当今时代，数字化进程对传统商业贸易模式带来了革命性的变革，数字贸易作为新兴领域，正逐渐成为全球经济中的焦点。一般而言，数字贸易涵盖了对于数字化方式订购的商品或数字化方式传输的服务的贸易。鉴于各国间利益的分歧，在全球范围内达成统一的数字贸易协议仍然充满挑战。尽管如此，全球数字贸易的主要参与者仍在努力通过签署或参与双边自由贸易协定（FTA）或地区自由贸易协定（RTA）来领导数字贸易规则的设计和全球数字经济转型的趋势。目前，中国是发展中国家中最重要的参与者之一，而美国在全球范围内扮演着主导角色。本文从结构性权力的角度出发，对中国和美国在塑造国际数字贸易秩序方面的优势和劣势进行了全面的政治经济分析。对于结构性权力存在的四种结构——安全、生产、金融和知识结构，本文进行了详细的探讨，分析了中国和美国的数字贸易结构性权力的形成机制及其背后动因，并对RCEP、CPTPP和IPEF进行案例研究，分析了中国和美国的数字贸易结构性权力在这些框架下的表现。最终，本文得出结论：在安全、金融和知识结构中，中国的数字贸易结构性权力不如美国强大，其中安全方面的结构性权力在目前尤为薄弱。不过，中国在这些结构中的数字贸易结构性权力整体呈上升趋势。在生产结构中，中国和美国在数字化订购和数字化交付贸易的生产中各有独特优势。总体而言，中国和美国在数字贸易中的结构性权力并非最开始就被战略性地发展而来，而是由国家发展过程中的各种内在动因驱动、逐渐演变形成的。随着数字经济时代的到来，两国水到渠成地开始运用已形成的数字贸易结构性权力影响国际规则制定，确保在这些框架内维护自身利益。结构性权力在数字贸易国际规则制定中扮演了关键角色，这一点在CPTPP、RCEP和IPEF等重要的区域自由贸易协定或经济框架的建立和发展中得到了充分体现。
Digitalization is now having a profound influence on traditional trade, and the newly emerging concept of digital trade is attracting more attention. In general, digital trade means the trade of digitally ordered goods or digitally delivered services. In this field, unanimous agreements can hardly be reached worldwide due to conflicts of interests between different countries. However, major participants of global digital trade are still striving to take the lead in the design of digital trade rules and the trend of global digital economic transformation at large, mainly through the signing of or participation in bilateral Free Trade Agreements (FTA) or multilateral Regional Trade Agreements (RTA). Currently, China is one of the most important participants in the developing world, and the United States plays a dominant role worldwide.This article provides comprehensive political and economic analysis regarding the formation of the current strengths and weaknesses of China and the US in determining the international digital trade order from the perspective of structural power. Regarding the digital trade structural power of China and the US, this article gives a thorough analysis in terms of the four structures defined by Susan Strange in her theory of structural power: security, production, finance, and knowledge, to discuss how different types of structural power have been formed in these different structures and their endogenous reasons in the context of digital trade, and provides case studies of RCEP, the CPTPP, and the IPEF by analyzing the manifestation and effects of the digital trade structural power of China and the US under these frameworks. Finally, this study leads to the conclusion: In the security, finance, and knowledge structures, China‘s structural power is not as strong as that of the US, and its structural power in security is particularly weak at present. However, the structural power of China in these structures is also on a trend of increase. In the production structure, both China and the U.S. have their distinct advantages in the production process of digitally ordered and digital delivery trade. In general, China and the US did not strategically develop their structural power in digital trade from the very beginning. Instead, their structural power evolved naturally through the processes of national development, driven by various endogenous factors. With the advent of the digital economy era, both nations naturally started to apply their structural power to influence international rules and regulations, seeking to secure their interests within these international regulatory frameworks. Structural power plays a significant role in the formulation of international rules, which can be reflected in the establishment and development of important regional free trade agreements or economic frameworks, such as the CPTPP, RCEP, and the IPEF.
