請用此 Handle URI 來引用此文件:
http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/8211
完整後設資料紀錄
DC 欄位 | 值 | 語言 |
---|---|---|
dc.contributor.advisor | 蘇宏達(Hung-Dah Su) | |
dc.contributor.author | Ting-Rui Hu | en |
dc.contributor.author | 胡庭瑞 | zh_TW |
dc.date.accessioned | 2021-05-20T00:50:09Z | - |
dc.date.available | 2021-02-20 | |
dc.date.available | 2021-05-20T00:50:09Z | - |
dc.date.copyright | 2021-02-20 | |
dc.date.issued | 2020 | |
dc.date.submitted | 2021-02-07 | |
dc.identifier.citation | Axelrod, Robert著,胡瑋珊譯,《合作的競化》,2010,台北:大塊文化。譯自The Evolution of Cooperation. New York: Basic Books. 1984. Keohane, Robert O. 著,蘇長和、信強、何曜譯,2001,《霸權之後:世界政治經濟中的合作與紛爭》,上海:上海人民出版。譯自After Hegemony: Cooperation and Discord in the World Political Economy. Princeton: Princeton University Press. 1984. Nye, Joesph S. David A. Welch著,張曉明譯,2019,《哈佛最熱門的國際關係課》,台北,商業週刊。譯自 Understanding Global Conflict and Cooperation: An Introduction to Theory and History (Tenth Edition). New Jersey: Pearson Education. Olson, Mancur著,董安琪譯,1989,《集體行動的邏輯》,台北:遠流出版。譯自 The logic of Collective Action: Public Goods and the Theory of Groups. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. 1965. Thaler, Richard H. 著,劉怡女譯,《不當行為》,2016,台北:先覺出版。譯自Misbehaving: The Making of Behavioral Economics. London: Penguin. 2015. Wendt, Alexander著,秦亞青譯,2000,《國際政治的社會理論》,上海:上海人民出版。譯自Social Theory of International Politics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 1999. 張亞中,2008,《小國崛起—歷史轉捩點上的關鍵決策》,台北:聯經。 楊三億,2014,〈歐盟北冰洋治理體系:永續發展與國家利益〉,蔡明彥(編),《海洋安全與治理》,台北:鼎茂圖書,頁190-216。 楊三億,2018,〈歐盟睦鄰政策實踐:以烏克蘭為例〉,蘇宏達(編),《廿一世紀歐洲聯盟的對外關係》,台北:台大出版中心,頁241-261。 盧業中,2016,〈新自由主義〉,張亞中、張登及(編),《國際關係總論(第四版)》,台北:揚智文化,頁71-97。 郭秋慶,2010,〈芬蘭半總統制到議會民主的變遷〉,施正鋒(編),《當代芬蘭民主政治》,台北:台灣國際研究學會,頁1-26。 蘇宏達,2007,〈歐盟理事會〉,黃偉峰(編),《歐洲聯盟的組織與運作(增訂二版)》,台北:五南圖書,頁169-214。 魏百谷,2010,〈小國與強鄰相處之道—以芬蘭與俄羅斯關係為例〉,施正鋒(編),《當代芬蘭民主政治》,台北:台灣國際研究學會,頁187-211。 賴怡忠,2010,〈芬蘭在後冷戰的國際認同掙扎—如何面對芬蘭化的歷史遺緒〉,施正鋒(編),《當代芬蘭民主政治》,台北:台灣國際研究學會,頁233-255。 吳玉山,1997,〈抗衡或扈從:面對強鄰時的策略選擇《下》〉,《問題與研究》,36(3):61-80。 宋興洲,1997,〈國際合作理論與亞太區域經濟〉,《問題與研究》,36(3):27-59。 楊三億,2006,〈冷戰結束後波蘭外交政策走向分析〉,《問題與研究》,45(4):91-122。 黃偉峰,2003,〈剖析歐洲聯盟正在成形的治理體系〉,《歐美研究》,33(2):291-344。 Austin, Daniel. 1996. Finland as a Gateway to Russia: Issues in European Security. Aldershot: Avebury. Bade, Robin Michael Parkin. 2013. Foundations of Economics (Sixth Edition). New Jersey: Pearson Education. Doron, Gideon Itai Sened. 2001. Political Bargaining: Theory, Practice Process. London: SAGE. Ejoshvili, Natia. 2010. The Evolution of the European Union’s Neighborhood Strategies: The Case of the Eastern Partnership. Saarbrücken: VDM Verlag Dr. Müller. Gilpin, Robert. 1981. War and Change in World Politics. New York: Cambridge University Press. Gilpin, Robert. 1987. The Political Economy of International Relations. New Jersey: Princeton University Press. Haglund, Anne. 2004. The EU Presidency and the Northern Dimension Initiative: Applying International Regime Theory. Växjö: Växjö University Press. Hardin, Russell. 1982. Collective Action. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins Press for Resources for the Future. HeikkilIä, Markku. 2019. If we lose the arctic: Finland's Arctic thinking from the 1980s to present day. Rovaniemi: The Arctic Centre, University of Lapland. Ingebritsen, C. 2006. Scandinavia in World Politics. Lanham: Rowman Littlefield. Kaminska, Joanna. 2014. Poland and EU Enlargement: Foreign Policy in Transformation. New York: Palgrave Macmillan. King, Gary, Robert O. Keohane Sidney Verba. 1994. Designing Social Inquiry: Scientific Inference in Qualitative Research. New Jersey: Princeton University Press. Lipponen, P. 2001. Kohti Eurooppaa. Helsinki: Tammi. Longhurst, Kerry Marcin Zaborowski. 2007. The New Atlanticist: Poland’s Foreign and Security Priorities. London: The Royal Institute of International Affairs. Moravcsik, Andrew. 1998. The choice for Europe: social purpose and state power from Messina to Maastricht. Ithaca: Cornell University Press. Scharpf, F. W. 1999. Governing in Europe. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Shmanske, Stephen. 1991. Public Goods, Mixed Goods, and Monopolistic Competition. College Station: Texas A M University Press. Szczerbiak, Aleks. 2012. Poland within the European Union: New awkward partner or new heart of Europe? New York: Routledge. Taylor, Michael. 1987. The possibility of cooperation. New York: Cambridge University press. Waltz, Kenneth N.. 1979. Theory of International Politics. Boston: Addison-Wesley. Aalto, Pami, Helge Blakkisrud Hanna Smith. 2008. “Introduction.” In The Northern Dimension of the European Neighbourhood, ed. Aalto, P., H. Blakkisrud H. Smith. Brussels: Centre for European Policy Studies, 1-18. Adamczyk, Artur. 2003. “Balance of power inside the European Union. Implications for Poland.” In On the road to the European Union: Applicant Countries’ Perspective, eds. Milczarek, Dariusz Alojzy Z. Nowak. Warsaw: Warsaw University Centre for Europe, 277-286. Alecu de Flers, Nicloe, Laura Chappell Patrick Müller. 2011. “The EU’s Foreign and Security Policy: Incremental Upgrading of Common Interests and the Effects of Institutionalized Cooperation.” In The EU’s Decision Traps: Comparing Policies, ed. Falkner, Gerda. New York: Oxford University Press, 162-180. Axelrod, Robert Robert Keohane. 1986. “Achieving Cooperation under Anarchy: Strategies and Institutions.” In Cooperation under Anarchy, ed. Oye, Kenneth. New Jersey: Princeton University Press, 226-254. Bulmer, Simon Christian Lequesne. 2002. “New Perspectives on EU-Member State Relationships.” In Question de recherches, eds. Favarel-Garriques, G. S. Perrot. Parris: CERI Science-Po. Busygina, Irina Mikhail Filippov. 2008. “End comment: EU-Russian relations and the limits of the Northern Dimension.” In The New Northern Dimension of the European Neighborhood, eds. Aalto, P., H. Blakkisrud H. Smith. Brussels: Centre for European Policy Studies, 204-219. Catellani, Nicola. 2001. “The Multilevel Implementation of the Northern Dimension.” In The Northern Dimension: Fuel for the EU? ed. Ojanen, Hanna. Helsinki: The Finnish Institute of International Affairs, 54-77. Cieszkowski, A. 2004. “Polityka rozszerzonej Unii Europejskiej wobec wschodnich sasiadow- wklad Polski.” In Rocznik polityki zagranicznej 2004, ed. Wizimirska, Barbara. Warszawa: Akademia Dyplomatyczna MSZ, 103–114. Cini, Michelle. 2003. “Intergovernmentalism.” In European Union Politics, ed. Cini, Michelle. New York: Oxford University Press, 93-108. Falkner, Gerda. 2011. “Introduction: The EU’s Decision Traps and their Exits: A Concept for Comparative Analysis.” In The EU’s Decision Traps: Comparing Policies, ed. Falkner, Gerda. New York: Oxford University Press, 1-17. Harasimowicz, Andrej. 2003. “Eastern policy of the enlarged European Union.” In On the road to the European Union: Applicant Countries’ Perspective, eds. Milczarek, Dariusz Alojzy Z. Nowak. Warsaw: Warsaw University Centre for Europe, 239-246. Harle, Vilho. 2000. “Martti Ahtisaari, A Global Rationalist.” In Northern Dimensions 2000(Yearbook). Helsinki: Finnish Institute of International Affairs Haukkala, Hiski Hanna Ojanen. 2011. 'The Europeanization of Finnish Foreign Policy: Pendulum swings in slow motion.' In National and European Foreign Policies: Towards Europeanization, eds. Wong, Reuben Christopher Hill. New York: Routledge, 149-166. Haukkala, Hiski. 2001. 'Comment: National Interests versus Solidarity Towards Common Policies.' In The Northern Dimension: Fuel for the EU?, ed. Ojanen, Hanna. Helsinki: Finnish Institute of International Affairs, 107-115. Heininen, Lassi. 2001. 'Ideas and Outcomes: Finding a Concrete Form for the Northern Dimension Initiative.' In The Northern Dimension: Fuel for the EU?, ed. Ojanen, Hanna. Helsinki: Finnish Institute of International Affairs, 20-53. Hønneland, Geir. 1999. “Borders, Orders and Identities in the New European North.” In The NEBI Yearbook 1999: North European and Baltic Sea Integration, eds. Hedgegaard, L. Lindstörm, B. Berlin: Springer, 335-347. Kaul, Inge., I. Grunberg M.A. Stern. 1999. “Defining Global Public Goods.” In Global Public Goods, eds. Kaul, Inge., I. Grunberg M.A. Stern. New York: Oxford University Press, 2-19. Longhurst, Kerry. 2003. “From security consumer to security provider.” In Poland: A New Power in Transatlantic Security, eds. Dunn, D. H. M. Zaborowski. London: Frank Cass. March, James G. Johan P. Olsen. 2011. “The Logic of Appropriateness.” In The Oxford Handbook of Political Science, ed. Goodin, Robert E. New York: Oxford University Press, 478-497. Missiroli, Antonio. 2000. “At odds, compatible, or complementary? Italy and Northern Dimension of the EU.” In North Europe. National views on emerging security, eds. Wessels, W., Vaahtoranta, T. Bonvicini, G. The Finnish Institute of International Affairs and Institut für Europäische Politik, 31-37 Ojanen, Hanna. 2001. “Conclusions: Northern Dimension- Fuel for the EU’s External Relations?” In The Northern Dimension: Fuel for the EU?, ed. Ojanen, Hanna. Helsinki: Finnish Institute of International Affairs, 217-236. Pomorska, Karolina. 2011. “Poland: Learning the Brussels game.” In National and European Foreign Policies: Toward Europeanisation, eds. Hill, Christopher Reuben Wong. London: Palgrave Macmillan. Wallace, Helen Christine Reh. 2015. “An Institutional Anatomy and Five Policy Modes.” In Policy-Making in the European Union, eds. Wallace, H., M.A. Pollack Alassdair R. Young. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 72-112. Arter, David. 2000. “Small State Influence Within the EU: The Case of Finland’s ‘Northern Dimension Initiative’.” Journal of Common Market Studies 38(5): 677-697. Bailer, Stefanie. 2010. “What factors determine bargaining power and success in EU negotiations?” Journal of European Public Policy 17(5): 743-757. Baldwin, David A. 1971. “Money and Power.” Journal of Politics 34: 578-614. Bolotnikova, Yekaterina Nikolai Mezhevich. 2010. “The Northern Dimension Policy: Current State and Development Prospects.” The Baltic Region 4(6): 103-113. Bowen, Glenn A. 2009. “Document Analysis as a Qualitative Research Method.” Qualitative Research Journal 9(2): 27-40. Browning, Christopher S. 2003. “The Region-Building Approach Revisted: The Continued Othering of Russia in Discourses of Region-Building in the European North.” Geopolitics 8(1): 45-71. Browning, Christopher S. Pertti Joenniemi. 2003. “The European Union’s Two Dimensions: The Eastern and the Northern.” Security Dialogue 34(4): 463-478. Cerny, Philip G. 1995. “Globalization and the changing logic of collective action.” International Organization 49(4): 595-625. Copsey, Nathaniel Karolina Pomorska. 2010. “Poland’s power and influence in the European Union: The case of its eastern policy.” Comparative European Politics 8(3): 304-326. Copsey, Nathaniel Karolina Pomorska. 2013. “The Influence of Newer Member States in the European Union: The Case of Poland and the Eastern Partnership.” Europe Asia Studies 2013(Special Issue Editor Final Proof): 1-24. Dangerfield, Martin. 2009a. “The Visegrad Group and the EU's 'Eastern' Policy.” Europe-Asia Studies 61(10): 1735-1755. Edwards, Geoffrey. 2006. “The New Member States and the Making of EU Foreign Policy.” European Foreign Affairs Review 11: 143-162. Fernández Pasarín, Ana Mar. 2011. “The Reform of the Council Presidency: paving the way for a new synergy with the European Commission? ” Politique européenne 35(3): 29-54. Filtenborg, M. S., S. Gänzle Elisabeth Johansson. 2002. “An Alternative Theoretical Approach to EU Foreign Policy: ‘Network Governance’ and the Case of the Northern Dimension Initiative.” Cooperation and Conflict 37(4): 387-407. Glaser, Charles. 1995. “Realists as Optimists: Cooperation as Self-Help.” International Security 19(3): 50-90. Haas, Ernst B. 1982. “Words Can Hurt you; Or, Who Said what to Whom about Regimes.” International Organization 36(2): 207-243. Hossain, Kamrui. 2015. “EU Engagement in the Arctic: Do the Policy Responses from the Arctic States Recognise the EU as a Legitimate Stakeholder?” Arctic Review on Law and Politics 6(2): 89-110. Jones, Bryan D. 1999. “Bounded Rationality.” Annual Review of Political Science 2: 297-321. Malkin, Jesse Aaron Wildavsky. 1991. “Why the Traditional Distinction Between Public and Private Goods Should be Abandoned.” Journal of Theoretical Politics 3(4): 355-378. Marcinkowska, Paula. 2016. “European Neighborhood Policy, A Polish Perspective.” UNISCI Journal N∘40: 27-42. Moravcsik, Andrew. 1997. “Taking Preferences Seriously: A Liberal Theory of International Politics.” International Organization 51(4): 513-553. Offerdal, Kristine. 2011. “The EU in the Arctic: In pursuit of legitimacy and influence.” International Journal 66(4): 861-877. Ojanen, Hanna. 2000. “The EU and Its ‘Northern Dimension’: an Actor in Search of a Policy, or a Policy in Search of an Actor?” European Foreign Affairs Review 5: 359-376. Riddervold, Marianne Mai’a K. Davis Cross. 2019. “Reactive Power EU: Russian Aggression and the Development of an EU Arctic Policy” European Foreign Affairs Review 24(1): 43-60. Samuelson, Paul A. 1954. “The Pure Theory of Public Expenditure.” The Review of Economics and Statistics 36(4): 387-389. Schweller, Randall L. 1997. “New Realist Research on Alliances: Refining, Not Refuting, Waltz’s Balancing Proposition.” American Political Science Review 91(4): 927-930. Sydoruk, Tetiana Dmytro Tyshchenko. 2016. “The Eastern Dimension of the EU’s and Poland’s Policy.” Polish Political Science Studies 52: 209-220. Tallberg, Jonas. 2008. “Bargaining Power in the European Council.” Journal of Common Market Studies 46(3) Tarrow, Sidney. 2010. “The Strategy of Paired Comparison: Toward a Theory of Practive.” Comparative Political Studies 43(2): 230-259. Tunkrova, Lucie. 2008. “The Power of Small States in the European Union: the Case of Finland and the Northern Dimension Policy.” Contemporary European Studies 1: 5-22. Tversky, Amos Daniel Kahneman. 1981. “The Framing of Decisions and the Psychology of Choice.” Science, New Series 211(4481): 453-458. Wu, Chong-Han Charles(吳崇涵). 2016. “Common Interests and Two-Level Game Theory in the South China Sea Dispute.” American Journal of Chinese Studies 23 (Special issue): 145-157. Boonstra, Jos Natalia Shapovalova. 2010. “The EU’s Eastern Partnership: One year backwards.” Working paper at FRIDE, Madrid. Catellani, Nicola. 2003. “The EU’s Northern Dimension: Testing a New Approach to Neighbourhood Relations?” Utrikespolitiska Institutet. Cianciara, Agnieszka K. 2008. “‘Eastern Partnership’-opening a new chapter of Polsih Eastern policy and the European Neighborhood Policy?” Analyses Opinions 4, The Institute of Public Affairs, Warsaw. Cianciara, Agnieszka K. 2009. “The Union for the Mediterranean and the Eastern Partnership: Perspectives from Poland, Czech Republic and Hungary.” Report of The Institute of Public Affairs, Warsaw. Copsey, Nathaniel. 2008. “Member State Policy Preferences on the Integration of Ukraine and the Other Eastern Neighbours.” SIPU report for the Swedish International Development Agency. Dangerfield, Martin. 2009b. “The Visegrad Group and the European Union’s ‘Eastern’ Dimension.” Conference paper at EUSA Biennial Conference. Gromadzki, Grzegorz, Raimundas Lopata Kristi Raik. 2005. “Friends or Family? Finnish, Lithuanian and Polish perspectives on the EU’s policy towards Ukraine, Belarus and Moldava.” Helsinki: The Finnish Institute of International Affairs. Institute für Europräische Politik. 2004. “Address by Minister of Foreign Affairs Włodzimierz Cimoszewicz entitled ‘The Enlargement of the EU and the Processes in the Union (23 September 2004).’” EU-25 Watch 1: 115. Makarychev, Andrey S. 2003. “Europe’s Eastern Dimension: Russia’s Reaction to Poland’s Initiative.” PONARS Policy Memo 301 Podolski, A. 2006. “Polskie weto.” Raporty i Analizy 1/6, Warsaw: Center for International Relations. Romsloe, Børge. 2005. “Finland and the Case of a Northern dimension for the EU: Inclusion by bargaining or arguing?” Working paper at Centre for European Studies, University of Oslo. EU2009.CZ. 2009. “Message from Mirek Topolánek , Prime Minister of the Czech Republic, from 1 December 2008. ” Available at http://www.eu2009.cz/en/czech-presidency/czech-presidency-4014/index.html European Parliament. 2011. “Northern Dimension Environmental Partnership meeting document.” Available at https://www.europarl.europa.eu/meetdocs/2009_2014/documents/deea/dv/0209_/0209_10.pdf European Union External Action. “Black Sea Synergy.” Available at https://eeas.europa.eu/diplomatic-network/black-sea-synergy/346/black-sea-synergy_en Eurostat. “Annual national accounts: Main GDP aggregates” Available at https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/web/national-accounts/data/database Freedom House. 2020. “Nations in Transit 2020.” Available at https://freedomhouse.org/report/nations-transit Ministry for Foreign Affairs of Finland. “Finland's Arctic and Antarctic cooperation.” Available at https://um.fi/arctic-cooperation. President of Russia. 2006a. “Northern Dimension Policy Framework Document.” Available at http://en.kremlin.ru/supplement/3736 President of Russia. 2006b. “Political Declaration on the Northern Dimension Policy.” Available at http://en.kremlin.ru/supplement/3735 Visegrad Group. 2008a. “Joint Statement of the Foreign Ministers of the Visegrad Group Countries and of Bulgaria, Estonia, Lithuania, Latvia, Romania and Sweden.” Available at http://www.visegradgroup.eu/2008/joint-statement-of-the-110412-4 Visegrad Group. 2008b. “Press Release: Official Summit of the Prime Ministers of Visegrad Group Countries.” Available at http://www.visegradgroup.eu/2008/press-release-official Deutsche Welle. 2007. “German Chancellor Doubts French Leader’s Mediterranean Plan.” Available at https://www.dw.com/en/german-chancellor-doubts-french-leaders-mediterranean-plan/a-2989117,上網檢視日期:2020/11/9。 EUObserver. 2008. “Poland’s ‘Eastern Partnership’ set for summit approval.” Available at https://euobserver.com/foreign/26339,上網檢視日期:2020/11/13。 Gazeta Prawna. 2009. “TK ws. sporu kompetencyjnego: prezydent sam decyduje o udziale w szczytach UE, rząd ustala stanowisko.” Available at https://prawo.gazetaprawna.pl/artykuly/319182,tk-ws-sporu-kompetencyjnego-prezydent-sam-decyduje-o-udziale-w-szczytach-ue-rzad-ustala-stanowisko.html,上網檢視日期:2020/11/11。 President of Russia. 2006c. “The leaders of Russia, the European Union, Norway and Iceland held a meeting as part of the EU Northern Dimension programme.” Available at http://en.kremlin.ru/events/president/news/36698 RadioFreeEurope. 2008. “EU: Poland, Sweden Breathe New Life Into Eastern Neighborhood.” Available at https://www.rferl.org/a/1144495.html,上網檢視日期:2020/11/10。 Ahtisaari, Martti. 1997a. “Toward a Global International System in the 21st Century (Cambridge, 15 October 1997).” Available at https://iop.harvard.edu/forum/toward-global-international-system-21st-century. Ahtisaari, Martti. 1997b. “ Speech by President of the Republic Of Finland at Chatham House (London, 24 November 1997).” Available at https://www.eilen.fi/en/2189/?language=en. Ahtisaari, Martti. 1998a. “Address by President Of The Republic of Finland to the Übersee-Club (Hamburg, 25 September 1998).” Available at https://www.eilen.fi/en/2232/?language=en. Ahtisaari, Martti. 1998b. “For the EU, the Focus Now Must be on Russia (Paris, 18 December 1998).” Available at https://www.eilen.fi/en/2250/?language=en. Cimoszewicz, Włodzimierz. 2003a. “EU Eastern Policy – Polish Perspective (Prague, 21 January 2003).” Available at: http://www.amo.cz/eu-eastern-policy-polish-perspective/ Cimoszewicz, Włodzimierz. 2003b. “Expose 2003; Information of the Government of the Republic of Poland on the Polish foreign policy in the year 2003 (Warsaw, 22 January 2003).” Available at: http://www.msz.gov.pl/resource/356d72b5-63a3-454d-8aeb-c380b54bd247:JCR. CVCE. 2012. “Statement made by Bronislaw Geremek on the opening of the negotiations for Poland’s accession to the EU (Brussels, 31 March 1998).” Available at https://www.cvce.eu/en/obj/statement_made_by_bronislaw_geremek_on_the_opening_of_the_negotiations_for_poland_s_accession_to_the_eu_brussels_31_march_1998-en-6bf844c7-770d-4b11-b0fa-f9950c56eede.html Meller, Stephan. 2006. “Government Information on Polish Foreign Policy in 2006: Presented at the Session of the Sejm (Warsaw, 15 Febuary 2006).” Penikett, Tony. 1997. “The Barents region today— Dreams and realities— Conference Report (Rovaniemi, 27 May 2019).” Available at http://arctic.gordonfoundation.ca/content/barents-region-today-dreams-and-realities-conference-report-draft. Stenlund, Peter. 2002. “Seminar on Northern Dimension Research. (Turku, 15-16 April 2002).” Available at: https://um.fi/current-affairs/-/asset_publisher/gc654PySnjTX/content/speech-by-ambassador-peter-stenlund-seminar-on-northern-dimension-research-turku-finland-2002-april-15-16 Commission. 2004. “Communication from the Commission: European Neighborhood Policy- Strategy Paper.” COM(2004) 373 final. Commission. 2008. “Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council: Eastern Partnership.” COM(2008) 823 final. Commission. 2017. “Joint Staff Working Document Eastern Partnership - 20 Deliverables for 2020 Focusing on key priorities and tangible results.” SWD(2017) 300 final. Commission. 2020. “The EU’s response to the coronavirus pandemic in the Eastern Partnership.” Available at https://ec.europa.eu/neighbourhood-enlargement/sites/near/files/coronavirus_support_eap.pdf Council of the European Union. 1995. “Council Decision of 1 January 1995 determining the order in which the office of President of the Council shall be held.” 95/2/Euratom, ECSC, OJ L 1, 1.1.1995, p. 220. Council of the European Union. 2000. “Action Plan for the Northern Dimension with external and cross-border policies of the European Union 2000-2003.” 9401/00. Council of the European Union. 2004. “2590th Council Meeting: General Affairs and External Relations- General Affairs” C/04/195. Council of the European Union. 2008a. “Joint declaration of the Paris summit for the Mediterranean. ” 11887/08 (Presse 213) Council of the European Union. 2008b. “Council Conclusions on Belarus.” 2897th EXTERNAL RELATIONS Council Meeting. Council of the European Union. 2009. “Joint declaration of the Prague Eastern Partnership Summit.” 8435/09 (Presse 78) Council of the European Union. 2019. “Council Conclusions on the EU Arctic policy.” 14952/19. European Commission High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy. “Joint Communication to the European Parliament and the Council: An integrated European Union policy for the Arctic.” JOIN(2016) 21 final. 2016. European Council. 2008a. “Brussels European Council 19/20 June 2008 Presidency Conclusions.” 11018/1/08. European Council. 2008b. “Extraordinary European Council, Brussels 1 September 2008 Presidency Conclusions.” 12594/2/08. European Council. 2009. “Brussels European Council 19/20 March 2009 Presidency Conclusions.” 7880/1/09. | |
dc.identifier.uri | http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/8211 | - |
dc.description.abstract | 在探討國家間合作的議題時,傳統的主流國際關係理論,如現實主義視角下的霸權穩定論、強調制度重要性的新自由主義等,均相當重視大國在合作過程中所扮演的角色,而對於其他佔據國際體系的中小型行為者的能動性則較少著墨與關注。著眼於中小型國家在國際層次上的外交策略選項空間,本文試圖解答的核心問題有二,即理論上是否能夠建立一個以行為者角度出發,同時並不以行為者具備特定實力作為前提的合作理論分析架構?更進一步言之,這樣的分析架構是否能夠捕捉到經驗世界中中小型國家的策略選擇邏輯? 為了回答上述的第一個問題,在理論層次上,本文回顧、爬梳既有的國際合作理論,並透過公共財、折扣函數等概念,搭建了一個以利益形質認知作為主要切入點的合作理論分析架構。本文認為,行為者對於係爭利益的性質認知會影響合作的發生邏輯:當利益的公共性明顯時,合作依照集體行動的邏輯運作;當利益的私有性強烈時,合作則按循現實式的議價邏輯。最後,無論是何種合作邏輯,對於未來的信心(折扣函數)都具有重要的影響作用。 利益性質認知的論點對於中小型國家外交政策的理論意涵在於,由於認知具備主觀性,因此行為者應有操作、形塑利益性質的空間,而按此思路所推衍而出的重要論點為,在體系內實力愈不足的行為者,就愈需要訴諸於利益的公共化策略。 在實證層次上,本文透過歐洲聯盟內的雙個案、三倡議(芬蘭的北方維度倡議與波蘭的東方維度倡議、東部夥伴關係倡議)來檢視分析架構的有效與適用性。芬蘭與波蘭作為體系內的小型以及中型行為者,均曾在歐盟內進行政策倡議,並在過程中分別透過不同的議價、遊說策略,爭取體系內其他行為者對於自身議程的支持與合作。在比較分析的過程中,本文發現,波蘭作為較具實力的行為者,其能夠使用的工具選項較為豐富,面對體系內較大或較小的其他行為者各有不同邏輯的遊說策略表現;相對而言,芬蘭作為體系的弱勢行為者,確實較仰賴利益公共化的策略來獲取不對稱的政治收益、實現自身的政治議程。本文進一步在北方維度的倡議過程發現,利益公共化策略並非萬能的靈丹妙藥,其潛在的副作用是,由於利益的實現需要透過體系內的大型行為者自願提供,因此倡議在具體化的過程中,其內涵可能會受到大型行為者自身的偏好影響,發生與倡議者預想不同的扭曲、變形現象。小型行為者較難控制倡議發展的方向,並維持倡議之完整性。 本文也在雙個案比較研究的過程中,觀察到折扣函數對於合作的影響作用。本文認為其具體展現在兩個層次:第一,當作為倡議背景的外部因素發生變化,由於折扣函數發生改變,行為者策略的有效性將受到影響。如文中所提及之俄喬戰爭(2008)爆發後,波蘭公共化東部夥伴關係倡議的策略就明顯的更具說服力;第二,倡議開展後的所創造出來的政策空間,能夠藉由增加各行為者間的互動機會,強化未來的重要性,並有助於各方後續合作的深化以及發展。 | zh_TW |
dc.description.abstract | While exploring the origin of cooperation, the concept of “common interest” is often regarded as the indispensable premise for collaboration, especially by neoliberal institutionalists. However, due to the vagueness of the concept itself, this article seeks different approaches toward understanding what constitutes cooperation. Through intensive literature review, this article argues that the perceived nature of an interest influences and dictates the logic of cooperation. When an interest is considered more “public” than “private”, cooperation that evolves around it would follow the logic of collective action, in which the weak might have a chance to exploit the stronger. However, if the interest is believed to be a private good, then realist bargaining logic is at play, and bargaining strength matters more. That said, as numerous literatures had implied, the nature of an interest is often obscure, and offers some room for actors to mold and define its “nature”. The analytical framework also notes the importance of prospect, in which that confidence is influential to both public and private good-oriented cooperation. The article then dives into the study of two main policy initiatives that took place in the European Union, brought up by Finland and Poland respectively. Throughout the Finnish-led “Northern Dimension” initiative, different strategies were observed. When persuading major powers in the EU, the Northern Dimension was actively described as a common European interest; When dealing with southern European states that have no particular interest on the subject, “tit-for-tat” like narratives, such as establishing such frontier policy would benefit the southern bloc as well should they wish to have one of their own, were used, and the process became a realist bargain. When compared with the Polish-steered “Eastern Partnership” initiative, the connection between difference in bargaining strength and available policy tools became even more evident. Poland, being a substantially larger actor in the EU, were able to utilize realist-oriented bargaining approach more efficiently to persuade other parties. However, when faced with a bigger actor, namely Germany, the public good narrative was also exploited to encourage its voluntary support. This article proposes that the shaping of interests can have powerful political impact. By choosing suitable tools for different targets, the subjectivity of interest allows actors to achieve asymmetric political gains by utilizing the logic of collective action. Nevertheless, this article is only an immature attempt to unravel the mysteries of cooperation, and further studies are required to revise or reinforce the framework brought forth in the article. | en |
dc.description.provenance | Made available in DSpace on 2021-05-20T00:50:09Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 U0001-0702202121553900.pdf: 4225652 bytes, checksum: 84252aa8bbac5bdada6aed647afeefcc (MD5) Previous issue date: 2020 | en |
dc.description.tableofcontents | 謝辭 i 中文摘要 iii ABSTRACT v 目錄 vii 圖表目次 ix 第一章 緒論 1 第一節 研究動機與目的 1 第二節 研究問題 4 第三節 文獻回顧 6 第四節 研究途徑 20 第五節 研究限制 27 第二章 北方維度倡議 29 第一節 倡議背景與內涵 29 第二節 倡議發展 32 第三節 行為者策略 35 第四節 倡議的挑戰 42 第五節 小結 45 第三章 東部夥伴關係倡議 47 第一節 東方維度倡議 47 第二節 東部夥伴關係倡議 57 第六節 小結 73 第四章 分析架構與實證之對話 77 第一節 利益性質對於合作途徑的影響 77 第二節 外部因素與利益性質的關係 86 第三節 合作策略對於政策產出的影響 87 第四節 個案比較與意涵 95 第五章 結論 103 第一節 研究發現 103 第二節 未來展望 105 參考文獻 107 一、 中文部分 107 二、 外文部分 109 附錄一 高峰會主席總結(1997-2003) 125 附錄二 高峰會主席總結(2008-2009) 131 | |
dc.language.iso | zh-TW | |
dc.title | 國際合作理論的再檢視:歐洲聯盟北方維度與東部夥伴關係倡議的比較分析 | zh_TW |
dc.title | Revisiting International Cooperation Theories: A Comparative Analysis of the EU’s Northern Dimension and Eastern Partnership Initiative | en |
dc.type | Thesis | |
dc.date.schoolyear | 109-1 | |
dc.description.degree | 碩士 | |
dc.contributor.oralexamcommittee | 吳玉山(Yu-Shan Wu),楊三億(San-Yi Yang) | |
dc.subject.keyword | 芬蘭,波蘭,歐盟,歐洲聯盟,北方維度,東部夥伴關係,政策倡議,合作,利益型塑,公共財, | zh_TW |
dc.subject.keyword | Finland,Poland,European Union,EU,Northern Dimension,Eastern Partnership,Policy Initiative,Cooperation,Public good,Interest shaping, | en |
dc.relation.page | 134 | |
dc.identifier.doi | 10.6342/NTU202100651 | |
dc.rights.note | 同意授權(全球公開) | |
dc.date.accepted | 2021-02-08 | |
dc.contributor.author-college | 社會科學院 | zh_TW |
dc.contributor.author-dept | 政治學研究所 | zh_TW |
顯示於系所單位: | 政治學系 |
文件中的檔案:
檔案 | 大小 | 格式 | |
---|---|---|---|
U0001-0702202121553900.pdf | 4.13 MB | Adobe PDF | 檢視/開啟 |
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。