- 學位論文
區域全面經濟夥伴協定（RCEP）與東協中心性： 一個歷史制度論的分析
RCEP and ASEAN Centrality: A Historical Institutionalist Approach
若您是本文的作者，可授權文章由華藝線上圖書館中協助推廣。
摘要
區域整合在全球化之下如火如荼的進行。在東亞區域整合中，東協佔據相當指標性的地位。除了東協本身的區域整合外，其也因著新區域主義向外擴張來拓展自身於區域的領導能力與貿易量。而於2022年1月1日正式生效的RCEP，為包含了東協十國與其他五國的區域經濟組織，其成立為亞洲區域整合及自由經濟貿易體系添上新的一頁。觀察RCEP的談判內容及歷程，可以得知其成立相當不易，當中有許多延宕遲滯以及成員國間爭執之發生；︁又檢視RCEP的制度內涵與規則，其為四個東協加一自由貿易協定所組成的貿易制度，在每個自由貿易中所規範的自由化程度都有所不同，呈現出一個組織多個制度安排之情形，造就出RCEP制度上的特殊性。這樣的特殊整合情況與強調一體化、標準化的區域主義有所不同，也不禁讓人思考是怎麼樣的情況才造就了這樣的制度安排。 為回答上述問題，本文採用歷史制度論之分析框架，以過程追蹤之方式觀察RCEP整體談判過程，以析論東協中心性在RCEP成立及制度上的相關影響。另外，從RCEP制度表現上，也藉此得知東協國家的影響程度。最後，輔以反事實推論的方法，進一步檢視東協中心性與RCEP之因果關係。 本研究結果顯示，東協中心性是造就RCEP成立相當重要的因素。具體事實表現在每次國際間發生重要事件，又或是在談判歷程中遲滯碰壁之下，東協都試圖扮演談判推進者及信心喊話者的角色。另外，東協各國在擔任東協主席國時，對於談判的態度也大大影響相關進度。而從RCEP的制度表現上，東協穿梭於各個談判小組，並且也擔任TNC主席，對於議題設定上有相當大的影響力。最後，觀察在沒有東協中心性制度發揮上，區域整合可能就未能如現今的樣貌，可推論出東協中心性對於RCEP影響之深。
並列摘要
Regional integration is in full swing under the phenomenon of globalization. Among the integration in east Asia, ASEAN is in the most significant position. ASEAN not only undergoes the regional integration, it also expands its regional leadership and trading volumes as the heating of neo Regionalism. Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership（RCEP）, established on the first day of January in 2022, is a regional economic organization contains ten ASEAN countries and other five countries. The establishment of RCEP turns over the new leaves in Asian regional integration and free trade system. As we looked deeply into the negotiation process of RCEP, it was obvious that its establishment was not easy as there were many postpones and happening of conflicts between RCEP members. Moreover, RCEP is the trading institution that is composed of four ASEAN plus one free trade agreements. The level of freedoms in each agreement are different, this shows the situation that there is more than one institutional arrangement in one organization, which demonstrates the specialty of RCEP institution. This kind of institutional arrangement is totally different from that of regionalism which emphasizes the importance of unification and standardization. This raises the question of what kind of situation brings up the institutional arrangement. To answer the question above, this thesis adopts historical institutionalism as the analytic framework, following the perspective on path dependence to inspect the whole negotiation process of RCEP. On the one way, it can analyze the influence of the ASEAN centrality to the establishment and institution of RCEP. On the other way, it can tell how deep of ASEAN’s influence in RCEP institution. This thesis also uses the counterfactual inference as a way to enact the robust test to ensure the causal relationship between ASEAN centrality and RCEP. The finding demonstrates that ASEAN centrality is essential to the establishment of RCEP. The specific fact shows that whenever the happening of significant events, or when RCEP members encountered the deadlocks during the process of negotiation, ASEAN always tried to be the role of negotiation facilitator or pep talker. Moreover, the attitude of the rotating chairmanship of ASEAN can influence the progress of negotiation. As for the institutional arrangement of RCEP, ASEAN involves in negotiating team all the time, it also serves as the chair of TNC who has a great agenda-setting power. Last but not least, from the counterfactual inference, we can infer that ASEAN centrality had a great influence on RCEP.
參考文獻
壹、 中文部分
一、 期刊論文
王子昌，2003，〈東盟的地理整體與利益整體意識 ─東盟意識與東盟的發展(II)〉，《東南亞研究》，5: 4-8。
王玉主，2013，〈RCEP倡議與東盟“中心地位”〉，《國際問題研究》，5: 46-59。
吳瑟致，2010，〈邁向開放?抑或走入封閉? 東協主義與十加三的發展〉，《亞太通訊研究》，8: 33-67。