請用此 Handle URI 來引用此文件:
http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/74486
完整後設資料紀錄
DC 欄位 | 值 | 語言 |
---|---|---|
dc.contributor.advisor | 周治邦(Jyh-Bang Jou) | |
dc.contributor.author | Fang-Tzu Liao | en |
dc.contributor.author | 廖芳慈 | zh_TW |
dc.date.accessioned | 2021-06-17T08:38:32Z | - |
dc.date.available | 2024-08-15 | |
dc.date.copyright | 2019-08-15 | |
dc.date.issued | 2019 | |
dc.date.submitted | 2019-08-08 | |
dc.identifier.citation | 英文文獻
Aggarwal, R. and Agmon, T. (1990). The International Success of Developing Country Firms: Role of Government-Directed Comparative Advantage. MIR: Management International Review, 30(2), pp. 163-180. Bardhan, P. (1997). Corruption and Development: A Review of Issues. Journal of Economic Literature, 35(3), pp. 1320-1346. Brander, J. A. and Spencer, B. J. (1985). Export Subsidies and International Market Share Rivalry. Journal of International Economics, 18(1-2), pp. 83-100. Bueno de Mesquita, B. (1975). Measuring Systemic Polarity. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 19(2), pp. 187-216. De Jong, E. and Bogmans, C. (2011). Does Corruption Discourage International Trade? European Journal of Political Economy, 27(2), pp. 385-398. Decker, J. H. and Lim. , J. J. (2009). Democracy and Trade: An Empirical Study. Economics of Governance, 10(2), pp. 165-186. Distancefromto. (2019). Distance Between Cities Places on Map. Retrieved from https://www.distancefromto.net/ Dixon, W. J. and Moon, B. E. (1993). Political Similarity and American Foreign Trade Patterns. Political Research Quarterly, 46(1), pp. 5-25. Eisenman, J. (2012). China–Africa Trade Patterns: Causes and Consequences. Journal of Contemporary China, 21(77), pp. 793-810. Eysenck, H. J. (1953). Primary Social Attitudes: A Comparison of Attitude Patterns In England, Germany and Sweden. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 48, pp. 563–568. Frankel, J. A. and Wei, S. J. (1994). Yen Bloc or Dollar Bloc? Exchange Rate Policies of The East Asian Economies. In T. Ito and A. O. Krueger, In Macroeconomic Linkage: Savings, Exchange Rates, and Capital Flows (pp. 295-333). University of Chicago Press. Frankel, J. and Rose, A. (2002). An Estimate of The Effect of Common Currencies on Trade and Income. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 117(2), pp. 437-466. Freedom House. (2019). Retrieved from Annual Freedom In The World Survey: https://www.freedomhouse.org. Frieden, J. A. (1991). Invested Interests: The Politics of National Economic Policies In A World of Global Finance. International Organization, 45(4), pp. 425-451. Garrett, G. (2000). The Causes of Globalization. Comparative Political Studies, 33(6-7), pp. 941-991. Gowa, J. and Mansfield, E. D. (1993). Power Politics and International Trade. American Political Science Review, 87(2), pp. 408-420. Head, K., Mayer, T. and Ries, J. (2010). The Erosion of Colonial Trade Linkages After Independence. Journal of International Economics, 81(1), pp. 1-14. Henisz, W. J. (2000). The Institutional Environment For Economic Growth. Economics & Politics, 12(1), pp. 1-31. Huang, Y. Y. and Huang, D. S. (2016). Technology Advantage and Home-Market Effect: A Poisson Quasi Maximum Likelihood Estimation. Taiwan Economic Forecast and Policy, 46(2), pp. 1-44. International Monetary Fund. (2017). Seeking Sustainable Growth: Short-Term Recovery, Long-Term Challenges. Washington, DC. International Monetary Fund. (2019). World Economic Outlook Database. Retrieved from World Economic and Financial Surveys: http://www.Imf.org/external/pubs/Ft/weo/2018/01/weodata/index.aspx Krugman, P. (1984). Import Protection As Export Promotion: International Competition In The Presence of Oligopoly and Economies of Scale. In H. Kierzkowski, Monopolistic Competition and International Trade (pp. 180-193). Oxford University Press. Kucera, D. and Sarna, R. (2006). Trade Union Rights, Democracy, and Exports: A Gravity Model Approach. Review of International Economics, 14(5), pp. 859-882. Lai, W. M. (2015). Rethinking The Rogowski Model: Taiwan. Journal of National Development Studies, 15(1), pp. 95-137. Lambsdorff, G. J. (1998). An Empirical Investigation of Bribery In International Trade. European Journal For Development Research, 10, pp. 40-59. Mansfield, E. D. and Milner, H. V. (2002). Why Democracies Cooperate More: Electoral Control and International Trade Agreements. Nternational Organization, 56(3), pp. 477-513. Mansfield, E. D., Milner, H. V. and Rosendorff, P. B. (2000). Free To Trade: Democracies, Autocracies, and International Trade. The American Political Science Review, 94(2), pp. 305-321. Marshall, M. G., Gurr, T. R. and Jaggers, K. (2017). Polity IV Project: Political Regime Characteristics and Transitions, 1800-2016. Center For Systemic Peace. Mauro, P. (1995). Corruption and Growth. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 110(3), pp. 681-712. Mccallumj. (1995). National Borders Matter: Canada-US Regional Trade Patterns. American Economic Review, 85(3), pp. 615-623. Mehanna, R. A. (2003). Do Politics and Culture Affect Middle East Trade? Evidence from The Gravity Model. Review of Middle East Economics and Finance, 1(2), pp. 155-170. Morrow, J. D., Siverson, R. M. and Tabares, T. E. (1998). The Political Determinants of International Trade: The Major Powers, 1907–1990. American Political Science Review, 92(3), pp. 649-661. Moser, C., Nestmann, T. and Wedow, M. (2008). Political Risk and Export Promotion: Evidence from Germany. World Economy, 31(6), pp. 781-803. Müller, G. J. (2008). Understanding The Dynamic Effects of Government Spending on Foreign Trade. Journal of International Money and Finance, 27(3), pp. 345-371. Musila, J. W. and Sigué, S. P. (2010). Corruption and International Trade: An Empirical Investigation of African Countries. World Economy, 33(1), pp. 129-146. O'Rourke, K. H. and Taylor, A. M. (2006). Democracy and Protectionism. National Bureau of Economic Research, No.W12250. Pollins, B. M. (1989). Conflict, Cooperation, and Commerce: The Effect of International Political Interactions on Bilateral Trade Flows. American Journal of Political Science, pp. 737-761. Rauch, J. E. (1999). Networks Versus Markets In International Trade. Journal of International Economics, 48(1), pp. 7-35. Rogowski, R. (1989). Commerce and Coalitions: How Trade Affects Domestic Political Alignments. In J. A. Frieden and D. A. Lake, International Political Economy: Perspectives on Global Power and Wealth (pp. 429-444). New Jersey: Princeton University Press. Rose, A. K. (2004). Do We Really Know That The WTO Increases Trade? American Economic Review, 94(1), pp. 98-114. Schneider, F. and Frey, B. S. (1985). Economic and Political Determinants of Foreign Direct Investment. World Development, 13(2), pp. 161-175. Standaert, S. (2015). Divining The Level of Corruption: A Bayesian State Space Approach. Journal of Comparative Economics, 43(3), pp. 782-803. Tinbergen, J. (1962). Shaping The World Economy: Suggestions For an International Economic Policy. New York: Twentieth Century Fund. Trubowitz, P. (1988). Defining The National Interest: Conflict and Change In American Foreign Policy. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press. Umana Dajud, C. (2013). Political Poximity and International Trade. Economics & Politics, 25(3), pp. 283-312. Werlin, H. H. (2002). Secondary Corruption: The Concept of Political Illness. The Journal of Social, Political, and Economic Studies, 27(3), pp. 341-362. Yu, M. (2010). Trade, Democracy, and The Gravity Equation. Journal of Development Economics, 91(2), pp. 289-300. 中文文獻 吳玉山(1999)。〈台灣的大陸政策:結構與理性〉,包宗和與吳玉山主編《爭辯中的兩岸關係理論》,頁 153-210。臺北:五南。 吳迪(2016)。〈民進黨兩岸經貿議題的階級訴求形成:2000-2010〉,《思與言:人文與社會科學雜誌》,54(2),頁 157-201。 林宗弘(2013)。〈ECFA之後的中國效應:兩岸貿易對台灣貧富差距與階級政治的影響〉,楊文山與尹寶珊主編《面對挑戰:台灣與香港之比較》,頁 287-325。台北:中央研究院社會學研究所。 林宗弘與胡克威(2011)。〈愛恨ECFA:兩岸貿易與臺灣的階級政治〉,《思與言:人文與社會科學雜誌》,49(3),頁 99-138。 邱明斌與黃馨筠(2010)。〈制度改革對貿易流量之影響:以東亞新興市場為例〉,《全球政治評論》,(30),頁 1-36。 耿曙與陳陸輝(2003)。〈兩岸經貿互動與台灣政治版圖:南北區塊差異的推手?〉,《問題與研究》,42(6),頁 1-27。 陳陸輝、耿曙、涂萍蘭與黃冠博(2009)。〈理性自利或感性認同?影響台灣民眾兩岸經貿立場因素的分析〉,《東吳政治學報》,27(2),頁 87-125。 黃子華(2004)。〈李登輝的治國理念與治國政策,1988-2004〉,《台北:臺灣大學政治學研究所學位論文》,頁 1-135。 黃登興與黃幼宜(2006)。〈兩岸三地貿易流量的變遷 — 引力模型的驗證〉,《台灣經濟政策與預測》,36(2),頁 47-75。 經濟部國際貿易局(2019)。〈中華民國進出口貿易統計〉。擷取自貿易統計查詢:https://cus93.trade.gov.tw/ 葉秋南(2010)。〈貪汙經濟學〉,《台灣經濟金融月刊》,46(4),頁 65-76。 劉宗欣、賴美穎與陳至還(2012)。〈區域貿易協定對台灣的貿易效果 — 引力模型的實證分析〉,《經濟論文》,40(1),頁 35-77。 蔡沐學與張國益(2013)。〈臺商對外投資在勞動成本及市場區位選擇的比較 — 臺灣主要製造業之驗證〉,《臺灣經濟預測與政策》,43(2),頁 83-122。 | |
dc.identifier.uri | http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/74486 | - |
dc.description.abstract | 雖然政治與貿易的關係緊緊相扣,但研究政治如何影響貿易的文獻相當有限,加之臺灣在國際上特殊的政治關係,使得更少文獻研究臺灣政治如何影響貿易。本研究以引力模型為基礎,並以1984年至2017年臺灣與三十個主要貿易夥伴的追蹤資料進行分析。本研究將與臺灣政治相關的變數分為三類:首先,以國民黨與民進黨執政時期來代表對中國進行貿易態度的差異;其二,探討國家內部政治發展對貿易的影響;最後,探討臺灣政治發展與他國政治發展的差距如何影響臺灣與其他國家間的貿易。
實證結果顯示,國民黨執政時期的經貿政策相較民進黨執政時期更能促進臺灣與貿易國的雙邊貿易值、進口值與出口值。其次,在國家內部政治發展部分,臺灣政治環境越自由越能促進進口;而臺灣貪腐程度越高以及貿易國貪腐程度越高,越能促進臺灣與貿易國間的雙邊貿易值、進口值與出口值。最後,臺灣與貿易國民主化程度的差距越大越能促進彼此間的雙邊貿易值與進口值。 | zh_TW |
dc.description.abstract | Even though politics and trade are closely related, there are only few studies on the impact of politics on trade. In addition, because of the unique political status of Taiwan in the international community, there are very few empirical studies investigating the impact of Taiwan’s political situation on trade. Based on gravity model this research analyzes the panel data 30 major trading partners of Taiwan from 1984 to 2017. In this study, I divide the variables related to Taiwan’s politics into three categories: First, difference in trade attitude toward China during the KMT and DPP administration; second, the impact of internal political development on trade; and lastly, how does the gap of political development in Taiwan with respect to other countries affect Taiwan’s trade with foreign countries.
My empirical result shows that compared to DPP administration, the trading policy under KMT administration promotes more bilateral trading value, import value and export value with foreign partners. Moreover, in terms of internal political development, a free political environment raises imports. However, when Taiwan and its trading partners corrupt more, their bilateral trading value, import value and export value increase. Lastly, when the gap in democratization between Taiwan and its trading partners differentiate more, the bilateral trading value, import value also increase. | en |
dc.description.provenance | Made available in DSpace on 2021-06-17T08:38:32Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 ntu-108-R06341003-1.pdf: 4165823 bytes, checksum: d6873248fa92aced9904705289128aab (MD5) Previous issue date: 2019 | en |
dc.description.tableofcontents | 口試委員會審定書 i
謝辭 ii 中文摘要 iii Abstract iv 1 介紹 1 2 文獻回顧 4 2.1 國家間相互政治關係與國家內部政治情勢對外國貿易之影響 4 2.1.1 國家內部政治情勢對外國貿易之影響 4 2.1.2 國家間相互政治關係 8 2.1.3意識形態對貿易的影響 10 2.2臺灣政治與貿易的相關回顧 11 2.2.1 臺灣引力模型文獻回顧 11 2.2.1 臺灣政治與貿易 13 3 理論模型設定以及資料說明 16 3.1基本模型介紹與設定 16 3.2敘述統計與資料來源說明 23 4 實證結果分析 25 5 結論 34 參考資料 36 英文文獻 36 中文文獻 40 附錄 42 | |
dc.language.iso | zh-TW | |
dc.title | 政黨輪替與政治環境差距如何影響貿易:臺灣追蹤資料實證分析 | zh_TW |
dc.title | How Do Party Alternation and the Gap in Political Environment Affect Trade: An Empirical Analysis Based on Taiwan Panel Data. | en |
dc.type | Thesis | |
dc.date.schoolyear | 107-2 | |
dc.description.degree | 碩士 | |
dc.contributor.oralexamcommittee | 葉國俊(Kuo-Chun Yeh),鄧志松(Chih-Sung Teng) | |
dc.subject.keyword | 政黨輪替,政治發展,政治差距,國際貿易,引力模型,追蹤資料, | zh_TW |
dc.subject.keyword | Party alternation,Political development,Political gap,International trade,Gravity model,Panel data, | en |
dc.relation.page | 43 | |
dc.identifier.doi | 10.6342/NTU201902767 | |
dc.rights.note | 有償授權 | |
dc.date.accepted | 2019-08-08 | |
dc.contributor.author-college | 社會科學院 | zh_TW |
dc.contributor.author-dept | 國家發展研究所 | zh_TW |
顯示於系所單位: | 國家發展研究所 |
文件中的檔案:
檔案 | 大小 | 格式 | |
---|---|---|---|
ntu-108-1.pdf 目前未授權公開取用 | 4.07 MB | Adobe PDF |
系統中的文件,除了特別指名其著作權條款之外,均受到著作權保護,並且保留所有的權利。