各期期刊 All issues

中美外援是基於國際道義或現實利益?非洲案例的實證分析
Are the U.S. and China's Foreign Aid Based on International Morality or Real Interests? An Empirical Analysis of the Africa Case
郭建中(Jiann-Jong Guo)王國臣(Guo-Chen Wang)
55卷1期(2016/03/01)

本文利用追蹤資料向量自我迴歸模型,檢證 2003~2012 年中美外援非洲的動機與成效。結果顯示,大國外援有相同之處:兩者外援目的,都不是基於國際道義考量,但大國外援也存在差異的地方:中國外援以現實利益為主,目的為確保其企業海外投資安全。美國外援則不局限在經濟利益而已,更加側重非傳統安全領域;換言之,美援強調的是綜合利益。中美兩國外援模式差異,肇因於彼此政府對自身所處國際體系地位的認知不同。  

In this paper, we used the panel data vector autoregression model (PVAR) to test motivation and effectiveness of the U.S. and China’s foreign aid (FA) in Africa. Empirical results show similarities in the great power’s foreign aid: the purpose of both great power’s FA is not based on international moral considerations. However there are also major differences between these two great power’s FA. Chinese FA is based on real interests and mainly aims to ensure safety of its outward foreign dire..

以中國對美國資本回流率檢視貨幣權力理論
Testing the Monetary Power Theory: A Case of China’s Capital Account/Current Account to the U.S.
沈麗山(Lih-Shan Shen)
55卷1期(2016/03/01)

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..

無科技的工業化:印尼汽車產業發展之政治經濟分析
An Industry Without Industrialization: Political Economy of the Failure of Indonesia's Automotive Industry
戴萬平(Wan-Ping Tai)
55卷1期(2016/03/01)

相對於泰國與馬來西亞,印尼是東南亞最早發展汽車業的國家,也有內需市場支撐,但是印尼並沒有像泰國成為亞洲的底特律,也沒有如馬來西亞建立起國家汽車品牌,而成為「有市場無技術」的「無科技工業化」。本文以政治經濟學領域中的「制度分析」途徑,就國家干預、政商關係、跨國產業分工等三個角度分析印尼汽車產業失靈的原因。受限於印尼政治經濟的結構因素,本文發現印尼汽車產業失靈的原因在於:在產業發展時期國家的干預政策沒有「學習」與「管理」市場;本土資本未建立產業所需相對的供應鏈,..

With respect to Thailand and Malaysia, Indonesia was first in Southeast Asia to develop a automotive industry, supported by the domestic market. But Indonesia did not become the “Detroit of Asia” as Thailand, or establish national brands as Malaysia. On the contrary, Indonesia is a “huge market without technology,” an “Industry Without Industrialization.” This paper adopts an institutionalist approach with three aspects – state intervention, government-business relations, a..

top