贏局面。然而，一些占主導(dǎo)地位的供應(yīng)商在世界旅游市場(chǎng)的潛在掠奪性的做法會(huì)造成不公平的現(xiàn)象。但是全球的決策者們?nèi)匀挥袥Q心可以通過自由貿(mào)易的途徑去占有這個(gè)世界。因此，為有關(guān)各方考慮，最好的可能性行動(dòng)過程是在確保會(huì)受影響的群體能夠得到一個(gè)公平待遇的條件范圍內(nèi)去履行。這些條件包括獲得投資和技術(shù)的使用權(quán)。這對(duì)于網(wǎng)絡(luò)貿(mào)易來說是尤為重要的。網(wǎng)絡(luò)貿(mào)易在全球旅游產(chǎn)業(yè)的信息傳播

87、方面有潛力成為一個(gè)最好的公平主義者。此外，它也有可能作為一個(gè)有療效的體系去服務(wù)于國際旅游產(chǎn)業(yè)所萌發(fā)的負(fù)面影響，充足的方針政策的存在，以及在管理上和制度上的基礎(chǔ)設(shè)施建設(shè)，使人類有能力去了解缺口在哪里，以及他們可以怎么樣被利用。</p><p>　　各國政府應(yīng)該認(rèn)識(shí)到《服務(wù)貿(mào)易總協(xié)定》的實(shí)施并非都是積極的影響。在某些情況下，它可能是朝著有關(guān)環(huán)境方面和社會(huì)方面的不斷增加的一條單行道。一旦國家采用在特定部門增加承諾，它是

88、幾乎不可能扭轉(zhuǎn)的。國家可以對(duì)他們的承諾列出限制，但一旦他們這樣做，他們只能增加那些限制或在等待三年后才能完全的扭轉(zhuǎn)一個(gè)承諾，然后提供補(bǔ)償 （通過開放另一個(gè)部門的自由化）。尤其是對(duì)于發(fā)展中國家來說，這樣的規(guī)則可能會(huì)在處理跨國投資事物上捆綁住政府的解決策略（克曼和布拉加，1997年）。</p><p>　　國際旅游的自由化可以對(duì)發(fā)展和環(huán)境產(chǎn)生極為積極的影響，特別是與世界上許多采取限制型發(fā)展模式的地區(qū)相比。它可以打開國

89、家和文化向著自由民主，對(duì)人權(quán)的尊重，這樣的潮流發(fā)展。它可以通過使用更多的現(xiàn)代設(shè)備取代效率低下并且會(huì)造成污染的技術(shù)。它能夠集中所需的財(cái)富，去解決發(fā)展的問題。生活水平的提高通常會(huì)導(dǎo)致對(duì)環(huán)境質(zhì)量的強(qiáng)勁需求。然而，必須記住的是，這些是機(jī)會(huì)也是挑戰(zhàn)。這些機(jī)會(huì)的獲得是取決于我們?nèi)绾螒?yīng)對(duì)相關(guān)的挑戰(zhàn)。作為有責(zé)任的公民和群體，我們應(yīng)該︰</p><p>　　●證明并舉例說明可持續(xù)性議題為國際旅游產(chǎn)業(yè)的可持續(xù)發(fā)展的真實(shí)性提供一個(gè)也是

90、唯一的途徑。</p><p>　　●對(duì)于未來談判的結(jié)構(gòu)指導(dǎo)方針，僅以旅游資源的可持續(xù)性使用將會(huì)帶來利潤(rùn)，這樣的途徑去實(shí)施。通過貿(mào)易自由化努力奪回失去的合法性，這是最佳途徑之一。</p><p>　　●確保幾輪談判都是向所有合法當(dāng)事方公開的，包括政府旅游機(jī)構(gòu)（NTOs）和政府間組織(IGOs)、地點(diǎn)和景點(diǎn)的擁有者、中介機(jī)構(gòu)、輔助媒介和設(shè)施的提供商，勞動(dòng)代表，所在地的當(dāng)?shù)亟M織，非政府組織和其他

91、基層組織。</p><p>　　●在國際和地區(qū)組織的可持續(xù)性發(fā)展項(xiàng)目里，空氣、土地和海洋基礎(chǔ)設(shè)施，建設(shè)和管理服務(wù)，以及其他實(shí)體的提供者的需求承諾和合作。</p><p>　　●確保國際貿(mào)易談判不進(jìn)行孤立和不損害在多個(gè)論壇中所促成的可持續(xù)發(fā)展議題，從而為各國政府防止沖突的法律義務(wù)的產(chǎn)生。</p><p>　　●要求在世貿(mào)組織管控下的合理自主權(quán)范圍內(nèi)建立地方分會(huì)，并且考

92、慮到當(dāng)?shù)氐膬?yōu)先順序和關(guān)注點(diǎn)，并將其納入更廣泛的自下而上得框架內(nèi)。</p><p>　　●旨在發(fā)展中世界提供教育和培訓(xùn)去確?；蚴鞘顾麄兡軌虿扇?yōu)勢(shì)增強(qiáng)開放貿(mào)易。此外，在性別等領(lǐng)域的認(rèn)知程序和相關(guān)的議題也應(yīng)該被計(jì)劃。</p><p>　　●確保貿(mào)易政策問題不會(huì)把自己強(qiáng)加進(jìn)其他較弱并且較少的市場(chǎng)支持的政策方面，而是要盡可能更好的反映人類文化的精髓。</p><p>　　●

93、對(duì)于旅游業(yè)一個(gè)特別的附加物進(jìn)行游說，因?yàn)樵撔袠I(yè)的多相性使它幾乎不可能監(jiān)控漸進(jìn)的自由主義化和其影響。一個(gè)可能的解決方案是通過一個(gè)群集途徑去修改世界旅游組織的TSA。此外，這將不能從根本上阻止"作為一攬子談判"的要求。</p><p><b>　　結(jié)論</b></p><p>　　在貿(mào)易服務(wù)領(lǐng)域展開國際合作并不是新鮮的，GATS代表第一個(gè)多邊的貿(mào)易協(xié)定

94、致力于去建立相關(guān)的規(guī)則去管理服務(wù)貿(mào)易，包括旅游和旅游產(chǎn)業(yè)，以及去提供一個(gè)用于多邊談判的架構(gòu)，為了提高跨國服務(wù)和服務(wù)供應(yīng)者的市場(chǎng)準(zhǔn)入。它反映出服務(wù)貿(mào)易的經(jīng)濟(jì)重要性的意識(shí)在不斷增長(zhǎng)，同時(shí)在全世界各國之間的相互依賴，緊密合作的需求在不斷增長(zhǎng)（李和阿爾，2002年）。正確恰當(dāng)?shù)募軜?gòu)和實(shí)施，使《服務(wù)貿(mào)易總協(xié)定 》成為至關(guān)重要的一步，預(yù)示著國際經(jīng)濟(jì)合作時(shí)代的到來。</p><p>　　《服務(wù)貿(mào)易總協(xié)定》的待辦事項(xiàng)，大體上仍然

95、是未經(jīng)測(cè)試，并且旅游業(yè)服務(wù)的規(guī)定所涉及的復(fù)雜性使錯(cuò)誤計(jì)算的可能性幾率更大。2006年7月17號(hào)，在圣彼得斯堡召開的世貿(mào)組織首腦會(huì)議上，八國集團(tuán)和金磚五國（即中國、巴西、印度、南非和墨西哥）國家領(lǐng)導(dǎo)人強(qiáng)調(diào)有必要達(dá)成多哈協(xié)議，并呼吁他們的談判人員恢復(fù)會(huì)談，以便在一個(gè)月內(nèi)縮小現(xiàn)有差距。然而，并沒有達(dá)成協(xié)議，并且多國達(dá)成一致要抽出時(shí)間去重新考慮他們的立場(chǎng)。主要的障礙是三角關(guān)系中兩個(gè)農(nóng)業(yè)基礎(chǔ)框架里，市場(chǎng)準(zhǔn)入和國內(nèi)支持。當(dāng)談判再次展開時(shí)它尚不清晰。

96、《服務(wù)貿(mào)易總協(xié)定》，包括對(duì)旅游業(yè)影響的規(guī)定，是多哈回合談判的一部分，它的未來也肯定是不能被確定的。盡管世貿(mào)組織一直在敦促各方去推進(jìn)發(fā)展，這個(gè)回合仍沒有在2006年明確地完成。在這兩者之間，貿(mào)易爭(zhēng)端有可能增加，以及雙邊和區(qū)域協(xié)定可能激增。不確定因素可能會(huì)產(chǎn)生干涉的力量使談判的整個(gè)軌跡改變方向(瑪特圖，1999年)。</p><p>　　旅游業(yè)作為一個(gè)辯論的主題卻沒有被任何值得提及的國家所擁護(hù)，除了像來自于多米尼亞共

97、和國的各處的一些聲音。沒有來自于南部的強(qiáng)民主的聲音，在這一地區(qū)，也沒有協(xié)議可以幫助小型和中型的參與者。旅游業(yè)公共政策制定者也應(yīng)該警惕這一點(diǎn)︰如本文其他地方所述，在旅游產(chǎn)業(yè)中公立的決策自主權(quán)要受制于《服務(wù)貿(mào)易總協(xié)定》—依據(jù)于再分配經(jīng)濟(jì)增長(zhǎng)的政策、地方投資和可持續(xù)發(fā)展問題（旅游地點(diǎn)，旅游產(chǎn)品等），除了有利于保證旅游業(yè)增長(zhǎng)的可持續(xù)性發(fā)展，這可能被視為進(jìn)入的貿(mào)易壁壘。</p><p>　　針對(duì)于《服務(wù)貿(mào)易總協(xié)定 》及其影