自改革开放以来，我国贸易实力不断增强，目前已是全球第二大经济体和第一大货物贸易出口国。然而，在一些西方媒体报道和学者研究中，中国对外贸易却常被质疑为“资源掠夺”和“低价倾销”，这些论调加剧了国际贸易关系的紧张局势。鉴于对外贸易在大国对外经济活动中扮演的关键角色，以及作为国家间合作的重要桥梁，本文欲研究拉美地区民众对华贸易态度的影响因素，对未来中国更好地推进“高水平对外开放”和“贸易强国”战略的实施具有理论与现实两个层面的研究意义。
       为探究事实证据，本研究从理论与实证两个层面考察了拉美国家对华贸易竞争力如何影响当地居民关于中国贸易影响力的感知以及其中的传导机制。具体而言，本文首先对贸易竞争力影响拉美民众对华贸易态度的理论机制进行了深入分析，并基于中拉经贸发展与拉美对华贸易态度的典型事实进行了相关性分析；其次，利用2020年的拉丁美洲民意调查(Latinobrometro)中受访者对华贸易态度数据与拉美各国的省级对华贸易竞争力数据进行匹配，从拉美当地居民的微观感知角度切入，实证研究贸易竞争力与当地民众对华贸易态度的关系。
       研究发现：拉美国家省级区域贸易竞争力对中国在当地积极的贸易影响力具有显著促进作用，且具有行业和国家差异性。在其他变量不变的条件下，拉美各国的省级对华贸易竞争力每增加一个单位，当地民众支持与中国贸易的概率上升5.2%。其次，对与中国贸易影响力的感知在不同省份和不同人群中都存在显著差异性。具体而言，一个省的人类发展指数和平均教育指数越低，民众越认为与中国贸易是有利于当地经济的。在微观个体方面，年龄较小的、男性、教育程度更高的民众更支持与中国贸易，以及因为近年来西方媒体常发表引起国外民众误解中国的扭曲言论，媒体接触少的群体反而对中国贸易持积极态度。而高贸易竞争力会增加“左倾”和不信任政府的民众对与中国贸易的支持度。且相较于就业群体，无需工作的人的贸易态度更为积极。在理论机制检验中，研究发现贸易竞争力主要通过生产者利益效应的传导渠道影响拉美民众对中国的贸易态度。此外，没有证据表明中美冲突的变化增强或削弱了贸易竞争力对我国贸易态度的影响，且中国软实力的崛起也没有以牺牲美国为代价，破除了“中国威胁论”等不实言论。最后本文还分析了贸易偏好是否影响了个人对不同派别政党的投票，因为只有当个人对全球化的态度影响到人们的投票时，贸易政策才会受到这些偏好的影响。结果表明，选民越支持贸易，他就越有可能支持左翼政党执政。而左翼政党上台后，拉美国家更注重在国际关系中保持独立自主，削弱了美国在该地区历来占据的主导地位，为中拉合作关系的深化与发展开辟了新的路径。
       基于上述研究结论，本文从推动中国高水平对外开放的角度，提出了以下建议：首先，放弃低价低质量竞争策略，增加差异化高质量产品的生产和出口。政府应为差异化、高质量产品生产企业提供更多的优惠政策，鼓励小微企业或民营企业创新。同时，提高国家质量和环境安全标准，落实企业主体责任，严格把控质检、海关等关卡。其次，积极发挥我国对外投资和援助对就业机会的创造作用，通过跨国企业和基础设施类援建吸纳当地劳动力，并适当地降低雇佣门槛以缓解就业压力。然后，积极发挥媒体作用，扭转中国在国际上的话语劣势。中国应及时且坚决地回击外媒毫无根据的指责，用实际行动向世界展现我们的大国担当。最后，中国对外经贸活动应顺应时代发展与国内外形势变化，尤其是在后疫情时代要加强构建“人类命运共同体”、加快“一带一路”建设，并进一步推动联合国2030年可持续发展目标的实现，为国际发展合作提出中国方案、贡献中国智慧、注入中国力量。

       Since the reform and opening-up, China's trade strength has been steadily increasing, making it the second largest economy in the world and the largest exporter of goods. However, in some Western media reports and scholarly studies, China's foreign trade is often questioned as "resource plunder" and "dumping at low prices," which have exacerbated tensions in international trade relations. Given the crucial role that outward trade plays in the foreign economic activities of major powers and its role as an important bridge for inter-state cooperation, this paper aims to study the influencing factors of the public's attitude towards trade with China in the Latin American region, which has theoretical and practical implications for China's better implementation of the "high-level openness" and "trade power" strategies in the future.
       In order to explore the evidence, this study examines how Latin American countries' trade competitiveness with China affects local residents' perceptions of China's trade influence and the transmission mechanism from both theoretical and empirical perspectives. Specifically, this paper firstly provides an in-depth analysis of the theoretical mechanism by which trade competitiveness affects Latin American people's trade attitudes towards China, and conducts a correlation analysis based on the typical facts of Sino-Latin American economic and trade development and Latin American attitudes towards China; secondly, it makes use of the respondents' attitudes towards China trade in the 2020 Latinobrometro public opinion polls (Latinobrometro) to compare them with the Latin American countries' trade competitiveness at the provincial level towards China. Secondly, the relationship between trade competitiveness and local people's attitudes towards China is empirically investigated by using the matching of respondents' attitudes towards China in the Latinobrometro 2020 public opinion survey with the provincial trade competitiveness of each Latin American country, which is measured by combining the data on import and export trade of China and Latin American countries and the data on employment at the subnational level.
       The study finds that provincial-level regional trade competitiveness in Latin American countries contributes significantly to China's positive local trade influence, with industry and country variability. Holding other variables constant, for every unit increase in provincial trade competitiveness in Latin American countries, the probability that the local population supports trade with China rises by 5.2 per cent. Second, perceptions of the impact of trade with China are significantly heterogeneous across provinces and across populations. Specifically, the lower a province's human development index and average education index, the more it perceives trade with China as beneficial to the local economy. On the micro-individual level, younger, male, and more educated populations are more supportive of trade with China; as well as because of the distorted rhetoric that has often appeared in the Western media in recent years that has caused foreign populations to misinterpret China, groups with less media exposure are instead more positive about trade with China. And high trade competitiveness increases support for trade with China among people who are left-leaning and distrustful of the government. And compared to the employed group, those who do not need to work have more positive attitudes towards trade. In the theoretical mechanism test, it is found that trade competitiveness affects Latin American people's trade attitudes towards China mainly through the transmission channel of the producer benefit effect. In addition, there is no evidence that changes in the U.S.-China conflict have strengthened or weakened the impact of trade competitiveness on China's trade attitudes, and the rise of China's soft power has not been at the expense of the U.S., which has dispelled the "China Threat Theory" and other inaccurate statements. Finally, the paper also analyses whether trade preferences affect how individuals vote for different political parties, as trade policy is only affected by individual attitudes towards globalisation if these preferences affect how people vote. The results show that the more supportive a voter is of trade, the more likely he/she is to support a left-wing party in power. And after the left-wing parties came to power, Latin American countries paid more attention to maintaining independence and autonomy in international relations, weakening the dominant position traditionally occupied by the United States in the region and opening up new paths for the deepening and development of China-Latin America co-operative relations.
       Based on the above findings, this paper puts forward the following suggestions from the perspective of promoting China's high-level opening-up to the outside world: firstly, give up the low-price, low-quality competition strategy and increase the production and export of differentiated, high-quality products. The government should provide more preferential policies for enterprises producing differentiated and high-quality products, and encourage small and micro enterprises or private enterprises to innovate. At the same time, improve national quality and environmental safety standards, implement the main responsibility of enterprises, and strictly control quality inspection, customs and other barriers. Secondly, actively play the role of China's foreign investment and aid in job creation, absorbing local labour with multinational enterprises and infrastructure-type aid, and appropriately lowering the hiring threshold to alleviate employment pressure. Then, we should play an active role in the media to reverse China's discourse disadvantage in the international arena. Timely and resolute response to the foreign media's unfounded accusations, with practical actions to show the world that we are a great power. Finally, China's foreign economic and trade activities should be in line with the development of the times and changes in the domestic and international situations, especially in the post epidemic era. It should strengthen the building of a "community of human destiny", accelerate the construction of the "Belt and Road", and further promote the achievement of the United Nations 2030 Sustainable Development Goals, so as to put forward China's proposals, contribute China's wisdom, and inject China's strength into international development cooperation.

[1]曹芳芳、孙致陆、李先德.中国进口拉丁美洲农产品的影响因素分析及贸易效率测算——基于时变随机前沿引力模型的实证分析[J].世界农业,2021(04),13-22+52+111

[2]陈立敏、周材荣、倪艳霞.全球价值链嵌入、制度质量与产业国际竞争力——基于贸易增加值视角的跨国面板数据分析[J].中南财经政法大学学报,2016(05),118-126+160

[3]迟永.中国对外贸易提高了他国外交政策相似度吗？ [J].世界经济与政治, 2015(12), 131-153

[4]代谦、别朝霞.人力资本、动态比较优势与发展中国家产业结构升级[J].世界经济,2006(11),70-84+96

[5]方慧、尚雅楠.基于动态钻石模型的中国文化贸易竞争力研究[J].世界经济研究,2012(01),44-50+88

[6]高德步、王珏.世界经济史[M].中国人民大学出版社,2005

[7]管慕飞. 社交媒体辟谣对受众态度的影响[D].北京外国语大学,2017

[8]管宁、宋一淼、王凯旋、于志洲.文化距离对中拉贸易的影响[J].管理学刊,2022,35(03),17-28

[9]郭存海．中国国家形象的构建：拉美的视角[J]．拉丁美洲研究,2016(5),43-58

[10]贺平.日美贸易摩擦中的美国“对日修正主义”研究[J].世界经济研究, 2008(01), 72-78+86

[11]黄繁华、张湘莎.中国对拉美省贸易出口特征和潜力研究[J].世界经济与政治论坛,2012(06),45-58

[12]黄锦明.技术获取型对外直接投资提升全球价值链分工位次的作用机制与中国对策——以中国企业华为为例[J].现代经济探讨,2016(04),54-58

[13]贾利军.中国与拉美主要国家贸易互补性实证分析[J].世界经济研究, 2005(11), 85-89

[14]李道阳.拉美对华反倾销的特点、趋势及应对策略[J].对外经贸实务,2021(01),37-40

[15]刘晨阳、段文奇.贸易便利化与出口多样性——基于APEC的经验证据[J].国际经贸探索,2019,35(01),4-20

[16]刘峰、徐康宁、王美昌.出口、对外投资与中国国家形象:来自拉丁美洲的证据[J].国际贸易问题, 2019(02), 15-28

[17]刘晓惠.中国和墨西哥贸易关系的实证分析[J].国际贸易问题,2007(07), 38-44

[18]陆铭、陆屹洲.大变局时代中美民众的文化价值观与外交态度——基于两国网民政治态度调查的对比研究[J].当代亚太,2023(01),45-69+158

[19]陆奇. 移动社交网络对青年受众态度和行为的影响研究[D].电子科技大学,2011

[20]马丹、何雅兴、郁霞.双重价值链、经济不确定性与区域贸易竞争力——“一带一路”建设的视角[J].中国工业经济,2021(04), 81-99

[21]毛日昇.贸易强国指数的跨国经验分析[J].世界经济,2019,42(10), 23-48

[22]庞琴、梁意颖、潘俊豪.中国的经济影响与东亚国家民众对华评价——经济受惠度与发展主义的调节效应分析[J].世界经济与政治, 2017(02), 130-154

[23]任保显.“一带一路”框架下中国自拉美国家进口战略研究[J].中国软科学,2019(11),9-16

[24]邵建春.我国对拉美新兴市场出口的影响因素研究——基于引力模型和变系数面板数据模型的实证分析[J].国际贸易问题,2012(06),61-68

[25]沈国兵、陈芳萍.中美两国在印巴俄市场的贸易竞争关系[J].世界经济研究,2014(05),74-80+89

[26]盛丹、王永进.基础设施、融资依赖与省出口比较优势[J].金融研究,2012(05),15-29

[27]宋海英、胡冰川.经贸摩擦背景下中国与拉美农产品贸易分析[J].华南农业大学学报(社会科学版),2019,18(05),96-103

[28]汤志伟、钟宗炬.基于知识图谱的国内外政府信任研究对比分析[J].情报杂志, 2017,36(2), 201-206

[29]屠新泉、邱薇.美韩FTA对中国出口的贸易替代效应研究[J].世界经济研究,2011(09),57-63+88-89

[30]王冰、刘婷婷.美国公众对华态度的演变历程、原因以及中国的应对策略[J].决策与信息,2023(05),44-58

[31]王鹏.何为破解拉美政治生态困境的出路[J].世界知识,2021(18),14-16

[32]王鑫、肖唐镖.美国民众眼中的中国形象[J].江苏社会科学,2015(05),132-137

[33]谢建国、杨海燕.互补还是替代——中美贸易竞争关系的测度与分析[J].国际贸易问题,2015(11),62-72

[34]徐剑、刘康、韩瑞霞等.媒介接触下的国家形象构建——基于美国人对华态度的实证调研分析[J].新闻与传播研究,2011,18(06),17-24+108-109

[35]闫奕荣、周翠翠、随洪光.贸易便利化对我国对外直接投资的影响研究[J].经济问题探索,2021(04), 181-190

[36]杨连星、铁瑛.区域贸易协定、投资条款差异性深化与跨国并购意愿[J].管理世界,2023,39(09),36-59

[37]姚君喜.媒介接触与社会公正认知、态度及行为——以上海在校大学生为对象的实证研究[J].现代传播(中国传媒大学学报),2012,34(03),12-18

[38]姚枝仲.贸易强国的测度:理论与方法[J].世界经济,2019,42(10),3-22

[39]叶耀明、戚列静.利用外国直接投资与提升我国外贸竞争力[J].上海经济研究,2002(03),37-42+59

[40]殷德生、唐海燕、黄腾飞.国际贸易、企业异质性与产品质量升级[J].经济研究,2011,46(S2), 136-146

[41]殷志玮.中国低碳贸易竞争力测度及时空演化分析[J].技术经济与管理研究,2023(10),111-116

[42]余道先、刘海云.中国生产性服务贸易结构与贸易竞争力分析[J].世界经济研究,2010(02):49-55+88

[43]余淼杰、智琨. 进口自由化与企业利润率[J].经济研究,2016(8), 57-71

[44]曾可昕、张小蒂.中国企业家精神增进的激励机理——以矫正资本市场的估值扭曲为视角[J].学术月刊,2016,48(08),61-70

[45]张金昌.国际竞争力评价的理论和方法研究[D].中国社会科学院研究生院,2001

[46]张小蒂、李晓钟.中国外贸三强省贸易模式比较分析[J].管理世界,2002(12),40-47

[47]庄惠明、黄建忠、陈洁.基于“钻石模型”的中国服务贸易竞争力实证分析[J].财贸经济,2009(03),83-89

[48]庄芮、郑学党.中美两国在智利市场的贸易竞争关系分析[J].国际经济合作,2012(04),34-38

[49]Ajami R.Us industrial competitiveness. resurgence or decline? In: Abbas, J. (eds.) How to Manage for Intemationa Competitiveness,1992

[50]Arteaga J C, Cardozo M L, Diniz M JT.Exports to China and economic growth in Latin America, unequal effects within the region[J]. International Economics,2020,164,1-17

[51]Auer R, Fischer A M. The Effect of Low-Wage Import Competition on US Inflationary Pressure[J]. Journal of Monetary Economics, 2010,57 (4),491-503.

[52]Autor D, Dorn D, Hanson G. The China Shock: Learning from Labor-Market Adjustment to Large Changes in Trade[J]. Annual Review of Economics, 2016(8),205-240

[53]Autor D, Dorn D, Hanson G. The China Syndrome: Local Labor Market Effects of Import Competition in the United States[J]. American Economic Review, 2013,103(6),2121-2168

[54]Autor D, Dorn D, Hanson G, Majlesi K. Importing Political Polarization? The Electoral Consequences of Rising Trade Exposure[J]. American Economic Review,2020,110(10), 3139-3183

[55]Baker A . Why Is Trade Reform So Popular in Latin America? A Consumption-Based Theory of Trade Policy Preferences[J]. World Politics,2003,55,423-455

[56]Balsvik R, Jensen S, Salvanes K G. Made in China, sold in Norway: local labor market effects of an import shock[J]. Journal of Public Economics, 2015,127, 137-144

[57]Baron J, Kemp S. Support for trade restrictions, attitudes, and understanding of comparative advantage[J]. Journal of Economic Psychology, 2004,25(5), 565-580

[58]Balassa B.The Changing Pattem of Comparative Advantage in Manufactured Goods[J]. The Review of Economics and Statistics, 1979,61(2),259-266

[59]Beaulieu, E. Factor or industry cleavages in trade policy? An empirical analysis of the Stolper Samuelson theorem[J]. Economics&Politics. 2002,14 (2), 99-131

[60]Bernard A B, Jensen J B , Peter K. Schott. "Importers, Exporters, and Multinationals: A Portrait of Firms in the U.S. that Trade Goods" In Producer Dynamics: New Evidence from Micro Data. Edited by Timothy Dunne, J. Jensen, and Mark J. Roberts (eds). University of Chicago Press, 2009

[61]Bersch K, Koivumaeki RI.Making Inroads:Infrastructure, State Capacity, and Chinese Dominance in Latin American Development[Jl.Studies in Comparative International Development,2019,54,323-345

[62]Bown C P, Meredith A C. Import Protection, Business Cycles, and Exchange Rates:Evidence from the Great Recession[J]. Journal of International Economics,2013,90(5), 50-64

[63]Braml M T, Felbermayr G. Understanding Free Trade Attitudes: Evidence from Europe.2018

[64]Brewer P, Steenbergen M. All Against All: How Beliefs About Human Nature Shape Foreign Policy Options[J]. Political Psychology,2002,23 (1), 39-58

[65]Busse M, Erdogan C, MuHlen H. China's Impact on Africa——The Role of Trade,FDI and Aid[J]. Kyklos,2016,69(2), 228-262

[66]Caplan B. The 4 Boneheaded Biases of Stupid Voters:(And we’re all stupid voters.) Reason-Santa Barbara then Los Angeles, 2007, 39(5), 24

[67]Daniel F B. Competitiveness:Here to Stay[J]. The Washington Quarterly,1994,17-21

[68]Dauth W, Findeisen S, Suedekum J. The rise of the east and the far east: German labor markets and trade integration[J]. European Economic Association. 2014,12 (6), 1643-1675

[69]Diamantopoulos A, Matarazzo M, Montanari M G, Petrychenko A.The "Pricing Footprint” of Country-of-Origin: Conceptualization and Empirical Assessment[J]. Journal of Business Research,2021,135,749-757

[70]Ehrlich S D. Who Supports Compensation? Individual Preferences for Trade-Related Unemployment Insurance[J]. Business and Politics, 2010,12(1),1-22

[71]Eichenauer V Z, Fuchs A, Brückner L. The effects of trade, aid, and investment on China's image in developing countries[R].University of Heidelberg,Department of Economics,Heidelberg,Discussion Paper Series,2018

[72]Elu J, Price G N. Does China Transfer Productivity Enhancing Technology to Sub-Saharan Africa?Evidence from Manufacturing Firms[J].African Development Review,2010,22(s1),587-598

[73]Fordham B O, Kleinberg K B.How Can Economic Interests Influence Support for Free Trade?[J]. International Organization, 2012,66, 311-328

[74]Grossman G.Imperfect competition and international trade[J].European Economic Review,1992,31(1),77-81

[75]Hannan A, Haider F, Ahmad N, Ishag T. lmpact of Economic, Social and Environmental Variables:Evidence from Panel Data[J].Bulletin of Energy Economics,2015,3(4),194-202

[76]Joy M, Mc Greenhan. Competitiveness:A Survey of Recent Literaturel[J].The Economic Journal,1968,78(310),243-262

[77]Mion G, Zhu L.Import competition from and offshoring to China: A curse or blessing for firms?[J].Journal of International Economics,2013,89(1),202-215

[78]Gallagher K P, Roberto P.The Dragon in the Room: China and the Future of Latin American Industrialization[M]. Stanford: Stanford University Press,2010

[79]Gilligan M J.Empowering Exporters: Reciprocity, Delegation, and Collective Action in American Trade Policy[M]. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press,1997

[80]Goldsmith B E, Horiuchi Y, Wood T. Doing Well by Doing Good: The Impact of Foreign Aid on Foreign Public Opinion[J].Development Economics: Women,2014

[81]Grubel H G, Lloyd P J. Intra-industry trade: The theory and measurement of international trade in differentiated products[M]. Macmillan Press,1975

[82]Guisinger A.Information,Gender,and Differences in Individual Preferences for Trade[J].Journal of Women,Politics&Policy,2016,37(4), 538-561

[83]Hainmueller J, Hiscox M J. Learning to Love Globalization: Education and Individual Attitudes Toward International Trade[J], International Organization,2006,60(02), 469-498

[84]Hearn E. Buying globalization: Consumer orientation and perceptions about trade[J].Politics & Policy,2020,48(1), 168-190

[85]Huber R A, Stiller Y, Dür A. Measuring Subnational Trade Competitiveness[J]. Sci Data 10, 2023,331

[86]Jäkel I C, Smolka M. Trade policy preferences and factor abundance[J]. Journal of International Economics,2017,106, 1-19

[87]Jenkins R, Edwards L. Is China‘Crowding Out’South African Exports of Manufactures?[J]. European Journal of Development Research,2015,27( 5), 903-920

[88]Kaltenthaler K C, Miller W. Social Trust and Public Support for Trade Liberalization[J]. International Studies Quarterly,2013(57), 784-790

[89]Keller W, Yeaple S R. The Gravity of Knowledge[J].Cepr Discussion Papers,2013,103(4),1414-1444

[90]Kim I S, Osgood I. Firms in trade and trade Politics[J].Annual Review of Political Science,2019,22(1),399-417

[91]Kleinberg K B, Fordham B O. Trade and Foreign Policy Attitudes[J].Journal of Conflict Resolution,2010,4( 5), 687-714

[92]Kono D Y. Does Public Opinion Affect Trade Policy?[J]. Business and Politics,2008,10(2), 1-19

[93]Kotschwar B. China's Economic Influence in Latin America[J].Asian Economic Policy Review,2014,(9),202-222

[94]Kuetz D L , Clow K E .Services Marketing[M]. New York, John Willey & Sons, 1998

[95]Kuo J, Naoi M. Individual attitudes[J]. International Political Economy: Trade Policy eJournal, 2017

[96]Levi M, Sacks A. Legitimating Beliefs: Sources and indicators[J]. Regulation and Governance，2009, 311-333

[97]Likert R, Roslow S, Murphy G.A simple and reliable method of scoring the thurstone attitude scales[J].Personnel Psychology, 1993,46(3),689-690

[98]Magee S P, Brock W, Young L.Black Hole Tariffs and Endogenous Policy Theory[M]. Cambridge University Press,1989

[99]Mansfield E D, Mutz D C. Support for free trade: self-interest, sociotropic politics, and out-group anxiety. International Organization, 2009,63(3), 425-457

[100]Margalit Y. Lost in Globalization: International Economic Integration and the Sources of Popular Discontent[J], International Studies Quarterly,2012,56(3), 484-500

[101]Mayda A M , Rodrik D. Why are Some People (and Countries) More Protectionist than Others?[J]. European Economic Review,2005,49 (6), 1393-1430

[102]McGreal C. Thanks China, now go home: buy-up of Zambia revives old colonial fears[J]. The Guardian,2007

[103]Mughan A, Bean C, McAllister I. Economic globalization, job insecurity and the populist reaction[J]. Electoral Studies,2003,22, 617-633

[104]Naoi M, Kume I. Workers or Consumers? A Survey Experiment on the Duality of Citizens’ Interests in the Politics of Trade[J]. Comparative Political Studies, 2015,48(10), 1293-1317

[105]Narins T P.Chinese Trade in Latin America Compared to the European Unionand the United States: The Case of Technology-Intensive Exports[J].The Professional Geographer,2018(2),218-229

[106]Nathaniel A A. Enhancing global competitiveness of the Nigerian economy: Implications for multilateral trade[J]. African Journal of Business Management,2010,4(17), 3571-3587

[107]Nunn N.Relationship-Specificity, Incomplete Contracts, and the Pattern of Trade[J]. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 2007,122(2),569-600

[108]Nye J S.On the Rise and Fall of American Soft Power[J].New Perspectives Quarterly, 2005(22),75-77

[109]Onozaka Y, Honkanen P, Altintzoglou T. Sustainability, perceived quality and country of origin of farmed salmon: Impact on consumer choices in the USA, France and Japan[J]. Food Policy, 2023,117, 102452

[110]O’Rourke K, Sinnott R. The Determinants of Individual Trade Policy Preferences: International Survey Evidence[M]. Brookings Trade Forum,2001, 157-206

[111]Pilinkiene V. Trade openness, economic growth and competitiveness. The case of the central and eastern European countries[J]. Inzinerinè ekonomika,2016,27(2),185-194

[112]Plouffe M. Firm Heterogeneity and trade- Policy stances: evidence from a survey of Japanese Producers[J].Business and Politics,2017,19(1),1-40

[113]Redding S. Dynamic Comparative Advantage and the Welfare Effects of Trade[J]. Oxford Economic Papers,1999, 15-39

[114]Rho S, Tomz M.Why Don’t Trade Preferences Reflect Economic Self-Interest?[J]. International Organization, 2017,71(S1), 85-108

[115]Sargent J, Matthews L. China versus Mexico in the Global EPZ Industry: Maquiladoras, FDI Quality, and Plant Mortality[J]. World Development,2009,37(6), 1069-1082

[116]Scherer A G, Palazzo G. The new political role of business in a globalized world: A review of a new perspective on CSR and its implications for the firm, governance and democracy[J]. Journal of Management Studies,2011,48(4), 899-931

[117]Scheve K F, Slaughter M J.What determines individual trade-policy preferences?[J].Journal of International Economics,2001,54(02),267-292

[118]Xie T, Page B I.What Affects China's National Image? A cross-national study of public opinion[J]. Journal of Contemporary China, 2013, 22(83),850-867

[119]Vackar R C. The Impact of Exports to China on Latin American Growth[J]. Journal of Asian Economics,2016,47, 58-66

[120]Verlegh P W J, Steenkamp J B. A review and meta-analysis of country-of-origin research[J]. Journal of Economic Psychology,1999,20(5), 521-546

[121]Vollrath T L. A theoretical evaluation of alternative trade intensity measures of revealed comparative advantage[J]. Weltwirtschafliches Archiv,1991,127, 265-280

[122]Wang E.Engagement or containment? Americans’ views on china and sino US relations[J]. Journal of Contemporary China,2002,11(31), 381-392

[123]Watson J J, Wright K. Consumer ethnocentrism and attitudes toward domestic and foreign products[J]. European Journal of Marketing,2000,34(9/10), 1149-1166

[124]Zhu S C, Trefler D. Trade and Inequality in Developing Countries: a General Equilibrium Analysis[J]. Journal of International Economics, 2005, 65(1), 21-48