歐盟整合模式與兩岸主權爭議之解析

European Integration Models and Cross-Strait Sovereignty Disputes

10.7015/JEAS.200103.0129

黃偉峰(David W. F. Huang)

新功能主義 ； 自由派政府間主義 ； 「一個中國」原則 ； 外溢效果 ； 區域整合 ； neo-functionalism ； liberal intergovernmentalism ； One China principle ； spillover effect ； regional integration

歐美研究

31卷1期（2001 / 03 / 01）

129 - 173

繁體中文

歐盟整合模式曾被提議用來解決台灣與中國大陸之主權爭議。然而論者並未指出到底要套用那一個歐盟整合模式呢？往往歐洲整合被等同於功能性整合，並據此來提倡海峽兩岸之整合。可是功能性整合是否正確地詮釋歐洲整合之經驗則備受質疑。而且歐盟整合模式也不是一個毫無爭議的模式。至少本文指出歐盟功能性整合模式並無法解決兩岸主權爭議。反倒是主權爭議之適度解決和擱置是功能性整合得以推動之前提。欲適度解決兩岸主權爭議，與其套用功能性整合模式，不如探討莫拉維奇之「自由派政府間主義」。本文運用「自由派政府間主義」之內在邏輯來分析兩岸主權爭議的幾個關鍵環節，並據此提出「港澳、粵閩、金馬次區域經濟特區」的整合建構計畫。由於該方案符合馬特里所歸納的區域整合成功之供給與需求條件，因而是化解兩岸主權爭議的可行方案之一。

The European integration model has been proposed to resolve the sovereignty dispute between Taiwan and China. But it is not clear as to ＂which＂ European integration model is to apply to the cross-strait dispute. Commentators usually equate European integration with functional integration, as if the latter is ＂sufficient＂ to explain the whole experience of European integration. Yet, not only is functional integration itself contested, but the European integration model is also not an undisputed single model. I argue that functional integration cannot resolve the cross-strait sovereignty dispute. On the contrary, the resolution or alleviation of sovereignty disputes is a prerequisite for functional integration. In order to alleviate the sovereignty dispute, I suggest we apply key concepts of Moravcsik's ＂liberal intergovernmentalism (LI) to the analysis of critical factors influencing the cross-strait sovereignty dispute. A subregional integration project that includes Hong Kong, Macau, and parts of China and Taiwan is proposed. Since this project meets Mattli's demand and supply conditions for any regional integration to succeed, it can be one of the alternatives that alleviate the sovereignty dispute between Taiwan and China.

1. 徐斯儉 Hsu, Szu-Chien(2000)。「中國改革開放的制度變遷：社會科學的回顧與前瞻」研討會。台北:中央研究院大陸研究推動委員會與民族學研究所。
   連結：
2. 中國對外經濟統計年鑑。
3. Burns, J.(1999).The People's Republic of China at 50: National Political Reform.The China Quarterly,159
4. Chryssochoou, D. N., Tsinisizelis, M. J., Stavridis, S., Ifantis, K.(1999).Theory and Reform in the European Union.Manchester:Manchester University Press.
5. Dyson, K.(1994).Elusive Union: The Process of Economic and Monetary Union in Europe.London:Longman.
6. Haas, E. B.(1964).Beyond the Nation-State: Functionalism and International Organization.Stanford, C. A.:Stanford University Press.
7. Haas, E. B.(1968).The Uniting of Europe: Political, Social, and Economic Forces 1950-1957.Stanford, C. A.:Stanford University Press.
8. Haas, E. B.(1975).The Obsolescence of Regional Integration Theory.Berkeley, C. A.:University of California Press.
9. Hoffmann, S.(1966).Obstinate or Obsolete? The Fate of the Nation-State and the Case of Western Europe.Daedalus,95(2)
10. Keohane, R., Hoffmann, S.(1990).The Dynamics of European Integration.London:Pinter.
11. Krasner, S. D.(1999).Sovereignty: Organized Hypocrisy.Princeton, N. J.:Princeton Univ. Press.
12. Lawrence, R.(1996).Regionalism, Multilateralism, and Deep Integration.Washington D. C.:Brookings Institution.
13. Lindberg, L. N.(1963).The Political Dynamics of European Economic Integration.Stanford, C. A.:Stanford Univ. Press.
14. Lindberg, L. N., Scheingold, S. A.(1970).Europe's Would-Be Polity: Patterns of Change in the European Community.Engelwood Cliffs, N. J.:Prentice-Hall, Inc..
15. Mattli, W.(1999).Explaining Regional Integration Outcomes.Journal of European Public Policy,6(1)
16. Mattli, W.(1999).The Logic of Regional Integration: Europe and Beyond.Cambridge:Cambridge Univ. Press.
17. McCosmick, J.(1999).Understanding the European Union.New York:St. Martin's Press.
18. Mitrany, D.(1966).A Working Peace System: An Argument for the Functional Development of International Organization.Chicago:Quadrangle Books.
19. Mitrany, D.(1970).The New International Actors: The UN and the EEC.London:Macmillan.
20. Moravcsik, A.(1998).The Choice for Europe.Ithaca, N. Y.:Cornell University Press.
21. Moravcsik, A.(1997).5th Biennial Conference of the European Community Studies Association.USA:
22. Moravcsik, A.(1993).Preferences and Power in the European Community: A Liberal Intergovernmentalist Approach.Journal of Common Market Studies,31(4)
23. Nye, J. S.(1971).Peace in Parts: Integration and Conflict in Regional Organization.Boston:Little Brown.
24. Nye, J. S.(1968).Comparative Regional Integration: Concept and Measurement.International Organization,22
25. Peterson, J.(1999).Sixth Biannual Conference of the European Community Studies Association.Pittsburg, USA:
26. Pierson, P.(1996).The Path to European Integration: A Historical Institutionalist Analysis.Comparative Political Studies,29(2)
27. Putnam, R. D.(1988).Diplomacy and Domestic Politics: The Logic of Two-Level Games.International Organization,42(3)
28. Russett, B. M.(1993).Grasping the Democratic Peace: Principles for a Post-Cold War World.Princeton, N. J.:Princeton University Press.
29. Schmitter, P. C.(1969).Three Neo-Functional Hypotheses about International Integration.International Organization,23(4)
30. Schneider, G., Cederman, L. E.(1994).The Change of Tide in Political Cooperation: A Limited Information Model of European Integration.International Organization,48(4)
31. Taylor, P.(1983).The Limits of European Integration.New York:Columbia University Press.
32. Tsebelis, G.(1990).Nested Games.Berkeley, Calif.:University of California Press.
33. Wallace, H., Caporaso, J. A., Scharpf, F. W., Moravcsik, A.(1999).Review Section Symposium: The Choice for Europe: Social Purpose and State Power from Messina to Maastricht.Journal of European Public Policy,6(1)
34. Wallace, W.(1996).Policy Making in the European Union.Oxford:Oxford University Press.
35. 中央通訊社(2000)。2000世界年鑑。台北:中央社。
36. 田志立(1998)。21世紀中華經濟區。台北:立緒文化事業。
37. 林正義 Lin, Cheng-Yi(2000)。「李總統主政12年與台灣的成就」研討會。台北:
38. 林正義 Lin, Cheng-Yi(2000)。「總統選舉與國家發展」文一－臺灣總統選舉對國家安全與外交的影響。國策專刊 National Policy Dynamic Analysis，14
39. 高安邦 Kao, An-Pan(2000)。「中國改革開放的制度變遷」研討會。台北:
40. 張亞中 Chang, Ya-Chung(2000)。兩岸統合之理論與實踐：歐盟經驗的啟示。美歐季刊 Americas & Europe Quarterly，14(1)
41. 陳志柔 Chen, Jay Chih-Jou(2000)。「中國改革開放的制度變遷：社會科學的回顧與前瞻」研討會。台北:中央研究院大陸研究推動委員會／民族學研究所。
42. 陳博志 Chen, Po-Chih(2000)。「李總統主政12年與台灣的成就」研討會。台北:
43. 陳義彥 Chen, Yih-Yan。民眾統獨態度－歷次民調的分析。
44. 黃偉峰 Huang, David W. F.(2000)。歐洲聯盟經貿政策。台北:中央研究院歐美研究所。
45. 鄒文海(1983)。政治學。台北:三民書局。
46. 魏艾(2000)。「中國改革開放的制度變遷」研討會。台北:

1. 卓忠宏(Chung-Hung Cho)(2021)。歐洲治理危機：「利益」與「認同」的落差。歐美研究。51(2)。219-266。