請用此 Handle URI 來引用此文件：
http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/46589完整後設資料紀錄
| DC 欄位 | 值 | 語言 |
|---|---|---|
| dc.contributor.advisor | 張亞中(Ya-Chung Chang) | |
| dc.contributor.author | YUN-CHEN LAI | en |
| dc.contributor.author | 賴昀辰 | zh_TW |
| dc.date.accessioned | 2021-06-15T05:17:22Z | - |
| dc.date.available | 2010-07-21 | |
| dc.date.copyright | 2010-07-21 | |
| dc.date.issued | 2010 | |
| dc.date.submitted | 2010-07-21 | |
| dc.identifier.citation | 一、中文文獻
Pascal Fontaine著，歐洲經貿辦事處譯，《認識歐盟》，台北：歐洲經貿辦事處。 二十一世紀基金會主編，1998，《台灣對外經援之路》，台北市：中華徵信所。 王明來，〈世界主要國家基因改造產品發展政策與法規之比較〉： http://root.etaiwanfish.com/apagri/21.nsf/ByUNID/95F9E341F252C699482570EB00261CC8?opendocument 王泰銓，1997，《歐洲共同體法總論》，臺北 : 三民書局。 王泰銓，2008，《歐洲聯盟法總論》，臺北: 臺灣智庫。 王遷，2004，〈歐盟轉基因食品法律管制制度研究〉，《華東政法學院學報》，5：91-97。 甘逸驊，2006，〈歐盟與美國：「柔性平衡」或「硬性平衡」〉，張亞中(編)，《歐盟全球戰略與對外關係》，台北：晶典，頁11-36。 甘逸驊，2006，〈歐洲安全與防衛政策的軍事層面〉，《問題與研究》，45(5)： 111-36。 甘逸驊，2007，〈歐盟「柔性強權」身份認同的建構與批判〉，《問題與研究》，46(4)：1-25。 石之瑜，2000，〈現實主義國際政治學的知識脈絡〉，《問題與研究》，39(7)：37-52。 余傑，2003，〈美歐之間轉基因產品貿易爭端〉，《世界農業》，10：4-7。 余菲，2005，〈歐美對華紡織品「特保」機制及實踐〉，《世界貿易組織動態與研究》11：30-33。 呂斯文，〈歐盟「基因改造生物及其產品之技術指導綱領」簡介〉，《行政院農業委員會》：http://www.coa.gov.tw/view.php?catid=8532 宋燕輝，2007，〈執委會〉，黃偉峰(編)，《歐洲聯盟的組織與運作》，台北：五南書局，第二版，頁215-280。 李文成，2000，〈轉基因產品：國際貿易爭端的新領域〉，《國際經貿探索》，2：20-24。 李河清，2006，〈歐盟與環境：以京都議定書為例〉，張亞中(編)，《歐盟全球戰略與對外關係》，台北：晶典，頁113-136。 李剛，2006，〈全球化視角下的中歐貿易爭端及其博弈分析－以紡織品為例〉，《國際商務－對外經濟貿易大學學報》2：30-34。 李貴英，2004，〈歐體對開發中國家之優惠待遇〉，《歐美研究》，34(4)：675-735。 李貴英，2007，〈論歐洲憲法條約架構下之共同商業政策〉，《政大法學評論》，96：345-396。 李道剛，2003，《歐洲：從民族國家至法的共同體》，濟南：山東人民。 汪威錞，2007，〈後配額石期的中歐紡織品貿易〉，《中華經濟研究院台灣WTO中心》，http://www.wtocenter.org.tw/SmartKMS/do/www/readDoc?document_id=89465&action=content 辛穎，1991，〈歐市對外貿易發展的趨勢〉，《經濟前瞻》，22：125-128。 那宏，2006，〈中國與美歐紡織品貿易爭端問題〉，《合作與科技》，3：6-7。 卓惠真，2006，〈國際經濟動向——力圖振興的歐盟經濟〉，《經濟前瞻》，2006年3月5日：19-23。 岳普峰，2005，〈中美貿易摩擦背後的根源〉，《環球經貿》，7：39-41。 林培州，1994，〈多纖維協定與紡織品貿易〉，《經濟前瞻》，35：78-81。 姚桂梅，1995，《洛美協定》，北京：中國大百科全書。 洪德欽，1998，〈歐盟與美國之農業貿易紛爭〉，《問題與研究》，37(7)：15-83。 洪德欽，2006，〈歐元的國際地位〉，張亞中(編)，《歐盟全球戰略與對外關係》，台北：晶典。 胡品潔、楊昌舉，2002，〈轉基因食品政策差異的影響因素分析〉，《成都大學學報》，21(2)：11-18。 倪世雄，2003，《當代國際關係理論》，台北：五南。 秦亞青，2001，〈國際政治的社會建構—溫特及其建構主義國際政治理論〉，《美歐季刊》，15(2)：231-264。 高朗，2006，〈如何理解中國崛起？〉，《遠景基金會季刊》，7(2)：53-94。 張亞中，1998，《歐洲統合：政府間主義與超國家主義的互動》，台北：揚智。 張亞中，2006，〈歐洲聯盟中國政策的戰略分析〉，《問題與研究》，45(4): 31-62。 張亞中，2007，〈全球化的爭辯〉，張亞中(編)，《國際關係總論》，台北：揚智，第二版，頁333-378。 張亞中、苗繼德，2007，〈全球不平等發展〉，張亞中(編)，《國際關係總論》，台北：揚智，第二版，頁415-458。 張原卿，2004，〈貿易與衝突：國家大小對國際互動的影響〉，《遠景基金會季刊》，5(2)：29-66。 張健雄，2005，〈中歐解決紡織品貿易〉，《當代世界》，10：32-33。 陳欣之，2007，〈新自由制度主義、社會建構主義及英國學派〉，張亞中(編)，《國際關係總論》，台北：揚智，第二版，頁73-116。 陳勁，2004，〈歐盟與拉丁美洲經貿及區域合作關係〉，《問題與研究》，43(4)：115-141。 陳麗娟，1996，《歐洲共同體法導論》，台北：五南書局。 黃偉峰，2003，〈剖析歐洲聯盟正在成型的治理體系〉，《歐美研究》，33(2): 291-344。 黃偉峰，2007，〈歐洲議會〉，黃偉峰(編)，《歐洲聯盟的組織與運作》，台北：五南書局，第二版，頁215-280。 葉至誠、葉立誠，1999，《研究方法與論文寫作》，台北：商鼎文化。 劉鵬飛、李剛，2006，〈基於全球化視角的中歐貿易爭端即其博弈分析〉，《中央財經大學學報》，7：59-63。 鄭端耀，2001，〈國際關係「社會建構理論」評析〉，《美歐季刊》，15(2)：199-229。 盧業中，2001，〈主要國際關係理論中新現實主義、新自由制度主義與建構主義之比較研究〉，《中山人文社會科學期刊》，9(2)：21-52。 盧業中，2002，〈論國際關係理論之新自由制度主義〉，《問題與研究》，41(2)：43-67。 錢磊，2005，〈轉基因產品貿易中預防原則探析〉，《法制論壇》，20(4)：2005：112-115。 薛榮久，2005，〈中國與歐美等國紡織品貿易爭端的化解〉，《國際貿易》，7：7-11。 藍玉春，2005，〈歐盟多層次治理：論點與現象〉，《政治科學論叢》，24: 49-76。 藍玉春，2007，〈歐盟高峰會〉，黃偉峰(編)，《歐洲聯盟的組織與運作》，台北：五南書局，第二版，頁215-280。 蘇宏達，2007，〈理事會〉，黃偉峰(編)，《歐洲聯盟的組織與運作》，台北：五南書局，第二版，頁215-280。 蘇芳誼，1996，〈歐聯、美國與世貿組織農產品貿易政策之綜合研究〉，《歐美研究》，26(2)：33-91。 〈GATT與WTO環境相關條款〉，《行政院環境保護署》：http://sta.epa.gov.tw/cooperation/貿易與環保/WTO基本資料/GATT與WTO環境相關條款.htm 〈WTO歐盟生技產品爭端案件研析〉，《經濟部資策會科技法律中心》：http://stlc.iii.org.tw/GMO/Research/doc/歐盟基因改造科技管理法制.pdf?i=449 〈中歐紡織品貿易爭端解決評析〉，《中國經濟網》：http://finance.ce.cn/macro/myal/200607/26/t20060726_7882558.shtml 〈紡織品與成衣協定〉，台大WTO研究中心：http://homepage.ntu.edu.tw/~wtocenter/project/texitle.htm 二、英文文獻 “Chinese Textiles Exports Surge; US, EU to Invoke Textile Safeguard?” Bridges Weekly Trade News Digest: 9: 11 (2005): http://www.ictsd.org/weekly/05-04-06/BRIDGESWeekly9-11.pdf “European Policy Analyst June 2005.” The Economist Intelligence Unit: http://www.eiu.com “Official Journal of the European Communities.” European Commission: http://ec.europa.eu/environment/biotechnology/pdf/dir2001_18.pdf “Spilling the Beans.” Institute for Responsible Technology: http://www.seedsofdeception.com/utility/showArticle/?objectID=1007 “Textile Vision-2005.” SMEDA: http://www.pakboi.gov.pk/pdf/Textile%20Vision%202005.pdf “Understanding the WTO Agreement on Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures.” World Trade Organization: http://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/sps_e/spsund_e.htm “What do People Want?” Mothers for Natural Law: http://www.safe-food.org/-issue/polls.html Aggarwal, V. K. 1985. Liberal Protectionism: The International Politics of Organized Textile Trade. Berkeley: University of California Press. Aggestam, Lisbeth. 2008. “Introduction: ehtical power Europe?” International Affairs. 84(1): 1-11. Ames, Glenn. 2001. “Banana, Beef, and Biotechnology: Three Contentious U.S.-EU Trade Disputes.” Review of Agricultural Economics. 23(1): 214-222. Archer, Clive. & Frona Butler. 1996. The European Union: Structure and Process. New York: St. Martin's. Arts, Karin. & Jessica Byron. 1997. “The Mid-Term Review of the Lomé IV Convention: Heralding the Furure?” Third World Quarterly. 18(1): 73-81. Bache, Ian. & Stephen George. 2006. Politics in the European Union. New York: Oxford University Press. Bailey, Ronald. “Escape of the Clones?” reasononline: http://www.reason.com/news/show/33739.html Baldwin, David. 1954. “Power Analysis and World Politics——New Trend vs. Old Tendencies.” World Politics. 31(2): 101-194. Baldwin, Matthew. 2006. “EU trade politics– heaven or hell?” Journal of European Public Policy. 13(6): 926–942. Baleix, Juliette. 2005. “Quotas on Clothing Imports: Impact and Determinants of EU Trade Policy.” Review of International Economics. 13(3): 445-460. Barnett, Michael. & Martha Finnemore. 1999. “The Politics, Power, and Pathologies of International Organizations.” International Organizations. 53(4): 699-732. Barnett, Michael. & Raymond Duvall. 2005. “Power in International Politics.” International Organizations. 59(1):39–75. Bretherton, Charlotte. & John Vogler. 2006. The European Union as a global actor. London; New York: Routledge. Brown, William. 2000. “Restructuring North-South Relations: ACP-EU Development Cooperation in a Liberal International Order.” Review of African Political Economy. 27(85): 367-383. Bull, Hedley. 1982. “Civilian Power Europe: A Contradiction in Terms?” Journal on Common Market Study. 21(2): 149-170. Buzan, Barry. 1984. “Economic Structure and International Security: The Limits of the Liberal Case.” International Organization. 38(4): 597-624. Coleman, William. & Melissa Gabler. 2002. “Agricultural Biotechnology and Regime Formation: A Constructivist Assessment of the Prospects.” International Studies Quarterly. 46(4): 481-506. Crawford, Gordon. 1996. “Wither Lomé? The Mid-Term Review and the Decline of Partnership.” The Journal of Modern African Studies. 34(3): 503-518. Dispute Settlement: Dispute DS291: “European Communities-Measures Affecting the Approval and Marketing of Biotech Products.” World Trade Organization: http://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/dispu_e/cases_e/ds291_e.htm Dolan, Michael B. 1983. “European Restructuring and Import Policies for a Textile Industry in Crisis.” International Organizations. 37(4): 583-615. Dougherty, James.& Pfaltzgraff, Robert. 2001. Contending Theories of International Relations. New York: Longman, ed. 5th. Duchêne, Francois. 1972. “Europe’s role in world peace” in Europe Tomorrow: Sixteen Europeans Look Ahead, ed. Richard Mayne. London Fontana, 32-47. Economic Note. “Defending GMO against the culture of precaution.” Institute Economique Molinari: http://www.institutmolinari.org/pubs/note20063.pdf Elgstrom, Ole. & Michael Smith. 2006. The European Union's roles in international politics: concepts and analysis. New York: Routledge. European Commission. Directorate-General. 1996. for Development. Info, Unit., SYSMIN and mining development: cooperation between the European Union and the ACP states. Office for Official Publications of the European Communities. Finnemore, Martha. 1996. National Interest in International Society. London: Cornell University Press. Forwood, Genevra. 2002. “The Road to Cotonou: Negotiationg a Successor to Lomé.” Journal of Common Market Studies. 39(3): 432-442. Freres, Christian. 2000. “The European Union as a Global ‘Civilian Power’: Development Cooperation in EU-Latin American Relations.” Journal of Interamerican Studies and World Affairs. 42(2): 63-85. Fresco, Louise O. “Genetically modified crops.” Agriculture Department, Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations: http://www.fao.org/AG/magazine/pdf/0111.pdf Galtung, Johan. 1976. “The Lomé Convention: updated dependence or departure toward collective self-reliance?” African Review. 1976(1):33-54. Gibb, Richard. 2000. “Post-Lomé: The European Union and the South.” Third World Quarterly. 21(3): 457-481. Gilpin, Robert. 1987. The Political Economy of International Relations. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press. Glasmeier, Amy. Jeffery W. Thompson, & Amy Kays. 1993. “The Geography of Trade Policy: Trade Regomes and Location Decisions in the Textile and Apparel Complex.” Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers. 18(1): 19-35. Goldstein, Joshua S. & Jon C. Pevehouse. 2004. International Relations. NY: HarperCollins College Publishers, ed.5th. Goldstein, Judith. 2000. “International Institutions and Domestic Politics: GATT, WTO, and the Liberalization of International Trade.” In The WTO as an International Organization, ed. Anne Krueger & Chonira Aturupane. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 133-152. Gowa, Joanna. 1994. Allies, Adversaries, and International Trade. New Jersey: Princeton University Press. Greenidge, Carl. 1999. “Return to Colonialism? The New Orientation of European Development Assistance.” In New Perspectives on European Union Development Cooperation, ed. Marjorie Lister. Colo Boulder: Westview Press, 103-124. Hanrahan, Charles. 2003. “Agricultural Biotechnology: The U.S.-EU Dispute.” CRS Report for Congress. Order Code RS21556. Hanson, Brian. 1998. “What Happened to Fortress Europe?: External Trade Policy Liberalization in the European Union.” International Organization. 52(1):55-85. Heffernan, M. J. 1998. The Meaning of Europe. Geography and Geopolitics. London: Arnold. Helmuth, Laura. 2000. “Both Sides Claim Victory in Trade Pact.” Science. 287(5454):782-783. Heron, Tony. 2007. “European Trade Diplomacy and the Politics of Global Development: Reflections on the EU-China ‘Bra Wars’ Dispute.” Government and Opposition. 42(2): 190-214. Hettne, Björn. & Fredrik Söderbaum. 2005. “Civilian Power or Soft Imperialism? The EU as a Global Actor and the Role of Interregionalism.” European Foreign Affairs Review. 10:532-552. Hyde-Price, Adrian. 2008. “A ‘tragic actor’? A realist perspective on ‘ethical power Europe’.” International Affairs. 84(1): 29-44. Hopf, Ted. 1998. “The Promise of Constructivism in International Relations Theory.” International Security. 23(1): 177-180. Hurt, Stephen. 2003. “Co-operation and Coercion? The Cotonou Agreement between the European Union and ACP States and the End of the Lomé Convention.” Third World Quarterly. 24(1): 161-176. Irvine, Keith. 1969. “Francozone Africa.” Current History. 56(309): 282-285. Johnson, Michael. 1998. European Community Trade Policy and the Article 133 Committee. London: Royal Institute of International Affairs. Keohane, Robert. & Josephe Nye. 1977. Power and Interdependence. Boston: Little, Brown. Keohane, Robert. 1984. After Hegemony: Cooperation and Discord in the World Political Economy. Princeton: Princeton University Press. Keohane, Robert. 1986. “Theory of World Politics: Structural Realism Beyond.” In Neorealism and Its Critics. ed. Robert Keohane. New York: Columbia University Press, 158-203. Keohane, Robert. 1989. International Institutions and State Power: Essays in International Relations Theory. Boulder: Westview Press. Knodt, Michele. 2004. “International Embeddedness of European Multi-Level Governance.” Journal of European Public Policy. 11(4): 701-719. Kowert, Paul & Jeffrey Legro. 1996. “Norms, Identity, and Their Limits: A Theoretical Reprise.” In The Culture of National Security, ed., Peter Katzenstein. NY: Columbia University Press, 451-497. Kurzer, Paulette. 2006. “European Environmental Leadership: The EU Approach to GM Foods.” In Hard Power, Soft Power and the Future of Translantic Relations, ed. Thomas Ilgen. Burlington, VT : Ashgate. Levy, Daniel. 2005. Old Europe, New Europe, Core Europe: Transatlantic Relations After the Iraq War. London: Verso. Lieber, Robert. 1972. Theory and World Politics. London: Allen and Unwin. Linklater, Andrew. 2005. “A European Civilizing Process.” In International Relations and the European Union, ed. C. Hill and M. Smith. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 367-387. Lister, Marjorie. 1988. The European Community and the Developing World: The Role of the Lomé Convention. Aldershot: Avebury. Lister, Marjorie. 1997. The European Union and the South: Relations with Developing Countries. London: Routledge. Lister, Marjorie. 1999. New Perspectives on European Union Development Cooperation. Boulder, Colo. : Westview Press. Manners, Ian. 2002. “Normative Power Europe: A Contradiction in Terms?” Journal of Common Market Studies. 40(2): 235-258. Manners, Ian. 2008. “The normative ethics of the European Union.” International Affairs. 84(1): 45-60. Mansfield, Edward. 1994. Power, Trade, and War. New Jersey: Princeton University Press. McCormick, John. 2007. The European Superpower. New York: Palgrave Macmillan. McDonald, Patrick. 2004. “Peace through Trade or Free Trade?” The Journal of Conflict Resolution. 48(4): 547-572. McQueen, Matthew. 1998. “ACP-EU Trade Cooperation after 2000: An Assessment of Reciprocal Trade Preferences.” The Journal of Modern African Studies. 36(4): 669-692. Meunier, Sophie. 2005. Trading Voices: The European Union in International Commercial Negotiations. Princetion, N.J.: Princetion University Press. Meunier, Sophie. & Kalypso Nicolaïdis. 1999. “Who Speaks for Europe? The Delegation of Trade Authorities in the EU.” Journal of Common Market Studies. 37(3): 477-501. Meunier, Sophie. & Kalypso Nicolaïdis. 2005 “The European Union as a Trade Power.” In The International Relations and the European Union, ed. Christopher Hill and Michael Smith. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 247-269. Meunier, Sophie. & Kalypso Nicolaïdis. 2006. “The European Union as a conflicted trade power.” Journal of European Public Policy. 13(6):906–925. Michalowitz, Irina. 2007. “What Determines Influence? Assessing Conditions for Decisionmaking Influence of Interest Groups in the EU.” Journal of European Public Policy. 14(1): 132-151. Milner, Helen. 1993. “The Assumption of Anarchy in International Relations Theory: A Critique.” In Neorealism and Neoliberalism: The Contemporary Debate, ed. David Baldwin. New York: Columbia University Press, 143-169. Morgenthau, Hans. 1954. Politics among Nations: the struggle for power and peace. New York : Alfred A. Knopf. Morgenthau, Hans. 1985. Politics among Nations: The Struggle for Power and Peace. Ed. 6. NY: Knopf. Nicolaïdis, Kalypso & Robert Howse. 2002. “’This is my EUtopia...’: Narrative as Power.” Journal of Common Market Studies. 40(4): 767-792. Nicolaïdis, Kalypso. & Justine Lacroiz. 2003. “Order and Justice Beyond the Nation State: Europe’s Competing Paradigms.” In Order and Justice in International Relations, ed. Rosemary Foot. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 125-154. Nye, Joseph. 2004. Soft Power: the Mean to Success in World Politics. NY: Perseus. Official website of EU: http://europa.eu Olsen, Gorm. 1997. “Western Europe’s Relations with Africa since the End of the Cold War.” The Journal of Modern African Studies. 35(2): 299-319. Olsen, Gorm. 1998. “Europe and the Promotion of Democracy in Post Cold War Africa: How Serious Is Europe and for What Reason?” African Affairs. 97(388): 343-367. Piening, Christopher. 1997. Global Europe: The European Union in World Affairs. Boulder: Lynne Rienner. Powell, Robert. 1993. “Absolute and Relative Gains in International Relations Theory.” In Neorealsim and Neoliberalism: the Contemporary Debate, ed. David A. Baldwin. NY: Columbia University Press, 209-233. Powell, Robert. 1994. “Anarchy in International Relations Theory: The Neorealism-Neoliberal Debate.” International Organizations. 48(2): 313-344. Rosendal, G. Kristin. 2005. “Governing GMOs in the EU: A Deviant Case of Environmental Policy-making.” Global Environmental Politics. 5(1): 82-104. Schurman, Rachel. 2004. “Fighting ‘Frankenfoods’: Industry Opportunity Structures and the Efficacy of the Anti-Biotech Movement in Western Europe.” Social Problems. 51(2): 243-268. Sergeant-Haape, Melanie. 1999. “Lomé rebuilding under way: Lomé V.” African Business. i241, March: 18. Sideri, S. 1970. Trade and Power: Informal Colonialism in Anglo-Portuguese Relations. Rotterdam: Rotterdam University Press. Smith, Jeffrey. “POINT OF VIEW: Genetically Modified Foods Unsafe? Evidence that Links GM Foods to Allergic Responses Mounts.” Genetic Engineering & biotechnology News: http://www.genengnews.com/articles/chitem.aspx?aid=2252 Smith, Jeffrey. “Seeds of Deception.” Wanttoknow.Info: http://www.wanttoknow.info/deception10pg Tellis, Ashley J. et al. 2000. Measuring National Power in the Postindustrial Age. Santa Monica CA: Rand Corporation. Torre, Josè. & Michel Bacchetta. 1980. “The Uncommon Market: European Policies Towards the Clothing Industry in the 1970’s.” n cccccccccJournal of Common Market Studies, 19: 2: 95-122. Ugur, Mehmet. 1998. “Explaining Protectionism and Liberalization in European Union trade policy: the case of textiles and clothing.” Journal of European Public Policy, 5(4): 652-670. Viner, Jacob. 1948. “Power Versus Plenty as Objectives of Foreign Policy in the Seventeenth and Eighteenth Centuries.” World Politics. 1(1): 1-29. Waltz, Kenneth. 1979. Theory of International Politics. Reading, Mass.: Addison-Wesley. Waltz, Kenneth. 2000. “Structural Realism after the Cold War.” International Security. 25(1): 14-18. Watts, Patrick. 1998. “Losing Lomé: The Potential Impact of the Commission Guidelines on the ACP Non-Least Developed Countries.” Review of African Political Economy. 25(75): 47-71. Weber, Max. 1954. Max Weber on Law in Economy and Society. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Wendt, Alexander. 1999. Social Theory of International Politics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Woolcock, S. 1993 “The European Acquis and Multilateral Trade Rules: Are They Compatible?” Journal of Common Market Studies. 31(4): 539-558. | |
| dc.identifier.uri | http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/46589 | - |
| dc.description.abstract | 「權力」為國際關係的核心焦點，本研究以權力連結歐盟的經濟和政治議題，探討歐盟如何以貿易政策追求政治目的。目前學界對於歐盟的權力角色有眾多看法，本研究在探討歐盟的貿易政策之外，將同時回顧相關觀點，藉此分析歐盟在國際舞台上究竟扮演怎樣的權力角色。
國際關係的三種主流理論對於權力的關注點有所不同，本研究嘗試以三種國際關係理論的權力觀點來解釋歐盟的貿易政策。本研究以溫特的國際體系概念假設歐盟在國際上面對不同角色的對手，同時假設中國為歐盟的硬競爭者、美國為歐盟的軟競爭者、非加太國家為歐盟的追隨者。在與中國的互動議題上，本研究選擇歐中紡織品貿易爭端；在與美國的互動議題上，本研究選擇歐美生技產品貿易爭端；在與非加太國家的互動上，本研究則是檢視自歐洲統合以來，歐體�歐盟的非加太貿易政策之演進。 本研究分為八章。第一章陳述本研究研究動機及目的，同時界定本研究之研究範圍與限制，並且針對目前學界相關研究做一番回顧與探討。第二章闡敘權力在國際關係研究之中的重要性，並分析國際關係三種主流理論的權力觀點。第三章從歐盟的組織設計和決策程序著手，以分析歐盟在貿易政策上的獨立行為能力。第四、五、六章進入案例探討，分別研究歐中紡織品貿易爭端、歐美生技產品貿易爭端，以及歐體�歐盟的非加太貿易政策。第七章以國際關係三種主流理論之觀點分析歐盟的貿易政策與政治權力之間的關係。第八章為結論，對本研究做一整體性的回顧，並試圖分析歐盟究竟在國際舞台上扮演怎樣的權力角色。 本研究以新現實主義、新自由制度主義、社會建構主義三種國際關係主流理論為途徑，從歐盟的貿易政策切入，探討歐盟如何以貿易來發揮政治權力以及追求政治目的。本研究認為歐盟是以貿易政策做為權力施展途徑，使用貿易權力、規範性權力等非軍事權力，在新時代構築有別於傳統軍武權力的「知識權力」。 | zh_TW |
| dc.description.abstract | “Power” is the focus of International Relations. This thesis uses power to connect economic and political issues of European Union (the EU). This thesis discusses how EU uses trade policy to pursue political intention. About EU’s role in power, there are various opinions in academic circle. This thesis reviews related perspectives and examines what role EU plays in international stage.
Three mainstreams of IR theories have various concerns of power. This thesis uses power perspectives of three IR theories to explain EU trade policy. This thesis utilizes Wendt's view of international system, assuming that EU is facing various counterparts. This thesis also assumes that China is the hard competitor of EU, US is the soft competitor, and ACP States are the followers of EU. In the relation with China, this thesis discusses EU-China textile trade dispute; in the relation with US, this thesis analyzes EU-US GMO trade dispute; and in the relation with ACP States, this thesis reviews the evolution of ACP policy of EC/EU since the integration of Europe. This thesis includes 8 chapters. Chapter one explains motives and purposes, defines range and restrictions of this research, and also reviews related studies. Chapter two discusses the importance of power in IR study, and analyses power perspectives of three mainstreams of IR theory. Chapter three demonstrates the independent capability of EU in trade policy by specifying the decision-making processes and the design of EU institutions. Chapter four, five, and six study EU-China textile trade dispute, EU-US GMO trade dispute, and EC/EU ACP policy individually. Chapter seven uses perspectives of three mainstreams to analyze the corelation between trade policy and political power of EU. Chapter eight is conclusion, reviewing this research thoroughly, and analyzing what role EU plays in international stage. This thesis uses Neorealism, Neoinstitutionalism, and Social Constructivism as approach, and EU trade policy as study objective, to discuss how EU uses trade policy to develop political power, and how EU utilizes trade policy to pursue political intention. This thesis concludes that EU establishes 'Knowledge Power' which is distinct from traditional military power, by using trade policy, trade power, normative power, and civilian power. | en |
| dc.description.provenance | Made available in DSpace on 2021-06-15T05:17:22Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 ntu-99-R96322010-1.pdf: 1130714 bytes, checksum: 0c1d983369c70065be5cedcb92d90a84 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2010 | en |
| dc.description.tableofcontents | 口試委員會審定書………………………………………………………………i
謝 辭……………………………………………………...ii 中文摘要…………………………………………………..iii 英文摘要....……………………………………………...iv 目 錄………………… …………………………………….vi 圖目錄………………………………………………………vii 表目錄………………………………………………………vii 縮寫對照表…………………………………………………viii 第一章 緒論…………………………………………………1 第一節 研究動機與目的………………………………… 1 第二節 研究方法與架構………………………………… 5 第三節 研究範圍與限制………………………………… 9 第四節 文獻回顧…………………………………………13 第二章 權力理論探討：三種理論的觀點……………… 27 第一節 權力與國際關係…………………………………27 第二節 新現實主義的權力觀點：國家相對利益至上…30 第三節 新自由制度主義的權力觀點：以制度合作求取國家絕對利益……35 第四節 建構主義的權力觀點：觀念、認同、實踐與權力……39 第三章 歐盟做為獨立行為者的能力：政策的形成與產出… …43 第一節 歐盟貿易政策歷史演進 43 第二節 歐盟貿易政策決策的組織互動 48 第三節 歐盟貿易政策的決策程序 56 第四節 歐盟作為獨立經濟行為者的角色與能力 68 第四章 與硬競爭者的互動：歐中紡織品貿易爭端…… ………73 第一節 歐洲紡織品貿易政策的發展過程 73 第二節 歐中紡織品貿易爭端的根源：保護主義政策形成的因素 76 第三節 歐中紡織品爭端的折衝及解決 81 第四節 從歐中紡織品貿易爭端觀察歐盟的雙邊貿易談判行為 87 第五章 與軟競爭者的互動：歐美生技產品貿易爭端……………93 第一節 歐盟生技產品貿易政策的發展過程 93 第二節 影響歐盟生技產品貿易政策形成的因素 98 第三節 歐盟生技產品貿易政策在WTO中所引起的爭議 104 第四節 從生技產品政策分析歐盟在WTO的參與行為 110 第六章 與追隨者的互動：歐盟的非加太國家經貿政策…………116 第一節 歐體�歐盟非加太經貿政策的發展過程……………… 116 第二節 歐體�歐盟非加太經貿政策的形成因素……………… 122 第三節 歐體�歐盟非加太政策的爭議與折衝………………… 130 第四節 從歐盟非加太經貿政策觀察歐盟的國際經貿援助政策 138 第七章 貿易政策與歐盟權力：三種理論的觀點…………………146 第一節 貿易政策是權力展現的選擇或必然：新現實主義觀點 146 第二節 依附在國際建制上的權力：新自由制度主義觀點 151 第三節 全球化下的歐盟權力角色：社會建構主義觀點 155 第八章 結論…………………………………………… 159 參考文獻……………………………………………………… 165 | |
| dc.language.iso | zh-TW | |
| dc.title | 貿易與權力：歐盟貿易政策的權力探討 | zh_TW |
| dc.title | Trade and Power: Power Study of EU Trade Policy | en |
| dc.type | Thesis | |
| dc.date.schoolyear | 98-2 | |
| dc.description.degree | 碩士 | |
| dc.contributor.oralexamcommittee | 吳東野,李貴英 | |
| dc.subject.keyword | 歐盟權力角色,知識權力,歐盟貿易政策,紡織品貿易爭端,生技產品貿易爭端,歐盟非加太政策,歐中關係,歐美關係,歐盟與非加太國家關係, | zh_TW |
| dc.subject.keyword | knowledge power,textile dispute,GMO dispute,ACP policy,EU-China relationships,EU-US relationships,EU-ACP states relationships, | en |
| dc.relation.page | 176 | |
| dc.rights.note | 有償授權 | |
| dc.date.accepted | 2010-07-21 | |
| 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 | |
|---|---|---|---|
| ntu-99-1.pdf 目前未授權公開取用 | 1.1 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。