現有國際關係研究對於霸權主導國際制度已有一定之發現，不過對崛起強權參與建構國際制度的行為傾向，則附屬於霸權的相關討論，而未獲得一定之重視。霸權論一般認為，崛起強權在未發生霸權戰爭前，只能被迫遵循霸權主導 下的國際制度，唯有在崛起強權取得霸權地位之後，方能展示是創建國際制度的領導能力。霸權論由相對物質權力層面探索的崛起強權描述，僅能凸顯霸權戰爭的爆發，未必能勾勒出崛起強權的全面行為，亦未能解釋霸權繼承者的條件。 發生霸權更迭之前，並非沒有發生崛起強權參與建構國際制度的案例，例如德意..

The exploration of the rising power has been subordinated to the arguments of hegemony and revisionist states. The Hegemonic Stability Theory and Power Transfer Theory have argued that the rising power has to follow international instructions set according to the hegemonic interests before the break out of hegemony war through which the rising power revolts the status quo hegemon. This approach might describe the reasons of hegemonic war; however, it might not be able to explain the overall behavior patterns of rising power in the construct..

討論國際經貿規範的法制化過程，無法規避國際法與國家間的權力運作問題，更不能忽視國際社會不存在最高權威之國際無政府狀態的事實。國際社會存在國家資源暨地位的不對稱差異，使強權得以操縱國際經貿議程，建構符合強權利益的國際經貿規範。形式上，國際經貿規範的法制化，係參與者基於對等地位，透過雙邊暨多邊談判後所建構而成的法律，但其實質內容，仍反映強權國家在不對等的基礎上，操縱談判議程，鑲嵌強權利益，扭曲平等正義，強化本國優勢，限制對手經貿發展機會之事實。 ..

It is hard to neglect neither the fact of power competition nor the anarchic character of the international society as scholar researches the context and the practice of international law. The asymmetric distribution of international resources enhances the possibility for powerful states to manipulate the agenda of International Economic law legalization processes, which are therefore constructed in according with the interests of the international Powers. Formally, international economic laws are instituted through bilateral..