期刊內容 Issue content

回列表
規範性權力仍然有效？理論分析與我國製造業問卷對歐盟產業政策的回應
Is Normative Power Still Valid? Theoretical Explanations and the Responses of Taiwan’s Manufacturing to the EU’s Industrial Policies
葉國俊 (Kuo-Chun Yeh) 陳馨蕙 (Shin-Hui Chen)
下載檔案
64卷4期(2025/12/18)
歐盟「規範性權力」（Normative Power）概念源自歐盟東擴計畫，檢視歐盟堅持普世價值並藉以推行各項對外政策成果，多著眼於法政與自由貿易協議而產業政策較為少見，因為歐盟產業政策本是新近議題。本文建構一個歐盟同時追求既有價值原則，同時面對近期經濟安全去風險趨勢與追求經濟繁榮的「不可能三角」理論，說明目前面對地緣政治與供應鏈變動衝擊，兼以成員國立場不一致下，堅持「規範性權力」推行普世價值難度增加，將提升歐盟政策選擇的不確定性。我們以臺灣製造業上市櫃公司問卷結果進行驗證，證明歐盟以價值包裝但遂行特定產業目標的政策，影響力雖仍不及美、中但已屬前所未有。然而實質內容朝自利傾斜的政策能否被計入「規範性權力」效果，有待進一步討論。
“Normative Power” originates from the EU's enlargement, emphasizing the commitment to universal values and its achievements in implementing various foreign policies. This concept mainly focuses on legal-political matters and free trade agreements, while industrial policy is less prominent, as it is a relatively recent issue for the EU. This paper constructs a theoretical framework of the “impossible trinity,” wherein the EU simultaneously pursues its established value principles, addresses recent trends in economic security and de-risking, and seeks economic prosperity. Given the current geopolitical landscape and disruptions in supply chains, along with the inconsistency in member states’positions, maintaining “Normative Power” and promoting universal values have
been increasingly challenging, thereby adding uncertainty to the EU’s policy choices. Using survey results from publicly listed Taiwanese manufacturing companies, we validate that while the EU employs value-based narratives to pursue specific industrial policy goals, its influence, though still trailing behind the U.S. and China, is unprecedented. However, whether policies that lean toward self-interest can still be considered an effect of “normative power” would need further discussions.
規範性權力 產業政策 臺灣製造業 半導體產業 歐盟 Normative Power Industrial Policy Taiwan’s Manufacturing Semiconductor EU

相關期刊

「避險」考量下的歐中關係： 「歐俄之間的外交歧異」如何影響 「歐洲各國與中國之間的合作與衝突」
Europe-China Relations Under the Logic of Hedging: How “Diplomatic Divergences Between Europe and Russia” Shape “Cooperation and Conflict Between European Countries and China”
薛健吾 (Chien-Wu Alex Hsueh)
64卷3期(2025/09/01)

本文研究同時具有「北約組織」和「歐盟」會員國身分的歐洲國家與中國之間的關係。同時具有這兩個會員國身分的國家，除了是歐洲「最為民主」和「最具安全保障」的國家之外，也因為須配合這兩個國際建制的官方立場，因而在理論上應該要對中國採取方向一致的經濟、外交和安全政策。然而，近年來，隨著「美國對中政策的轉變」、「歐盟在移民和經濟議題上的分裂」，以及「北約組織各國在安全議題上的分歧」，中國對歐洲國家「分而治之」的爭議也浮上檯面。在經濟和安全皆有保障的情況之下，是否有什麼系統性的因素可以解釋歐洲各國與中..

This paper examines the relationships between China and the European countries that hold dual membership in both NATO and EU. These countries, being among the most democratic and secure in Europe, are theoretically expected to adopt consistent economic, diplomatic, and security policies toward China in line with the official positions of these two international institutions. However, in recent years, shifts in U.S. policy towards China, divisions within the EU on migration and economic issues, and security disagreements within NATO have bro..

歐盟規範性權力與歐中投資協定談判
EU Normative Power and EU-China Comprehensive Agreement on Investment Negotiations
蘇卓馨 (Cho-hsin Su)
60卷4期(2021/12/01)

歐盟在與第三國/區域簽訂貿易或投資協定時，因為其市場吸引力，而得以將帶有歐盟價值的規範性議程納入協定中，以實踐自身外交政策的目標。此「規範性權力(normative power)」論述在學界已有廣泛的討論。實務上，歐盟的規範性權力亦不斷透過各種不同的管道，在不同的地區和領域內發揮影響力。歐盟自2013年10月開始，與中國大陸進行全面投資協定(Comprehensive Agreement on Investment，簡稱CAI)談判，目前已完成了第35輪的談..

The European Union (EU) has well utilized its market attraction to bring European value based normative agenda into trade or investment agreement negotiations with third country/region, in order to achieve its own foreign policy objectives. This “normative power” theory has had wide discussion among academics. In practice, EU’s normative power has also continuously expanded its influence in different areas via various channels. Since October 2013, EU and China have begun the negotiations on the Comprehensive..

top