請用此 Handle URI 來引用此文件: http://hdl.handle.net/11455/17752
標題: ASEM經濟議程之研究:以歐盟與東協之經濟互動關係為例
A Study on ASEM Economic Agenda: Economic Relations Between the EU and the ASEAN
作者: 陳佳雯
Chen, Chia-Wen
關鍵字: 亞歐會議
Asia-Europe Meeting (ASEM)
國際建制
區域間主義
歐盟
東協
International Regime
Inter-Regionalism
European Union (EU)
Association of South-East Asian Nations (ASEAN)
出版社: 國際政治研究所
引用: 壹、中文部分 一、專書: 中村哲主編。王玉茹、林滿紅譯。2005年。《東亞近代經濟的形成與發展》。臺北:中研院人社中心。 方宗鑫。2007年。《國際貿易法規》。台北:三民書局。 沈玄池、洪德欽主編。1998年。《歐洲聯盟:理論與政策》。臺北:中央研究院歐美研究所。 宋鎮照。1996年。《東協國家之政經發展》。臺北:五南圖書出版公司。 柯拉多.列塔(Corrado G. M. Lettav)著。《亞歐會議的未來》翻譯組譯。2003年。《亞歐會議的未來》。北京:時事出版社。 洪德欽主編。2000年。《歐洲聯盟經貿政策》。臺北:中央研究院歐美研究所。 宮占奎、孟夏、劉晨陽主編。2006年。《亞歐會議研究》。天津:南開大學出版社。 陳勁。2002年。《歐盟外交政策與對外關係》。臺北:五南圖書出版公司。 張亞中主編。2006年。《歐盟全球戰略與對外關係 》。臺北:晶典文化事業出版社。 楊麗慧、阿蕯德.拉吉夫主編。林驤華、吳芸芬、汪中平譯。2001年。《亞歐縱 橫談-許通美演講與言論集》。新加坡:世界科技出版公司。 薛瓦.法蘭克福-納區密爾斯(Chava Frankfort-Nachmias)、大衛.納區密爾斯(David Nachmias)著。潘明宏、陳志瑋譯。2003年。《最新社會科學研究方法》。臺北:韋伯文化。 蔡東杰。2007年。《東亞區域發展的政治經濟學》。臺北:五南圖書出版公司。 閻學通、孫學峰。2001年。《國際關係研究實用方法》。北京:人民出版社。 法羅斯(James Fallows)著。薛絢譯。1996年。《瞄準大東亞:東亞政治與經濟的崛起》。臺北:立緒文化事業有限公司。 二、期刊論文: 宋鎮照。1996年。<從亞歐高峰會看東亞政經發展>。《美歐月刊》,第11卷第8期,頁115-134。 吳東野。2005年。<從亞歐會議論區域間主義的發展>。《問題與研究》,第44卷第3期,頁1-25。 郝培芝。2004年。<亞歐會議形成的結構性動力與意義:從新區域主義的觀點分析>。《問題與研究》,第43卷第1期,頁125-143。 孫國祥。2005年。<區域間主義之研究:亞歐會議之實踐>。《亞太研究通訊》,第3期,頁30-54。 馬孆。2006年。<亞歐會議十年進程回顧>。《當代亞太》,第9期,頁3-9。 張亞中。1997年。<亞歐新關係>。《美歐季刊》,第12卷第1期,頁97-119。 湯紹成。2006年。<兩個不對稱的合作夥伴:歐盟與東協的關係>。收錄於張亞中主編,《歐盟全球戰略與對外關係 》,臺北:晶典文化事業出版社,頁193-222。 2004年。<第四屆亞歐會議之發展>。《問題與研究》,第43卷第1期,頁145-164。 1998年。<一九九六年曼谷亞歐會議的後續發展>。《問題與研究》,第37卷第3期,頁35-44。 潘光、朱雯霞。2006年。<亞歐會議與亞歐間其他合作機制的關係>。《現代國際關係》,第10期,頁23-34。 蔡東傑。2005年。<東協國家對亞歐會議態度之立場與策略>。《亞太研究通訊》,第3期,頁55-65。 蔡增家。2006年。<亞歐會議經濟議程的建構與發展:從國際建制的角度分析>。《問題與研究》,第45卷第4期,頁63-90。 鄭端耀。1997年。<國際關係「新自由制度主義」理論之評析>。《問題與研究》,第36卷第12期,頁1-72。 盧光盛。2005年。<亞歐會議:機制和績效>。《國際論壇》,第7卷第2期,頁1-6。 盧晨陽。2007年。<亞歐會議對東亞地區主義的影響>。《教學與研究》,第8期,頁63-69。 三、未出版論文: 高子妤。2003年。《亞歐會議之研究》。嘉義:南華大學歐洲研究所碩士論文。 黃媜媜。2006年。《由新自由制度主義論亞歐會議架構下歐盟與東協的合作與行動(1996-2006年)》。臺北:淡江大學歐洲研究所碩士論文。 楊士和。2003年。《由亞歐會議(ASEM)分析歐盟(EU)與東協(ASEAN)之關係》。臺北:淡江大學歐洲研究所碩士論文。 四、網路資料: 中華歐亞基金會。http://www.fics.org.tw/issues/index.asp 中華人民共和國外交部。 http://big5.fmprc.gov.cn/gate/big5/www1.fmprc.gov.cn/chn/ 淡江大學歐盟資訊中心。http://www.lib.tku.edu.tw/eudoc/libeu_ch.htm 歐洲經貿辦事處。http://www.deltwn.ec.europa.eu/index.php 歐洲聯盟研究協會。http://eusa-taiwan.org/ 國立政治大學國際關係研究中心。http://iir.nccu.edu.tw/Default.asp# 貳、外文部分 一、專書: Baldwin, David A. ed. Neorealism and Neoliberalism: the Contemporary Debate. New York: Columbia University Press, 1993. Bretheron, Charlotte and Volger, John . the European Union as a Global Actor. London: Routledge, 1999. Dent, Christopher M. the European Union and East Asia :an Economic Relationship. London: Routledge, 1999. Dougherty, James E. Contending Theories of International Relations: a Comprehensive Survey. New York: Longman, 2001. Gilson, Julie. Asia Meets Europe: Inter-Regionalism and the Asia-Europe Meeting. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar, 2002. Hettne, Bj&ouml;rn. Inotai, Andras and Sunkel, Osvaldo eds. Globalization and the New Regionalism. New York: St. Martin''s Press, 1999. Hu, Yao-su. the Asian crisis and the EU''s global responsibilities. London: Federal Trust for Education & Research, 1999. Keohane, Robert O. After Hegemony: Cooperation and Discord in the World Political Economy. Oxford: Princeton University Press, 2005. Keohane, Robert O. and Joseph Nye. Power and Interdependence. New York: HarperCollins, 1989. Krasner, Stephen ed. International Regimes. Ithaca : Cornell University Press, 1983. Lee, Sang-Gon and Pierre-Bruno Ruffini eds. the global integration of Europe and East Asia: studies of international trade and investment. Cheltenham, Cheltenham: E. Elgar, 1999. Maull, Hanns; Gerald Segal and Jusuf Wanandi eds. Europe and the Asia Pacific. London: Routledge, 1998. Preston, Peter W. and Julie Gilson eds. the European Union and East Asia : Interregional linkages in a changing global system. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar, 2001. Robles, Alfredo C. the Political Economy of Interregional Relations: ASEAN and the EU. England: Ashgate, 2004. Reiterer, Michael. Asia-Europe: Do They Meet? Reflections on the Asia-Europe Meeting. Singapore: Asia- Europe Foundation, 2002 . Stokhof, Wim and Paul van der Velde eds. ASEM (the Asia-Europe Meeting): A Window of Opportunity. New York: Columbia University Press, 1999. Asian-European Perspective: Developing the ASEM Process. London: Curzon, 2001. Strange, Roger; Jim Slater and Corrado Molteni eds. the European Union and ASEAN: Trade and Investment Issues. London: Macmillan, 2000. Tadashi, Yamamoto and Yeo, Lay Hwee eds. ASEM in Its Tenth Year: Looking Back, Looking Forward. Tokyo: Japan Center for International Exchange, 2006. Wiessala, Georg. the European Union and Asian Countries. London: Sheffield Academic Press, 2002. Yeo, Lay Hwee. Asia and Europe: the Development and Different Dimensions of ASEM. New York: Routledge, 2003. Yue, Chia Siow and Joseph L. H. Tan. ASEAN & EU: Forging New Linkages and Strategic Alliances. Singapore: Institute of Southeast Asian Studies, 1997. 二、期刊論文: Bernhard, May. “Trilateral relations in a globalizing world. ASEM and the United States.” Asia Europe Journal3, no.1 (2005): 37-47. Cammack, Paul and Gareth Api Richards. “ASEM and Interregionalism.” Journal of Asia Pacific Economy4, no.1 (1999): 1-12. Camroux, David and Christian Lechervy. “Close encounter of a third kind? The inaugural Asia-Europe meeting of March 1996.” the Pacific Review9, no.3 (1996): 442-453 Chen, Zhimin. “NATO, APEC and ASEM: triadic interregionalism and global order.” Asia Europe Journal3, no.3 (2005): 361-78. Dent, Christopher M. “From inter-regionalism to trans-regionalism? Future challenges for ASEM.” Asia Europe Journal1, no.2 (2003): 223-235. “The ASEM: Managing the New Framework of the EU’s Economic Relations With East Asia.” Pacific Affairs70, no.4 (1997-1998):495-516. “The Asia-Europe Meeting and Inter-Regionalism: Toward a Theory of Multilateral Utility.” Asian Survey44, no.2 (2004): 462-486. “The Eurasian Economic Axis: Its Present and Prospective Significance for East Asia.” the Journal of Asian Studies60, no.3 (2001): 731-759. Forster, Anthony. “Evaluating the EU-ASEM Relationship: a Negotiated Order Approach.” Journal of European Public Policy7, No.5(2000): 787-805. Gilson, Julie. “Trade Relations between Europe and East Asia,” Asia Europe Journal2, no.2 (2004): 185-200. “New Interregionalism? The EU and East Asia.” Journal of European Integration27, no.3 (2005): 307-326. Grieco, Joseph M. “Anarchy and the Limits of Cooperation: a Realist Critique of the Newest Liberal Institutionalism.” In Neorealism and Neoliberalism: the Contemporary Debate. ed. David A. Baldwin. New York: Columbia University Press, 1993: 116-140. H&auml;nggi, Heiner. “ASEM and the Construction of the New Triad.” Journal of Asia Pacific Economy4, no.1 (1999): 56-80. Kim, Jong Bum. “Combating International Corruption: in Search of an Effective Role for ASEM,” In ASEM (the Asia-Europe Meeting): A Window of Opportunity. eds. Wim Stokhof and Paul van der Velde. New York: Columbia University Press, 1999: 84-94 Kim, Jong Kil Kim. “Economic Growth of ASEAN in the Context of East Asian Development.” In the Global Integration of Europe and East Asia. ed. Sang-Gon Lee. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar, 1999: 132-148. Krasner, Stephen. “Structural Causes and Regime Consequences: Regimes as Intervening Variables,” International Organization36, no.2 (1982): 185-205. Kivim&auml;ki, Timo. “Europe and Asian international cooperation.” Asia Europe Journal5, no.3 (2007): 303-315. Lamy, Pascal. “Unlocking the potential of the ASEAN – EU partnership. the role of Singapore.” Asia Europe Journal2, no.4 (2004): 485-487. Lim, Paul. “Analyzing the ASEM process.” Asia Europe Journal1, no.1 (2003): 121-141. “the Unfolding Asia-Europe Meeting(ASEM) Process,” In the European Union and East Asia : Interregional linkages in a changing global system. eds. P.W. Preston and Julie Gilson .Cheltenham, Cheltenham: Edward Elgar, 2001:91-108. Maull, Hanns W. and Nuria Okfen. “Inter-regionalism in international relations: Comparing APEC and ASEM.” Asia Europe Journal1, no.2 (2003): 237-249. Moeller, Joergen Oerstroem. “ASEAN''s Relations With the European Union: Obstacles and Opportunities.” Contemporary Southeast Asia29, No.3 (2007): 465-482. Park, Sung-Hoon. “ASEM and the future of Asia-Europe relations: Background, characteristics and challenge.” Asia Europe Journal2, no.3 (2004): 341-354. Pereira, Rui. “the Helsinki Summit and the Future Course of Asia-Europe Meeting.” Asia Europe Journal5, No.1 (2007): 17-21. Petersen, Niels Helvig. “ASEM: Realising the Potential for the Next Millennium,” In Asian-European Perspective: Developing the ASEM Process. eds. Wim Stokhof and Paul van der Velde. London: Curzon, 2001: 3-8. Petersson, Magnus. “Myanmar in EU-ASEAN Relations.” Asia Europe Journal4, No.4 (2006): 563-581. Robert Axelrod and Robert O. Keohane. “Achieving Cooperation Under Anarchy: Strategies and Institutions.” In Neorealism and Neoliberalism: the Contemporary Debate. ed. David A. Baldwin. New York: Columbia University Press, 1993: 85-114. Rui, Pereira. “The fifth Asia-Europe Meeting (ASEM) summit. An assessment.” Asia Europe Journal 3, no.1 (2005): 17-23. “the Helsinki Summit and the future course of Asia–Europe Meeting.” Asia Europe Journal5, no.1 (2007): 17-21. R&uuml;land, J&uuml;rgen. “ASEM-Transregional Forum at the Crossroads,” In Asian-European Perspective: Developing the ASEM Process. eds. Wim Stokhof and Paul van der Velde. London: Curzon, 2001: 60-73. “the Future of the ASEM Process: Who, How, Why, and What?” In ASEM (the Asia-Europe Meeting): A Window of Opportunity. eds. Wim Stokhof and Paul van der Velde. New York: Columbia University Press, 1999: 126-151. Schmit, Leo. “the ASEM Process: New Rules for Engagement in a Global Environment,” In Asian-European Perspective: Developing the ASEM Process. eds. Wim Stokhof and Paul van der Velde. London: Curzon, 2001: 39-59. Segal, Gerald. “Thinking strategically about ASEM: The subsidiarity question.” the Pacific Review10, no.1 (1997): 124-134. Yeo, Lay Hwee. “ASEM: Looking Back, Looking Forward.” Contemporary Southeast Asia22, No.1 (2000): 113-124. Yepes, C&eacute;sar de Prado. “the effect of ASEM on European foreign policies.” Asia Europe Journal3, no.1 (2005): 25-35. Young, Oran R. “Regime Dynamic: the Rise and Fall of International Regimes.” In International Regimes. ed. Stephen Krasner. Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1983: 93-114. Zhang, Jun. “EU in ASEM: Its Role in Framing Inter-regional Cooperation With East Asian Countries.” Asia Europe Journal (online), November (2007): 1-19. 三、網路資料: ASEM Infoboard. http://www.aseminfoboard.org/ Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN). http://www.aseansec.org/ Asia-Europe Meeting (ASEM). http://asem.inter.net.th/ http://ec.europa.eu/external_relations/asem/intro/index.htm BBC News. http://news.bbc.co.un/ EUROPA. http://www.europa.eu/index_en.htm World Trade Organization. http://www.wto.org/ World Bank. http://web.worldbank.org
摘要: 亞歐會議是歐盟與東亞國家的政府間論壇,參與會員國包括歐盟27國及歐盟執委會,亞洲方面則是東協10國及東協秘書處,加上中國、日本、南韓、蒙古、印度及巴基斯坦。從亞歐會議的規模來看,其涵蓋的人口數約占世界總人口數的60%、GDP占全球總產值的50%、貿易量占世界總額的60%。 亞歐會議是研究國際建制的一個案例。作為當前最重要的區域間主義機制之一,亞歐會議是歐洲與亞洲最高層級的區域間對話機制,自1996年正式成立以來,其運作便受到關注。亞歐會議是在世界政治多極化、經濟全球化以及區域整合發展的背景下,亞歐兩大區域為加強相對薄弱的政經聯繫,而設立的論壇性對話合作機制。 從合作領域來看,亞歐會議的結構包括三大支柱,分別是經濟支柱、政治支柱與文化支柱。其中,經濟支柱是亞歐會議取得最多成果,發展最完善的支柱,因為作為世界兩大經濟體的歐盟與東亞,可以藉由彼此更緊密的對話與合作獲得更大的利益。換言之,經濟合作是亞歐平等夥伴關係強而有力的基礎。 自亞歐會議成立以來,歐盟與東亞之間的經貿往來呈現增加之趨勢,且是彼此重要的合作夥伴。然而,由於除了亞歐會議之外,亞歐區域間關係尚存在其它雙邊合作機制,因此無法單獨且明確指出亞歐會議與此發展趨勢之間的直接關聯。儘管如此,亞歐會議之存在仍是必要的,因其在區域間或國家間的經貿互動關係中,至少可以發揮提供訊息、提升透明度以及增加對話、交流之作用。 本論文首先針對亞歐會議之起源與發展進行彙整與分析,其次評估亞歐會議之成效,以及歐盟與東協之經濟互動關係,並且針對阻礙亞歐會議實現預期目標之因素進行探討,最後則是分析亞歐會議對於國際關係之影響與重要性。
The Asia-Europe Meeting (ASEM) is a forum and a process involving Sixteen Asian and twenty-seven European nations, the European Commission and the ASEAN Secretariat. They represent around 50% of world GDP, 60% of world trade, and approximately 60% of the world population. To be regarded as one of the important inter-regionalism regimes, ASEM is the highest level dialogue and inter-regional forum between EU and East Asia. ASEM has begun to attract notice all around the world since it was established in 1996. The primary purpose of ASEM is to strengthen economic, political and cultural relations between EU and East Asia, in other words, to mend the long Eurasian “missing link.” In terms of cooperative field, the structure of ASEM includes three major pillars, including economic pillar, political pillar and culture pillar. Among them, the economic pillar is the most developed one and achievements of the economic pillar are the most. Because East Asia and EU, as two major economic actors in the world, have a lot to gain through close dialogue and cooperation with each other. Since the establishment of ASEM, positive trend has appeared in the economic and trade contacts between EU and East Asia. And they are each other's important partner in the world. Nevertheless, besides ASEM, there are still other bilateral cooperation mechanisms in inter-regional relation between EU and East Asia. For that reason, to indicate the direct linkage between increasing flows and ASEM is difficult. Despite of this, ASEM is undoubtedly vital and essential in offering information, improving the transparency and facilitating dialogue between EU and East Asia. The purposes of this study are as below: Firstly, attempt to chronicle the genesis and development of ASEM. Secondly, examine the impact of ASEM on inter-regional economic interaction, especially in the case of EU and ASEAN. Thirdly, analysis the predicament that ASEM confronted with. Finally, access the importance of ASEM to international relation.
URI: http://hdl.handle.net/11455/17752
其他識別: U0005-2301200910221500
文章連結: http://www.airitilibrary.com/Publication/alDetailedMesh1?DocID=U0005-2301200910221500
顯示於類別:國際政治研究所

文件中的檔案:
沒有與此文件相關的檔案。


在 DSpace 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。