請用此 Handle URI 來引用此文件:
http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/20732完整後設資料紀錄
| DC 欄位 | 值 | 語言 |
|---|---|---|
| dc.contributor.advisor | 陳明通(Ming-tong Chen) | |
| dc.contributor.author | Josh Wenger | en |
| dc.contributor.author | 溫賈舒 | zh_TW |
| dc.date.accessioned | 2021-06-08T03:00:49Z | - |
| dc.date.copyright | 2020-08-21 | |
| dc.date.issued | 2020 | |
| dc.date.submitted | 2020-08-20 | |
| dc.identifier.uri | http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/20732 | - |
| dc.description.abstract | 本論文採用Robert Putnam的「獲勝組合」(win-set) 概念來探索對兩岸政治談判的阻礙,並用該概念作爲測量台灣民衆的統獨立場的新的分析工具。藉由針對大陸涉台專家的問卷調查以及針對台灣民衆的系列民意調查,本論文探討在2015年至2019年期間兩岸是否存在著能獲得各自國内多數支持的政治談判結果。筆者先檢視兩岸的win-set是否有重叠之處,或者雙方在接受率上比較接近的談判結果,再進一步探討以達成該談判結果為目標推動兩岸政治談判的跨兩岸或者台灣國内的聯盟(coalition)的形成之可能性。在分析潛在的聯盟的方法上,除了將兩岸的四個群組(大陸涉台專家與台灣的泛藍、泛綠和中立的選民)對趨於統一的談判結果的接受率加以比較,筆者也從民調中分析台灣民衆對兩岸政治談判的條件的態度,包括大陸所偏好的談判條件、談判雙方的適當身份和立法部門與民衆對談判的監督等條件。本研究的後部分由測量win-set的民調題目分析台灣民衆在統獨立場上的彈性程度,將民衆在統獨立場六方量表上的偏好與他們對趨於統一的談判結果的接受度加以比較。接著筆者特別分析民調受訪者的子總體,即在六方量表上偏向維持現狀或台灣獨立的受訪者,針對此子總體採用二元勝算對數模型,檢驗個體層次變數與受訪者接受趨於統一的談判結果是否有相關性。 | zh_TW |
| dc.description.abstract | This thesis uses Robert Putnam’s win-set concept as a framework for examining domestic constraints on cross-Strait political negotiation and as a new tool for measuring unification-independence preference among the Taiwanese public. Applying Putnam’s definition of the win-set as the set of negotiation outcomes that could be accepted by a majority of domestic constituents, the study identified a spectrum of political negotiation outcomes ranging from unification to independence. Recent questionnaire research of PRC experts, along with textual analysis of PRC expert commentary, and a series of Taiwanese public opinion surveys designed in part by the author (the Cross-Strait Political Negotiation Surveys, or CPNS) were analyzed to see if there was a negotiation outcome that might have received majority domestic approval on both sides in the period from 2015 to 2019. Potential for coalitions in favor of negotiation outcomes that overlapped in the two-sides’ win-sets, or came closest to overlap, were estimated based on congruence in acceptance rates for those outcomes among PRC experts and Taiwan’s major voting blocs. Coalition potential was further explored by examining Taiwanese attitudes toward cross-Strait political negotiation, including their views regarding approval of negotiation, Beijing’s desired preconditions for negotiation, the status of the negotiating entities, and legislative and popular oversight of negotiation. The latter part of this study examined the utility of the win-set as a measure of flexibility in Taiwanese unification-independence preferences. It used the CPNS Taiwan opinion poll data to compare respondents’ preferences on the traditional 6-point measure with their acceptance of negotiation outcomes on the win-set spectrum leading to unification. A subset of respondents who indicated preference for the status quo or independence but accepted negotiation outcomes leading to unification was identified. Binary logistic regression was performed on that subset to look for correlation between individual-level variables and whether or not respondents accepted political negotiation outcomes leading to unification. | en |
| dc.description.provenance | Made available in DSpace on 2021-06-08T03:00:49Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 U0001-1908202016302500.pdf: 4283641 bytes, checksum: 2498625d4b7247f223b618720621a965 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2020 | en |
| dc.description.tableofcontents | Index
口試委員會審定書 ……………………………………………………………………..i 致謝 ……………………………………………………………………………………..ii 中文摘要………………………………………………………………………………..iii 英文摘要………………………………………………………………………………..iv Index……………………………………………………………………………………..v Chapter 1 Introduction and Literature Review…………………………………………...1 1.1 Introduction…………………………………………………………………..1 1.2 Research Purpose and Historical Background……………………………….4 1.3 Literature Review…………………………………………………………..15 Chapter 2 Research Design……………………………………………………...……. .25 2.1 Theoretical Framework…………………………………………….……… 25 2.2 Survey Research Design ………………………………………….………. 30 Chapter 3. Trends in the Win-sets……………………………..……………….………39 3.1 PRC Win-set……………………………………………..…………….…...39 3.2 Taiwan Win-set………………………………………………………….…52 Chapter 4. Coalition Potential……………………………………………………59 4.1 Negotiation Outcome Acceptance Rates…………………………….…..…60 4.2 Taiwanese Views on Conditions for Political Negotiation…………….......63 Chapter 5 Taiwan Public’s Flexibility to Accept Unification Outcomes …...................77 5.1 1nterplay of 6-Point Scale Preference and Win-set Category Acceptance...79 5.2 Logistic Regression Design and Assumptions……………………………..87 5.3 Logistic Regression Results………………………………………………..93 Conclusion…………………………………………………………………………….102 Appendix…… ………………………………………………………………………...110 I. PRC Expert Institutional Affiliation List…………………………………...110 II. Survey Questions ……………………………………………………….…111 III. Data Tables………………………………………………………………..119 Bibliography…………………………………………………………………………..136 1. English Materials………………………………………………………….. 136 2. Chinese Materials………………………………………………………..…139 Diagrams, Tables, and Charts Diagram 1: Independent and Dependent Variables in Prenegotiation ………………….27 Diagram 2: Prenegotiation Two-level Game……………………………………………29 Table 1 Proposals Regarding Taiwan’s International Status…………………………....17 Table 2. CPNS Tongdu Preference and Win-set Questions…………………………......35 Table 3. Political Negotiation Win-set Question (PRC Expert Questionnaire)…………36 Table 4: PRC Win-set Data (Expert Questionnaire)…………………………………....40 Table 5. Taiwan Win-set Categories Acceptance Rates 2015-2019 (Including Post-Ma-Xi) ……………………………………………………………………………………...51 Table 6. Cross-tabulation of 6-Point Tongdu Preference and Win-set Categories (Combined Annual Surveys 2015-2019)……………………………………………….81 Table 7. Binary Logistic Regression Models 1 and 2: Prefer Status Quo or Independence Relationship BUT Accept Unification Negotiation Outcomes (“Unification” and/or “Status Quo-to-Unification”) (Combined Annual Surveys 2015-2019)…………………………………………………………………………………....93 Table 8. Binary Logistic Regression Models 3 and 4: Prefer Status Quo or Independence Relationship BUT Accept Unification Negotiation Outcomes (“Unification” and/or “Status Quo-to-Unification”) Comparison of 2018 Models (with and without new independent variables)………………………………………………………………….97 Chart 1 TNSS Polls: Taiwanese Public Support for Cross-Strait Political Dialogue 2013-2015…………………………………………………………………………………….18 Chart 2 TNSS Polls: Taiwanese Public Support for Cross-Strait Interim/Peace Agreement……………………………………………………………………………...19 Chart 3 NCCU Election Center 6-Point Tonggdu Preference Polling 1994-2019………20 Chart 4 Unidimensional Measures of Tongdu Preference 2015-2019…………………..23 Chart 5 TNSS Conditional Tongdu Preferences 2015-2019…………………………….24 Chart 6 PRC Win-set (Expert Questionnaire Data)……………………………………..41 Chart 7 Taiwan Win-sets 2015-2019 (Including Post Ma-Xi Poll)…………………….53 Chart 8 % Respondents Accepting Integration Who Also Accept Unification Outcomes ……………………………………………………………………………....54 Chart 9. Post Ma-Xi Meeting Shift in Taiwan Win-set ………………………………..55 Chart 10. Shift in Taiwan Win-set 2018-2019…………………………………………56 Chart 11: Intersection of PRC and Taiwan Win-sets ………………………………….57 Chart 12: % Respondents Accepting Unification Outcomes (“Unification” or “Status Quo-to-Unification”) 2015-2019……………………………………………………. ..57 Chart 13. Political Camp Affiliation of CPNS Polls Respondents 2015-2019………...60 Chart 14: Acceptance Rates for “Unification” and “Status Quo-to-Unification” Outcomes 2015-2019………………………………………………………………………………61 Chart 15: % Acceptance of Unification Outcomes (“Unification” or “Status Quo-to-Unification”) 2015-2019 (Total and Political Camp) ……………………………….....61 Chart 17. Political Camp Win-sets: 2018 vs. 2019……………………………………..62 Chart 18. % Approve Political Negotiation (Total, Political Camp, and Accept Unification Outcomes) 2015-2019…………………………………………………………………. 65 Chart 19. % Prefer Political Negotiation Start “As Soon as Possible” (Total, Political Camp, and Accept Unification Outcomes) 2015-2019……………………………….. 66 Chart 20. Approve Acceptance of “One China Principle” as Precondition for Political Negotiation 2015-2019………………………………………………………………... 68 Chart 21: Agreement with “Both Side Belong to One China” as Basis for Political Negotiation……………………………………………………………………………. 69 Chart 22. Agreement with “92 Consensus” as Basis for Political Negotiation 2015-2019 …………………………………………………………………………………....71 Chart 23. % Believe Status of Negotiating Parties Should Be “Two Separate Countries”………………………………………………………………………………72 Chart 24. % Believe Referendum Necessary to Authorize Political Negotiation……...74 Chart 25: % Believe Legislative Approval of Negotiation Outcome Necessary………75 Chart 26. % Believe Referendum to Approve Negotiation Outcome Necessary 2015-2019…………………………………………………………………………………… 76 Chart 27. Approval of Unification 2015-2019 (Review of Other Surveys) (80) Chart 28. CPNS Polls 6-Point Tongdu Preference 2015-2019………………………... 80 Chart 29. Comparison of % Prefer Unification vs. % Accept Unification Negotiation Outcomes 2015-2019…………………………………………………………………...81 Chart 30. Cross-tabulation: 6-Point Tongdu Preference Categories and Win-set Negotiation Outcome Categories (all cases annual surveys 2015-2019)……………….83 Chart 31. % Tongdu Preference Categories and Acceptance of Unification Outcomes (Combined Annual Surveys 2015-2019)……………………………………………. ...83 Chart 32. Acceptance Rates of Unification Negotiation Outcomes Among Respondents Who Prefer “status quo now, decide later” or “status quo permanently on 6-Point Tongdu Scale 2015-2019………………………………………………………………………..85 Chart 33. % Prefer Status Quo or Independence on 6-Point Tongdu Scale But Accept Unification Negotiation Outcomes 2015-2019……………………………………….. 86 | |
| dc.language.iso | en | |
| dc.subject | 前置談判 | zh_TW |
| dc.subject | 統獨立場 | zh_TW |
| dc.subject | 民意調查 | zh_TW |
| dc.subject | 獲勝組合 | zh_TW |
| dc.subject | 雙層賽局 | zh_TW |
| dc.subject | 兩岸關係 | zh_TW |
| dc.subject | unification-independence preference | en |
| dc.subject | win-set | en |
| dc.subject | two-level game | en |
| dc.subject | cross-Strait relation | en |
| dc.subject | opinion polling | en |
| dc.subject | prenegotiation | en |
| dc.title | 獲勝組合(Win-Set)在前置談判期的測量:以調查研究探索對兩岸政治談判的阻礙(2015-2019) | zh_TW |
| dc.title | Measuring Win-sets in Prenegotiation: Survey Research of Obstacles to Cross-Strait Political Negotiation (2015-2019) | en |
| dc.type | Thesis | |
| dc.date.schoolyear | 108-2 | |
| dc.description.degree | 博士 | |
| dc.contributor.oralexamcommittee | 丁樹範(Arthur Ding),周繼祥(Jih-Shine Chou),張五岳(Wu-ueh Chang),周嘉晨(Chelsea Chou),范世平(Shih-ping Fan) | |
| dc.subject.keyword | 獲勝組合,雙層賽局,兩岸關係,前置談判,統獨立場,民意調查, | zh_TW |
| dc.subject.keyword | win-set,two-level game,cross-Strait relation,opinion polling,prenegotiation,unification-independence preference, | en |
| dc.relation.page | 151 | |
| dc.identifier.doi | 10.6342/NTU202004094 | |
| dc.rights.note | 未授權 | |
| dc.date.accepted | 2020-08-20 | |
| 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 | |
|---|---|---|---|
| U0001-1908202016302500.pdf 未授權公開取用 | 4.18 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。
