有關於層次分析(levels-of-analysis)的研究早於第二次世界大戰以來即受到西方學者相當之注重,但國內相關之研究仍未重視層次分析之研究途徑,亦很少有研究著作涉及層次分析之研究架構。近年來隨著「建構主義」 在國際關係理論上愈受重視,開展相互主觀、研究「結構/體系」與「單元 /能動者」之動態互動關係,並提及跨層分析的重要性,可惜建構主義學者亦未能將層次分析之相關理論做系統性之整理或推導成分析模型。針對此,本文將傳統國際關係理論及建構主義涉及層次分析的研究途徑歸納為五大類,並提出相關層次分析之分析架構(analytical framework)及相關模型,以進一步推動國際關係研究中對於層次分析之重視,並冀有裨於國際關係研究者對複雜的層次分析能有一個較有系統性之分析架構。
Levels-of-analysis has been one of most important IR theory in the West since World War II, but still waiting to be explored in Taiwan. With the rises of constructivism emphasizing the concept of intersubjectivity, exploring the relations between structure and agency, and reverting the significance of cross-levels analysis, researchers are forced to recall levels-of-analysis approach. However, there is still a pity that constructivism did not offer a modeling analytical framework for the studies of levels-of-analysis. Therefore, this essay tries to distinguish IR Theory by constructing levels-of- analysis into five categories and offers a modeling explanatory framework for the studies of levels-of-analysis.
在國際關係的研究領域中,不論是國家中心論或是以體系為主的體系理論,都以國家為研究的客體。伴隨著全球化浪潮,「全球治理」概念的出現,表明以國家為主的國際政治體系已無法解決國際環境的複雜變化,須藉助許多跨國性次級團體來共同治理。有鑑於此,新現實主義、新自由主義、 與建構主義中以國家為給定對象的國際關係主流理論,遇到解釋上的局限, 需要建構一套新的本體論與知識論,俾有效解釋在國際政治中逐漸呈現的多元行為體治理現象。本文認為國際關係理論面臨三個問題的挑戰:一、如何解..
Theories of international relations(IR), whether through state-centric or systemic approach, put states as centers of research objectives. With trending globalization, the advent of the global governance concepts manifests that a state-focused international political system without transnational sub-political groups has failed to respond to complex changes in the international environment. Accordingly, this challenges neo-realism, neo- liberalism, and constructivism, which focus on the state-centric approach and experience ex..
請輸入想查詢的期刊標題、關鍵字、作者相關資訊. Please enter the journal title, keywords, and author-related information you want to query.