國際政治經濟學(簡稱國政經)自 70 年代開始發展以來,不僅呈現出理論(自由主義、重商主義與馬克思主義)與研究途徑(理性主義與反思主 義)的競逐,同時也有美國(American School)與不列顛學派(British School)間關於學科定位、研究議題與方法論上的差別。本文主要目的在於從三個面向來介紹及探討國政經的不列顛學派:一、為何該學派被稱為 British School?與國際關係英國學派(English School)有何差別?二、不列顛學派學者偏好以「全球政治經濟學」(Global Political Economy)取代「國際政治經濟學」(International Political Economy)作為學科名稱,‘Global’和 ‘International’到底有何不同?僅涉及世界經濟生產方式的改變?還是包括研究議題與研究方法上的變遷?三、不列顛學派亦被稱為「批判的國際政治經濟學」(Critical IPE),‘Critical’的意涵為何?其和國際關係批判理論 (Critical Theory of International Relations)有何異同?經由這三組問題的討論,冀望可以對國政經不列顛學派有較充分的理解。
Since the 1970s, the International Political Economy(IPE)has explored various research methodologies and methods. However, the disciplinary boundary of IPE is still controversial. The main purpose of this article is to discuss the British School of IPE from three dimensions. First, why is this school called “British?” Are there differences between the British School and the English School of international relations? Secondly, British School scholars prefer to call this new discipline the” Global Political Economy(GPE)“instead of “International Political Economy.” Thus, what is the underlying meaning of “Global?” Does it require the use of different research methodology? Thirdly, the British School is often viewed as the “Critical International Political Economy(Critical IPE)”. What does “Critical” represent here? What are the differences and similarities of the Critical IPE and the Critical Theory of International Relations? The author hopes that the discussion of these three dimensions could help us further understand the British School of IPE.
國際關係理論的第三次大辯論中,廣為人知的是(新)自由主義與 (新)現實主義的辯論,較少為人關注的是實證主義與後實證主義之間的後設理論爭論,以及因此引發的後設理論研究爭議。後實證主義質疑既有國際關係理論的本體與知識基礎,更使國際關係學者質疑到底後設理論研究是否有助於國際關係理論與實務的研究。後實證主義關注的是後設理論層次而非實質理論層次,後設理論是(國際關係)理論的理論(a theory of theory)或是有關(國際關係)理論的理論(a theory a..
In the third Great Debate in International Relations, the debate between (Neo)Realism and(Neo)Liberalism has been well known; whereas the metatheoretical debate between Positivism and Postpositivism have been ignored. Postpositivism questioned the ontological and epistemological foundations of the established International Relations theory. It has caused the scholars to wonder whether metatheoretical researches exert positive incluences on theories and practices of International Relations. Postpositivism is concerned with the..
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.