本研究認為，為更加切合國際關係的現實，必須從全球與區域層次重新修正國際關係理論的結構現實主義。攻勢現實主義雖然初步涉及全球-區域層次，提出區域霸權概念，不過由於該理論在本體論、體系結構理論和區域層次上的論述缺失，最終還是受到守勢現實主義框架的限制。本文因此以Barry Buzan和Richard Little的「互動能力」概念作為物質性建構的關鍵因素，使攻勢現實主義的本體論和體系結構觀得以動態化，並填補該理論在區域層次上的不足。本文也將區域層次作為全球層次的..

This study argues that in order to fit into international relations, it is neces- sary to establish a global-regional level of structural realism. Despite the con- tribution of Offensive Realism by bringing in regional hegemony to the global level, it challenges the traditional assumption of structural realism, which is the constant anarchy underlies the international system. However, due to the defi- ciency of Offensive Realism in explaining ontology, system-structure theory, as well as the regional level, it ultimately retu..

在國際關係的研究領域中，不論是國家中心論或是以體系為主的體系理論，都以國家為研究的客體。伴隨著全球化浪潮，「全球治理」概念的出現，表明以國家為主的國際政治體系已無法解決國際環境的複雜變化，須藉助許多跨國性次級團體來共同治理。有鑑於此，新現實主義、新自由主義、 與建構主義中以國家為給定對象的國際關係主流理論，遇到解釋上的局限， 需要建構一套新的本體論與知識論，俾有效解釋在國際政治中逐漸呈現的多元行為體治理現象。本文認為國際關係理論面臨三個問題的挑戰:一、如何解..

Theories of international relations(IR), whether through state-centric or systemic approach, put states as centers of research objectives. With trending globalization, the advent of the global governance concepts manifests that a state-focused international political system without transnational sub-political groups has failed to respond to complex changes in the international environment. Accordingly, this challenges neo-realism, neo- liberalism, and constructivism, which focus on the state-centric approach and experience ex..