English  |  正體中文  |  简体中文  |  Post-Print筆數 : 27 |  Items with full text/Total items : 96245/126860 (76%)
Visitors : 32262270      Online Users : 359
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/140.119/97122

    Title: 兩岸交流管理與突圍之研究:以臺灣二線城市花蓮赴陸外交經驗為例2011-2015
    A Study on Cross-strait Exchanges Management and Its Breakthrough: from 2011 to 2015
    Authors: 王春雅
    Wang, Chun Ya
    Contributors: 王定士
    Wang ,Ding Su
    Wang, Chun Ya
    Keywords: 城市治理
    City governance
    Cross-strait exchanges
    City diplomacy
    Second-tier city
    Date: 2016
    Issue Date: 2016-06-01 13:56:15 (UTC+8)
    Abstract: 對於兩岸交流日益頻繁,本文提出一命題假設,認為「兩岸城市交流管理,臺灣政府尚未建立有效府際關係(intergovernmental relations)管理模式」。

    本文透過以臺灣東部二線城市花蓮為研究對象,設定2011 至 2015 年為研究範圍,並以國際關係理論中的庶民現實主義觀點及新多邊主義及為研究途徑,佐以文獻探討、歷史資料蒐集、內容分析和個案深度訪談等方法, 以了解(1)臺灣中央政府赴陸城市外交管理模式與地方六都赴陸城市外交理念? (2)花蓮地方政府、特色產業與民間組織如何運用兩岸城市外交,達成增加「柔性實力」(soft power)與大都會競爭?(3)其特殊突圍模式?期望此研究提供考察臺灣政府如何進行管理,以達成有效適時性、突破性的府際關係決策參考,洞察臺灣城市兩岸外交發展和局限性。

    本研究發現,臺灣政府針對兩岸城市外交實質上並無建構完善整合管理及分權機制,使兩岸交流中央業務單位間各自為政,地方政府參與大陸事務迫於自立,彼此的互信度不高,溝通不良是府際運作關係的主要特徵,因此地方政府時常擁有自己桌面下的議程,成為爭鬥式各自為政型地方政府(coming apart and contentious local government)。

    In cross-strait exchanges, the central government plays the dominant role, while the role of local governments still misfunctioned. This paper examines the unique breakthrough of Taiwan local government on cross-strait city exchanges and the lack management of Taiwan central government on the issue.

    It arises the following question: For Hualian, a resourcelss second-tier city and located in remote eastern-part of Taiwan, its local government has brought considerable economic benefits through cross-strait exchanges; while it might also demage Taiwan national security and long-term development of cross-strait exchanges. What is the cause of this contradiction?

    The intergovernmental contradiction between central and local government is for reason that the central government in Taiwan is reluctant to the management on cross-strait exchanges between cities. This paper found that the conservative management of cross-strait city exchanges is featured that the lack of central coordination mechanism, local initatives and the intermediary support for local NGOs.

    As for Haulien, located in remote area with inufficiant subsidies from the central government, the strengtheness of Haulien ccompetitiveness serves as the priority for its urgent need on reconstruction and economic regeneration,. That is to say, Hualian seeks economic benefits in the cross-strait exchanges is synonymous with the trend of enterprising city governance in the era of globalization.

    In other words, it also features that in the context of cross-strait relationship, Hualian is forced to participate in independently due to the lack of intergovernmental mutual trust and poor communication and leads to Hualien local different agenda under the table, being a coming contentious government.

    This paper concludes that the management on cross-strait city exchanges may be difficult to completely dominant by the central or the locals alone, the whole conepts also relies on share responsibility except for centralization and decentralization. This concepts of new management may initates the local government to actively expand its interests, but not braggering the role of local government on the both side.

    While the central government should open the channel for the locals, especially the dispute of Six-cities in Taiwan has caused great challenges for domestic city governance in order to avoid intergovernmental tension on the topic of cross-strait city exchanges.

    In conclusion, it is suggested that local government can effectively play a mediating role between the central government and local non-governmental organizations on both sides of political or grass roots level exchanges for the sustainable development of cross-strait city exchanges.
    Reference: Falleti, T. G. (2005). A Sequential Theory of Decentralization: Latin American Cases in Comparative Perspective. Am. Pol. Sci. Rev. American Political Science Review, 99(03).
    Giddens, A. (1990). The consequences of modernity. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
    Narine, S. (2009). ASEAN in the twenty-first century: A sceptical review. Cambridge Review of International Affairs, 22(3), 369-386.
    Nye, J. S. (2011). The future of power. New York: PublicAffairs.
    Ohmae, K. (2006). "Advice for Taiwan leader." CommonWealth Magazine(347): 230-233.
    Pluijm and Melissen: City diplomacy:the expanding role of cities in international relations,Netherlands institute of international relations, clingendael, april 2007.
    Robertson, Roland, etc. Global modernities. London: Sage, 1995.
    Sizoo Alexandra,2007.City diplomacy concept paper. Peace-building of United Cities and Local Governments Policy Statement. City Diplomacy Committee.
    Description: 碩士
    Source URI: http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G1029260103
    Data Type: thesis
    Appears in Collections:[亞太研究英語博/碩士學位學程(IDAS/IMAS) ] 學位論文

    Files in This Item:

    File SizeFormat
    010301.pdf639KbAdobe PDF259View/Open

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

    社群 sharing

    DSpace Software Copyright © 2002-2004  MIT &  Hewlett-Packard  /   Enhanced by   NTU Library IR team Copyright ©   - Feedback