English  |  正體中文  |  简体中文  |  Post-Print筆數 : 27 |  Items with full text/Total items : 95940/126530 (76%)
Visitors : 31803550      Online Users : 327
RC Version 6.0 © Powered By DSPACE, MIT. Enhanced by NTU Library IR team.
Scope Tips:
  • please add "double quotation mark" for query phrases to get precise results
  • please goto advance search for comprehansive author search
  • Adv. Search
    HomeLoginUploadHelpAboutAdminister Goto mobile version
    Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/131926


    Title: 全球化對制裁效力的影響
    Effects of Globalization on Sanction Effectiveness
    Authors: 傑姆
    Kovalenko, Artem
    Contributors: 薛健吾
    Chien-wu Alex Hsueh
    傑姆
    Artem Kovalenko
    Keywords: 經濟制裁
    制裁效力
    全球化
    政治全球化
    人權
    制裁結果
    Economic sanctions
    sanction effectiveness
    globalization
    political globalization
    human rights
    sanctions outcome
    Date: 2020
    Issue Date: 2020-09-02 13:13:10 (UTC+8)
    Abstract: 在有關制裁效力的文獻中,學者們發現了許多變量,這些變量會影響目標國家是否屈服於發送者的要求或堅持並屈服制裁。但是,很少有研究談論全球化對制裁結果的影響。全球化是一個連接國家並在參與者之間建立聯繫的過程。這項研究發現,先前研究中影響制裁有效性的因素可以歸因於全球化,因此,全球化有可能與目標國抵抗制裁和制裁的能力相關。
    該研究分別評估了政治,經濟和社會全球化的影響。許多研究人員都採用這種劃分方法,這是由於全球化是一個複雜的術語,其中包含許多變量。這些措施反過來對制裁結果產生不同的影響。
    預計政治全球化指數的提高將有助於目標成功擊退制裁國的需求。上述全球化類型所產生的信任和透明度對於取得這一成果至關重要。同時,經濟和社會全球化並沒有改變有效性水平,因為它們由變量組成,如果一一估計,變量與最終結果呈正相關或負相關。因此,減輕了這兩種類型對一般制裁結果的影響。
    通過應用TIES和KOF數據以及評估秘魯和印度尼西亞的案例,該研究能夠更清楚地顯示政治全球化的影響。從1992年到2005年,這兩個國家都面臨著幾次制裁事件,而且隨著政治全球化指數的提高,他們能夠轉移發件人的要求,儘管在此之前它們被迫默認。
    In the literature on sanctions effectiveness, scholars have discovered a large number of variables, which have an impact on the decision of a target state to succumb to sender’s demands or to stand firm and deflect sanctions. However, few studies talk about the influence of globalization on sanction outcomes. Globalization is a process which connects nations and creates ties between actors. This research discovered that factors affecting sanction effectiveness from previous studies could be attributed to globalization, thus, there is a possibility that globalization may correlate with an ability of a target to resist sanctions treats and impositions.
    The study assessed the effects of political, economic and social globalizations separately. Such division is used by a number of researchers, and is due to the fact that globalization is a complicated term, which includes many variables. These measurements in their turn have a different impact on the sanction outcome.
    Increase in the political globalization index is predicted to help a target to successfully repel sender’s demands. The trust and transparency created by the aforementioned globalization type are crucial in getting this outcome. At the same time economic and social globalizations do not change the effectiveness level, as they are comprised of variables, which if estimated one by one have either positive or negative correlation with the final outcome. Thus, mitigating the effects of these two types on the general sanction’s result.
    By applying the TIES and the KOF data as well as evaluating cases of Peru and Indonesia the study was able to show clearer the impact of political globalization. Both countries from 1992 to 2005 faced with several sanctions’ episodes, and with the increase in their political globalization index they were able to deflect sender’s demands, although before that occurred they were forced to acquiesce.
    Reference: Abdulbaki, L. (2008). Democratisation in Indonesia: From Transition to Consolidation. Asian Journal of Political Science, 16(2), 151-172.
    Allen, S. H. (2005). The Determinants of Economic Sanctions Success and Failure. International Interactions, 31 (2), 117–138.
    Amnesty International. (1994, January 1). Amnesty International Report 1994 – Peru. London: Amnesty International.
    Baldwin, D.A. (1998). Evaluating Economic Sanctions. International Security 23 (2), 189–195.
    Bapat, N.A., & Morgan, T.C. (2009). Multilateral versus Unilateral Sanctions Reconsidered: A Test Using New Data. International Studies Quarterly 53 (4), 1075–1094.
    Bapat, N.A., Heinrich, T., Kobayashi, Y., & Morgan, T.C. (2013). Determinants of Sanctions Effectiveness: Sensitivity Analysis Using New Data. International Interactions, 39 (1), 79-98.
    Bhasin, B. B., & Venkataramany, S. (2010). Globalization Of Entrepreneurship: Policy Considerations For SME Development In Indonesia. International Business & Economics Research Journal (IBER), 9(4), 95-104,
    Bolks, S. M., & Al-Sowayel, D. (2000). How Long Do Economic Sanctions Last? Examining the Sanctioning Process through Duration. Political Research Quarterly 53(2), 241-265.
    Brooke, J. (1995, 31 January). Peru: On the Very Fast Track. New York Times. Retrieved 15 June, 2020, from: https://www.nytimes.com/1995/01/31/business/peru-on-the-very-fast-track.html
    Census Bureau. (2020). Trade in Goods with Indonesia [Data Set]. Retrieved 15 June, 2020, from: https://www.census.gov/foreign-trade/balance/c5600.html
    Center for Systemic Peace. (2018). Polity IV Project, Political Regime Characteristics and Transitions, 1800-2018 [Data Set]. Retrieved 15 June, 2020, from: https//www.systemicpeace.org/inscrdata.html
    Crouch, H. (2010). Political Reform in Indonesia after Soeharto. ISAS–Yusof Ishak Institute.
    Dadm. (2003). Indonesia/East Timor (1976-2002). Dadm Project. Retrieved 15 June, 2020, from: https://uca.edu/politicalscience/dadm-project/asiapacific-region/indonesiaeast-timor-1976-2002/
    Dashti-Gibson, J., Davis, P., & Radcliff, B. (1997). On the Determinants of the Success of Economic Sanctions: An Empirical Analysis. American Journal of Political Science 41(2), 608–618.
    Dehejia, R., & Wood, B. (1992). Economic Sanctions and Econometric Policy Evaluation: A Cautionary Note. Journal of World Trade 26(1), 73-84.
    Drezner, D. W. (1999). The Sanctions Paradox: Economic Statecraft and International Relations. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    Drezner, D. W. (2003). The Hidden Hand of Economic Coercion. International Organization 57(3), 643–659.
    Drezner, D. W. (2008). Outside the box: Explaining sanctions in pursuit of foreign economic goals. International Interactions 26 (4), 379–410.
    Drury, A. C. (1998). Revisiting Economic Sanctions Reconsidered. Journal of Peace Research 35(4), 497–509.
    Early, B. R. (2011). Unmasking the Black Knights: Sanctions Busters and Their Effects on the Success of Economic Sanctions. Foreign Policy Analysis 7(4), 381-402.
    Escribà-Folch, A., & Wright, J. (2010). Dealing with Tyranny: International Sanctions and the Survival of Authoritarian Rulers. International Studies Quarterly, 54(2), 335-359.
    Eyler, R. (2007). Economic sanctions: International policy and political economy at work. London: Palgrave Macmillan
    Fearon, J. (1994). Domestic Political Audiences and the Escalation of International Disputes. The American Political Science Review, 88(3), 577-592.
    Friedman, T. L. (1992, April 14). U.S. Is Shunning Sanctions Against Peru. New York Times. Retrieved 15 June, 2020, from: https://www.nytimes.com/1992/04/14/world/us-is-shunning-sanctions-against-peru.html
    Gygli, S., Haelg, F., Potrafke, N., & Sturm J. E. (2019). The KOF Globalisation Index – revisited. The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 14(3), 543-574.
    Gordon, J. (2011). Smart Sanctions Revisited. Ethics & International Affairs 25(3), 315–335.
    Hart, R. A. (2000). Democracy and the Successful Use of Economic Sanctions. Political Research Quarterly 53(2), 267–284.
    Haas, R. N. (1997). Sanctioning Madness. Foreign Affairs 76 (6), 74–85.
    Heine-Ellison, S. (2001). The Impact and Effectiveness of Multilateral Economic Sanctions: A Comparative Study. The International Journal of Human Rights 5 (1), 81-112.
    Higginbottom, A. (2013). The Political Economy of Foreign Investment in Latin America: Dependency Revisited. Latin American Perspectives, 40(3), 184–206.
    Hohe, T. (2002). “Totem Polls”: Indigenous Concepts and “Free and Fair” Elections in East Timor. International Peacekeeping, 9(4), 69-88.
    INS. (1995). Human Rights and Political Developments Through December 1994. Washington: INS Resource Information Center.
    International Monetary Fund. (1997, October 31). Letter of Intent of the government of Indonesia. Washington: International Monetary Fund.
    Jeong, J. M., & Peksen, D. (2019). Domestic Institutional Constraints, Veto Players, and Sanction Effectiveness. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 63 (1), 194–217.
    Kuncoro, A. (2012). Globalization and Innovation in Indonesia: Evidence from Micro-Data on Medium and Large Manufacturing Establishments. Economic Research Institute for ASEAN and East Asia, 1-35.
    Lagarde, C. (2016, November 18). Peru—Seizing Opportunities in a Changing Global Economy. International Monetary Fund. Retrieved 15 June, 2020, from: https://www.imf.org/en/News/Articles/2016/11/18/SP111816-Peru-Seizing-Opportunities-in-a-Changing-Global-Economy
    Lektzian, D., & Souva, M. (2003). The Economic Peace Between Democracies: Economic Sanctions and Domestic Institutions. Journal of Peace Research, 40(6), 641-660.
    Lektzian, D., & Souva, M. (2007). An Institutional Theory of Sanctions Onset and Success. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 51(6), 848–871.
    Lektzian, D., & Biglaiser, G. (2013). Investment, Opportunity, and Risk: Do US Sanctions Deter or Encourage Global Investment? International Studies Quarterly, 57 (1), 65–78.
    Levy, J. S. (2008). Case Studies: Types, Designs, and Logics of Inference. Conflict Management and Peace Science, 25, 1–18.
    Li, Q., & Reuveny, R. (2003). Economic Globalization and Democracy: An Empirical Analysis. British Journal of Political Science, 33(1), 29-54.
    Lijphart, A. (1971). Comparative Politics and the Comparative Method. The American Political Science Review, 65(3), 682-693.
    Lindsay, J. M. (1986). Trade Sanctions as Policy Instruments: A Re-examination. International Studies Quarterly, 30(2), 153–73.
    Levitsky, S. (2014). First Take: Paradoxes of Peruvian Democracy. Political Bust Amid Economic Boom? ReVista. Retrieved 15 June, 2020, from: https://revista.drclas.harvard.edu/book/first-take-paradoxes-peruvian-democracy
    McClintock, C. & Walls, F. (2003) The United States and Peru. Cooperation at a cost. New York: Routledge.
    McCormack, D., & Pascoe, H. (2015). Sanctions and Preventive War. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 61(8), 1711–1739.
    Morgan, T. C., & Schwebach, V. L. (1997). Fools Suffer Gladly: The Use of Economic Sanctions in International Crises. International Studies Quarterly, 41(1), 27-50.
    NDI. (2000). Peru Elections 2000. Washington: National Democratic Institute.
    Neuenkirch, M., & Neumeier, F. (2015). The impact of UN and US economic sanctions on GDP growth. European Journal of Political Economy, 40(PA), 110-125.
    Nossal, K. R. (1989). International Sanctions as International Punishment. International Organization, 43 (2), 301–22.
    Peksen, D. (2011). Economic Sanctions and Human Security: The Public Health Effect of Economic Sanctions. Foreign Policy Analysis, 7(3), 237–251.
    Peksen, D. (2016). Economic Sanctions and Official Ethnic Discrimination in Target Countries, 1950–2003. Defense and Peace Economics, 27(4), 480–502.
    Peksen, D. (2019). When Do Imposed Economic Sanctions Work? A Critical Review of the Sanctions Effectiveness Literature. Defense and Peace Economics, 30(6), 635-647.
    Pepe, R. A. (1997). Why Economic Sanctions Do Not Work. International Security, 22(2), 90-136.
    Peterson, T. M. (2013). Sending a Message: The Reputation Effect of US Sanction Threat Behavior. International Studies Quarterly, 57(4), 672–682.
    Rogers, E. S. (1996). Using Economic Sanctions to Control Regional Conflicts, Security Studies, 5(4), 43-72.
    Rodman, K. A. (1998). “Think Globally, Punish Locally”: Nonstate Actors, Multinational Corporations, and Human Rights Sanctions. Ethics International Affairs, 12, 19-41.
    Smith, A. (1996). The Success and Use of Economic Sanctions. International Interactions, 21(3), 229–45.
    Stokke, K., & Tornquist, O. (2013). Democratization in the Global South: The Importance of Transformative Politics. Palgrave Macmillan.
    Taylor, J. G. (2004) East Timor, Australia and Regional Order James Cotton. London: Routledge Curzon, 46(4), 203-205.
    University of North California. (2014). Threat and Imposition of Economic Sanctions (TIES) [Data Set]. Retrieved 15 June, 2020, from: http://sanctions.web.unc.edu
    Van, P. A. G. (2017). Biased Sanctions? Methodological Change in Economic Sanctions Reconsidered and Its Implications. International Interactions, 43(5), 879–893.
    Verbeek, B. J. (2014). Globalisation and Exploitation in Peru: Strategic Selectivities and the Defeat of Labour in the US-Peru Trade Promotion Agreement. Global Labour Journal, 5(2), 212-232.
    Walker, M. (2007). Globalization 3.0. The Wilson Quarterly, 31(4), 16-24.
    Wallensteen, P., & Grusell, H. (2012). Targeting the Right Targets? the UN Use of Individual Sanctions. Global Governance: A Review of Multilateralism and International Organizations, 18(2), 207–230.
    Whang, T., McLean, E. V., & Kuberski, D. W. (2013). Coercion, Information, and the Success of Sanction Threats. American Journal of Political Science, 57(1), 65-81.
    Whang, T. (2010). Structural Estimation of Economic Sanctions: From Initiation to Outcomes. Journal of Peace Research, 47(5), 561–573.
    Wood, R. M. (2008). “A Hand upon the Throat of the Nation”: Economic Sanctions and State Repression, 1976-2001. International Studies Quarterly, 52(3), 489–513.
    Younce, W. C. (2001). Indonesia: issues, historical background and bibliography. Nova Science Publishers.
    Description: 碩士
    國立政治大學
    國際研究英語碩士學位學程(IMPIS)
    107862006
    Source URI: http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0107862006
    Data Type: thesis
    DOI: 10.6814/NCCU202001515
    Appears in Collections:[國際研究英語碩士學位學程] 學位論文

    Files in This Item:

    File Description SizeFormat
    200601.pdf1908KbAdobe PDF29View/Open


    All items in 政大典藏 are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved.


    社群 sharing

    著作權政策宣告
    1.本網站之數位內容為國立政治大學所收錄之機構典藏,無償提供學術研究與公眾教育等公益性使用,惟仍請適度,合理使用本網站之內容,以尊重著作權人之權益。商業上之利用,則請先取得著作權人之授權。
    2.本網站之製作,已盡力防止侵害著作權人之權益,如仍發現本網站之數位內容有侵害著作權人權益情事者,請權利人通知本網站維護人員(nccur@nccu.edu.tw),維護人員將立即採取移除該數位著作等補救措施。
    DSpace Software Copyright © 2002-2004  MIT &  Hewlett-Packard  /   Enhanced by   NTU Library IR team Copyright ©   - Feedback