Study on Global Economic Regional Blocks and National Development Stage with International Trade Risks-Comparison on with 2009 and 2012 Financial Crisis

• Main Authors: Wei-Chi Liu, 劉韋琪
• Other Authors: Horng-Der Leu
• Format: Others
• Language: zh-TW
• Published: 2012
• Online Access: http://ndltd.ncl.edu.tw/handle/56163311361854805085

碩士 === 中原大學 === 企業管理研究所 === 100 === History never repeats, but is always surprisingly similar. Although The 2008 global financial crisis has become a part of history, the following is The 2011 European Debt Problem. These have increased the risk of international trading arrangement. Many traders may hence change their strategy. After the two financial storms, traders have to understand the issues to resolve them. In addition, following the trend of regional economic, traders have gradually changed their strategy because emerging market countries have more potential in development than important market countries. Will affect trade layout change. Therefore, the goal of this study is to discuss how traders can effectively understand the trade risks for different economic regions, and to enable enterprises to global distribution. This study is based on the past studies and research reports. And therefore aims to explore is trade risks and related variables are selected in this thesis, including (1) different Organization regional economic is divided into ‘8 countries of EU‘,’7 countries of ASEAN‘ and ’NAFTA‘. (2) different economic Organization is divided into ’G7‘, ’BRICs‘ and ’VISTA‘. (3) different GDP countries is divided into ’emerging market countries‘ and ’important market countries‘. (4) different Real GDP per Capita divided into ’High Income‘, ’Middle Income‘ and ’Lower Income‘. (5) Compared with 2009 and 2012 financial storm. This research adopts a questionnaire survey which recycles effective questionnaire 505 and finds that (1) different trade risk satisfaction in different Organization regional economic. (2) different trade risk satisfaction in different economic Organization. (3) different trade risk satisfaction in different GDP. (4) different trade risk satisfaction in different Real GDP per Capita. (5) different payment risk on 2009 and 2012.