在美國歷史上所簽訂的 14 項 FTA 中,NAFTA 與 CAFTA-DR 最能展現總統與國會在 FTA 政策制訂上所扮演角色與影響決策的程度,故本文以此兩項 FTA 作為研究美國 FTA 決策主體的案例。研究發現,在對外政策的決策主體的三種不同的模式:總統主導模式、國會主導模式與互動模式中,總統模式最能解釋美國 FTA 政策。總統具有龐大的國內外行政資源與政黨力量,可以干預國會的決策並改變個別議員的投票傾向,在不影響 FTA 基本內涵與目的下促使國會通過 FTA。國會制訂的程序規範不足以限制行政部門的權力;除了最終的投票權,國會的影響力僅存在於洽簽時介入修改某些條款,而這些條款的改變仍需要行政部門的認可。這種由行政部門主導,國會僅能在不影響 FTA 根本的前提上修改部分的條款,明顯的符合總統主導模式。
Among all 14 FTA’s signed by the U.S. in history, NAFTA and CAFTA-DR - selected by this paper as cases to identify the entity that owns the power of dominating the U.S. FTA policy - most represent the dynamics and impacts of President and Congress on the FTA policy formation. The research shows that among the three models of decision-making entities of foreign policy - President, Congress, and Interaction, the President model best explains the decision-making of FTA policies. President controls enormous external and internal administrative resources and party leverage to interfere with the Congress decision-making and change the voting behavior of individual congressman, resulting in the passage of FTA’s in Congress without undermining its foundation. Regulations created by Congress do not generate meaningful effects on constraining President’s power. In addition to the showdown on final voting, Congress’ influence is only limited to slightly modifying contents of agreements mostly in the stage of negotiation, which also requires approval from the Administration. This is apparently consistent with the arguments of the President model.
Benjamin J. Cohen 和 Eric. Helleiner 對貨幣權力進行概念論述,但欠缺具體操作指標,學者趙文志依 Cohen 貨幣權力理論中的延遲權力與轉移權力,提出延遲權力中有中、美兩國外匯儲備量、國債發行規模的借貸能力,轉移權力以貿易占 GDP 比值的開放程度,共三項具體指標,指出美國開放度比中國低、但美元流動性與借貸能力高於中國,說明美國對中國有貨幣權力,但該文無法說明中國外匯存底和貿易開放程度都高於美國,但為何是美國擁有貨幣權力,顯然..
Although Benjamin J. Cohen and Eric Helleiner have developed narratives on Monetary Power, there is no clear operational definition of the term. Based on Cohen’s discussion of the power of delay and the power of transfer, Chou Wen-Chi came up with three criteria to measure Monetary Power: foreign reserve, outstanding national debt, and percentage of trade in GDP. Using these criteria, he pointed out that although the US is less trade- dependent, liquidity of US Dollar and borrowing ability of the US are both higher. Thu..
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..
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 Ec..
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.