以歐韓自由貿易協定檢證規範性強權理論

本研究藉由《歐韓自由貿易協定》（Free Trade Agreement between the European Union and its Member States, of the One Part, and the Republic of Korea, of the Other Part），檢證Ian Manners的規範性強權(normative power)理論，是否能全面性的解釋歐洲聯盟（European Union, EU）的對外行動？為了研究本問題，本研究依照規範性強權的理論架構，建構歐盟規範性強權對外經貿政策的運作框架，包含價值基礎、規範對價值的實踐與輸出、傳播規範的途徑、韓國做為目標國的反應四個面向，來檢驗歐盟在自由貿易協定上的規範建構，是否符合規範性強權的假設。研究結果顯示：就價值基礎而言，規範性強權的九個歐盟價值基礎，也就是和平（peace）、自由（freedom）、民主（democracy）、人權（human rights）、法治（rule of law）、永續發展（sustainable development）、社會團結（social solidarity）、反歧視（anti-discrimination）、善治（good governance），都成為驅動《歐韓自由貿易協定》設定規範的要素，而即使韓國作為民主國家，在作為規範性強權核心價值基礎的和平、自由、民主、人權、法治等價值上差距不大，發展程度也步入已開發國家，歐盟依然主動向韓國輸出價值，尤其是集中輸出永續發展、社會團結、善治這三項價值，在和平、自由、民主、人權、法治核心價值上，也輸出歐盟詮釋下的價值內涵。表示歐盟面對已開發國家，也展現規範性強權的特質。其次，在規範對價值的實踐與輸出上，歐盟的確以規範性強權與經濟面向最為相關的價值基礎：「社會團結」，作為經濟典範，建構了歐韓市場框架與途徑。最明顯的是歐盟將環境與社會規範置入在互惠性的自由貿易協定中，顯示歐盟的市場規範特色：環境與社會規範是歐盟市場框架中不可或缺的一環，市場的競爭秩序也必須在永續發展與社會團結的價值下被規範，也直接輸出了規範性強權的價值：善治、永續發展、社會團結。而歐盟對市場與商業規範的設定，也被規範性強權的價值基礎所驅動，除了歐盟將防治對永續發展與社會團結、人權傷害的特別條款，滲透到市場與商業規範中，擴大市場與商業事務被上述價值規範的範圍，歐盟使市場秩序明確化、產業規範的透明度（transparency）、良好治理原則的強烈要求，也輸出善治的規範性強權價值基礎，也使市場與商業規範輸出規範性強權的價值。在傳播規範的途徑上，經貿途徑中產品與服務標準、市場規範的確扮演重要角色，但歐盟也積極運用雙方在國際組織的制度關係，以及在自由貿易協定積極建構許多以影響韓國國內規範為目的的委員會與對話小組，向韓國輸出規範。更特別的是，歐盟也運用公民社會的力量，將之引入為《歐韓自由貿易協定》的正式制度之一，不僅使歐盟公民社會也成為輸出規範的價值基礎來源之一，也使歐盟的影響力能深入到韓國的公民社會，不限於國家或國際組織等國際關係上的行為者。最後，由於歐盟規範發展的完善，也吸引韓國學習歐盟規範，因為對歐盟規範的模仿，能夠解決韓國的規範發展不足，也可以使韓國在國際上建構新的自我認同，因而使歐盟的價值能藉由韓國對歐盟的規範學習向韓國輸出。最後，目標國的反應上，歐盟的影響力成為推動韓國修改國內規定的因素之一，韓國菁英對於歐盟作為規範性強權的認知，也因為《歐韓自由貿易協定》而加強，尤其是韓國的公民社會，特別能反映歐盟的規範性強權特質。《歐韓自由貿易協定》設置的公民論壇（Civil Society Forum），也確實舉行，促使歐盟與韓國的公民社會提出明確的永續發展議程，歐盟的公民社會也在其中不斷要求韓國生效在《歐韓自由貿易協定》中承諾生效的國際勞動權益保障標準與公約。然而，本研究也觀察出規範性強權對歐盟的解釋侷限：談判期間發生歐盟施壓韓國，要求韓國降低歐盟汽車溫室氣體排放標準，雖然此一事件無法成為全然反駁規範性強權之案例，然而這使我們發現規範性強權的兩個理論侷限：一是規範性強權武斷的連結輸出規範性價值必定為歐盟帶來正當性，造成這個缺陷的原因，來自於Manners忽略價值間可能產生衝突，價值與利益也會產生衝突，也忽略了歐盟組成的複雜性，價值的變動性，以及歐盟掌握價值詮釋權，傷害目標國的自主性，都會減損歐盟以輸出價值運作影響力的正當性。二是過度分離價值與物質的關係，而沒有發現價值與物質之間的互動關係，可能可以更精準的解釋歐盟行動的規則。雖然規範性強權在解釋歐盟行動時有上述侷限，但其重新發掘價值、概念、規範本身對國際關係理論的重要性，以及以平等的角度將這些要素與物質、利益的因素加以討論，的確對我們在這個非國家行為者的角色越來越活躍的國際關係中討論歐盟行動時，能掌握更多以往無法衡量的因素，以及對越來越多在新一代自由貿易協定談判中產生的非貿易議題有更多理論的探討視角。關鍵字：歐盟、歐韓自由貿易協定、規範性強權、價值、規範

關鍵字

歐盟；歐韓自由貿易協定；規範性強權；價值；規範

並列摘要

This thesis aims to reconsider whether normative power, a concept proposed by Ian Manners, can explain European Union(EU)’s external action by the case of EU Korea Free Trade Agreement(EU Korea FTA). For this purpose, this research built up a framework of analysis which consisted of four elements: values’ role in EU’s norms, the formation of the norms, the factors of norm diffusion, and the reaction from Korea, to exam whether normative power works to explain EU’s external action. After analyzing the text of EU Korea FTA and other relevant official documents through this research's framework of analysis, firstly, this research finds out that the nine values as EU's norm basis of normative power support a comprehensive system of norms in EU Korea FTA , and that EU diffuse these values by exporting this system of norms to Korea. Among the nine values, EU intensively advocate sustainable development, social solidarity, and good governance to Korea. This shows that even when EU faced with a democratic and developed country, which has less difference or conflict on the values of democracy, human rights, freedom, peace, and rule of law, EU still export its value to it. Thus, the EU's characteristics as a normative power, are not only reflected by aids to developing countries and least developed countries, but also by its reciprocal trade policy to the whole world. Secondly, on EU's action to form the norms in EU Korea FTA, this research finds out that the norm basis of normative power not only exists in the social and environmental regulations of EU Korea FTA, but also supports the whole framework of market regulations between EU and Korea, and guides the formation of regulation on market and business. The inclusion of social and environmental articles in the reciprocal EU Korea FTA means that they are indispensible in EU's approaches to external market integration. Also, EU's emphasis on the principle of good governance in market and business regulations, on the human rights protections in business regulations, and on the consumer protection regulations on products and services, shows that EU's normative values and norms also direct its business regulations. Thirdly, the six factors of norm diffusion of normative power rediscover that the vessels diffusing EU’s norms in EU Korea FTA are more than economic one. EU actively build up many institutional ties to diffuse norms to Korea. For example, lots of committees and working groups aiming to influence Korea's domestic regulations were set up according to the FTA. Most impressing part is the EU Korea Civil Society Forum formed according to the FTA, because it successively turns the influence from civil society into EU’s normative basis. Thus, EU can extend its influence to Korea’s non-national actors. Also, EU’s ability to build up norms also attracts Korea to imitate EU’s norms, since Korea have to learn these norms for her practical needs and for upgrading her international status. Finally, the reaction from Korea, including her norms imitations to EU, her impression of its elites to EU, the EU Korea Civil Society Forum’s cooperation agendas by both sides’ civil societies, reflect EU as a normative power. However, during the negotiation, the incident that EU pressed Korea to lower her car greenhouse gases emission reveals some problems of normative power. Although this incident can’t fully deny normative power, it does shed light on what is the limitation of Manners’ theory. This research argues that there are two main limitations of normative power: one is it asserts that exporting normative values definitely brings legitimacy, and another one is that it fails to observe the relations between ideational and physical factors or interests on EU’s external action. The first limitation are caused by normative power’s neglect to EU’s diversified inner composition, conflicts between normative values, conflicts between interests and values, values’ own dynamic, and EU's encroachment to Korea’s autonomy on norms. On the other hand, the second limitation are caused by normative power’s dichotomy on ideational and physical factors of EU’s external action.

並列關鍵字

NORMATIVE POWER ； EU ； EU KOREA FTA ； NORMS ； VALUES AND TRADE, EU EXTERAL TRADE POLICY

參考文獻

吳婷婷，2011，《歐洲聯盟與韓國自由貿易協定之研究─兼論對臺灣之影響》，台

鄭陸霖，2006，〈幻象之後：台灣汽車產業發展經驗與「跨界產業場域」理論〉，

Asinari, Maria Veronica Perez. 2003. “The WTO and the Protection of Personal Data.

張國聖，2003，〈現代人權的發展源流與意涵〉，《通識研究集刊》，（4）：1-18。

International Trademark Association

國際替代計量

以歐韓自由貿易協定檢證規範性強權理論

主題瀏覽