透過您的圖書館登入
IP:3.12.108.236
  • 學位論文

世界銀行與亞投行國際戰略角色之比較

A Comparison of the Strategic Roles of the World Bank and the AIIB in International Politics.

指導教授 : 黃兆年

摘要


1980年代起,西方國家提倡以自由市場為導向的經濟改革政策,在向發展中國家進行援助、貸款或投資時,經常要求落實「結構調整計劃」,或附上人權條款。證據顯示,美國利用其在世界銀行的否決權,對與其利益或意識形態相左的國家進行經濟制裁,使世界銀行淪為其維持對從屬國家行意識形態滲透、規範及制度的工具。相對而言,中國大陸的政經發展模式更受到開發中國家的喜愛,2013年中國大陸提出了以支持亞洲地區基礎設施融資需求的亞投行,受到國際社會高度關注。 過去在國際關係領域中,關於世界銀行與亞投行的研究多為對決策制度的探討,較少關於透過霸權穩定理論及文化霸權的角度去分析兩者之間的戰略角色異同之研究。因此,本研究透過個案分析探討亞投行是否與世界銀行一樣,淪為霸權國家用來控制從屬國家的經濟與文化,進而維繫其霸權地位之角色。 自從亞投行創立後,中國大陸在其中的投票權重佔了超過四分之一,使其有極大的可能在亞投行決議案上擁有否決權,這一點與美國在世界銀行的權力一樣,對於國際金融組織的決議案皆擁有否決權,因此,中國大陸及美國可藉由其在國際金融組織的這項權力,迫使與其利益衝突的國家遵循他們的意識形態及規範,以換取貸款援助。結果顯示,亞投行雖然創立宗旨以援助開發中國家的基礎設施建設為主,但實則與世界銀行一樣,被霸權國用來對從屬國家進行意識型態上的控制。

並列摘要


Since the 1980s, Western countries have advocated free-market-oriented economic reform policies. When assisting, lending or investing in developing countries, additional requests often come along, such as implementing a “Structural Adjustment Program” or human rights clause. Evidence shows that the United States, using its veto power at the World Bank, imposes economic sanctions on countries that differ from its interests or ideologies, as the World Bank serves as its tool for ideology penetration, regulation, and institutions in its subordinate countries. Relatively speaking, the political and economic development model of China is more welcomed by developing countries. In 2013, China proposed the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB) to support infrastructure financing needs in the Asian region, which was highly concerned by the international community. In the field of international relations, the research on the World Bank and the AIIB mostly focused on their decision-making systems, and less on the study of the similarities and differences between the two, through the perspectives of hegemonic stability theory and cultural hegemony. Therefore, this study explores whether the AIIB, like the World Bank, actually serves a hegemonic country that controls the economy and culture of subordinate countries and maintains its hegemonic position. China's voting power have accounted for more than a quarter of all voting power, making it highly likely that it has a veto on the AIIB resolution since the establishment of the AIIB. United States has a similar veto power in the World Bank as well. Therefore, China and the United States can use these powers in international financial organizations to force countries with conflicts of interest to follow their ideology and norms in exchange for loan assistance. The results show that although the AIIB established its purpose to assist infrastructure development in developing countries, it is actually used by hegemonic countries to control the subordinate countries' ideology.

參考文獻


一.書籍
林佩璇,2000,〈個案研究及其在教育研究上的應用〉,中正大學教育學研究所主編,《質的研究方法》,高雄:麗文文化。
周湘華、董致麟、揭仲、林穎佑、蔡欣容,2014,《國際關係:理論與應用》,臺北:新文今。
孫晶,2004,《文化霸權理論研究》,北京:社會科學文獻。
陳牧民、陳宛郁,2015,《圖解國際關係》(第四版),臺北:五南。

延伸閱讀