隨著拜登政府（Biden Administration）對中國半導體、人工智慧以及資通訊產業進行制裁，美中兩大強權於科技領域內競爭態勢已經形成。學者與政府官員對於中國挑戰美國科技霸權感到憂慮。然而當前國際關係領域缺乏對總體科技實力建構有效測量指標，導致在衡量中國科技權力上產生偏誤。因此，本文從金融權力、人力資本和智慧財產三個面向出發，建構了一套測量國家總體科技權力的指標。從指標中可發現，儘管中國已成為科技強國之一，但其與美國之間仍存在顯著差距。透過比較個案研究發現相比於美國開放社會帶來金..

As the Biden administration imposes sanctions on China’s semiconductor, artificial intelligence, and information and communication industries, a competitive stance in the technological arena has been established between the two powers, the United States and China. Scholars and government officials are concerned about China’s challenge to the US’s technological hegemony. However, there is a lack of effective measurement indicators for overall technological capability in the current field of international relations, lead..

近年來國際關係理論面臨可能終結的危機，國際關係理論的三大典範：現實主義、自由主義與建構主義的發展呈現停滯的狀態，理論與政策應用之間的鴻溝也逐漸加深，以中程理論為導向的經驗研究逐漸取代了傳統國際關係理論強調通則化與系統性的分析架構。儘管國際關係理論仍有其重要性，但不論現實主義、自由主義與建構主義皆沒有預測到中國的崛起對國際政治所造成的變化，美國學界也開始反思過去對華交往政策的國際關係理論基礎。就臺灣的研究者而言，隨著從事中國大陸研究的限制增加，研究中國外交是否還能像過去那樣地依賴國際關係理..

In recent years, international relations theory has faced a potential crisis of obsolescence. The development of the three major paradigms—realism, liberalism, and constructivism—has stagnated, and the gap between theory and policy implications has widened. Empirical research guided by middle-range theories are replacing traditional international relations theory that emphasize generalization and systematic frameworks. Although international relations theory remains important, neither realism, liberalism, nor constructivism have..

對於強權並存且有爆發戰爭可能性的國際格局，戰爭由誰引發在學界的論點迥異。權力轉移理論認為崛起國基於不滿現狀，會對主導強權發起戰爭；另有聲音則認為衰退的國家基於預防性動機，會對崛起的對手採取行動；然而，權力轉移理論與預防性動機的論述，主要關注於戰爭的發動，此觀點反映一種以「戰爭」進行解析的框架，即探討國與國之間是否會發生戰爭。本研究則以另一個「非戰爭的攻防」的分析框架，論述主導強權與崛起國之間在兵戎之外的攻防行動。本文以美國在2022年施行的晶片與科學法案為例，論述美國對中國採行的非戰爭預..

In the international arena where powerful nations coexist, and the possibility of war exists, there are differing opinions on who triggers wars. Power transition theory suggests that a rising power will initiate war against a dominant power out of dissatisfaction with the status quo. Other argue that the declining state is motivated by preventive motivation to take action against rising adversary. However, both the power transition theory and the preventive motivation argument primarily focus on the initiation of war. This perspective refle..

霸權應對崛起強權的具體策略，是觀察美中兩強權力競爭的重要課題。國際關係受到霸權權力衰落宿命論的影響，無視霸權是戮力科技創新的國際層級結構產物。本文試圖從領導長周期論的視角，勾勒科技創新對於霸權維繫其全球主導地位的重要性，提出霸權面對崛起強權科技創新追趕挑戰的分析架構。本文解析冷戰時期美國回應蘇聯地緣戰略與日本科技創新威脅的不同面貌，辨識美國為延緩中國科技創新追趕速度，在關鍵新興尖端科技領域，所採取的出口管制、自強自固、阻絕圍堵與吸融匯濟等四種策略，並分析美國所遭遇的挑戰與契機。本文發現，..

The specific strategies employed by a hegemon in dealing with rising powers are a crucial aspect of understanding the power competition between the United States and China. International relations paradigms have been influenced by the notion of the inevitable decline of hegemonic power, often disregarding the fact that a hegemon is a product of international-level efforts in science and technological innovation. This article aims to delineate the significance of technological innovation in maintaining global dominance for a hegemon with the..

美中貿易戰宣告了兩國在國際政治的競爭局勢正式展開，2019年後的疫情更形加劇了兩國彼此的競爭關係。然而，美中對立下新冷戰的政治兩極化一定會造成國際貿易關係的兩極化嗎？世界各國真的會各自歸隊，在美國與中國之間擇一而處，形成兩極對立的局勢嗎？還是口頭上與行為上有差異，仍然依照國家自身的利益分別和美國和中國進行實質上的往來。本文即探討這個問題，比較疫情前後，國際貿易局勢的變化到底是趨向兩極化還是非兩極化。本文認為，新冷戰的局勢下，美中對立造成的政治兩極化無法避免，但政治兩極化不等於貿易關係兩極..

The U.S.-China trade war indicates a confrontation between the U.S. and China, and the pandemic problem since 2019 deteriorates the confrontation. However, will political polarization due to the new cold war between the U.S. and China lead to economic polarization? Do countries in the whole world choose their own sides between the U.S. and China, establishing two blocs and competing? Or countries in the whole world behave inconsistently in terms of verbal promises and practical actions. National interest is still their benchmark to have sub..