【作者】 彭述华；

【导师】 石源华；

【作者基本信息】 复旦大学 ， 国际政治， 2007， 博士

【副题名】国际政治经济学（IPE）视角

【摘要】 本文利用国际政治经济学(IPE)方法，以主导问题为切入口探讨东亚经济一体化问题。作为铺挚，绪论对选题、概念、文献与理论分析框架等问题进行基本的简略陈述。国际经济学有关理论表明，国际区域一体化通过成员国之间的互利合作，将有助于各国谋取经济福利，并能促进有关政治安全目标的实现。但东亚为什么不能切实实现符合各国经济福利诉求和政治安全需要的地区经济一体化?东亚经济一体化迟滞是不是主导之争造成的呢?主导问题是实现东亚经济一体化的关键问题之一。然而，怎样才能将属于权力竞争范畴的国际主导与归属国际合作范式的经济一体化这两种看似冲突的研究变量纳入同一理论架构，又不至于因“水火不容”而产生理论悖论?什么样的主导模式不至于背离国际一体化的合作逻辑?本文通过对既有理论的“淘金”，提出了国际一体化的“大国和平主导”的观点，并希望以此来阐释本文选题的相关问题。第二章主要对权力、制度对东亚经济一体化主导问题的作用与影响进行讨论。国际关系研究有两种主要取向：一是以市场失灵为核心；二是以权力关系为焦点。前者主张以制度提供信息，用制度保障合作，这是国际关系中的新自由制度主义取向。后者主张权力是制定规则的基础并决定结果，这是国际关系的现实主义取向。本文首先把权力与制度作为核心变量，并将东亚经济一体化主导问题放入权力与制度构建的理论坐标，力图澄清权力与制度对于东亚经济一体化主导问题的影响与制约。在对国际一体化的权力、制度与主导相关问题进行了一般性的简略的理论分析后，文章对权力关系作用下的东亚经济一体化主导之争，以及制度机制对东亚经济一体化主导问题的影响进行了分析，认为东亚地区的制度缺失是制约地区经济一体化主导问题的重要因素，而东亚经济一体化也需要通过强大的主导力量才能推动制度创设。因而，东亚经济一体化不但有一个严肃的主导问题，也面临一个机制创设问题，二者构成密切互动的因果关系。第三章对东亚经济一体化主导问题中的几个突出因素进行了讨论。东亚地区具有经济政治多样性，地区政治关系呈现复杂化与“政治破碎带"特征，使东亚国际关系又具有典型的“外部干预性”特征，因而，东亚经济一体化主导问题就与美国等外部因素形成某种敏感关系，只有消化了美国因素，才能解决东亚经济一体化主导问题。由于地区大国中国和日本在东亚经济格局中具有独特的地位和重要影响，使中日关系成为东亚经济一体化的重要变量；然而，近期以来，中日关系中“斗嘴的巨人”现象凸现了某种“主导情节”，中同竞争与“不合作”造成的互相制约构成了核心国家主导性“缺失”难题，因而造成了东盟主导的“悖论”。东盟作为中小国家组成的国际组织，面临能力不足的“尴尬”，在地区经济一体化进程中难以发挥“引擎”作用。东亚地区“安全困境”与民族主义等因素也对东亚经济一体化主导问题形成制约。第四章和第五章主要对东亚一体化“大国和平主导”进行了理论分析。国家能力是决定一国在竞争中能否获胜的主要手段，国际一体化推演了某种“大国主导”的逻辑。然而，“大国主导”这种能力主要不在强制性方面，而在于说服与施惠的能力，它与某种国际威望相伴而生，并为追随者所认同与接受。国际一体化主要基于合作的主导模式，重视主导的道义与制度规范的作用，将使主导大国的强制倾向受到制约。大国将更多地利用协商甚至实惠的手段来取得主导地位。国际一体化需要相应的国际制度机制作为保障，国际一体化的“大国主导”是一种“直接主导”而非“霸权主导”。由于国际制度机制是国际一体化的重要变量，“大国主导”打上了深深的“制度烙印”，加之，大国需要对中小国家做出和平与安全承诺，大国还需要通过自身在经济政治资源方面的绝对优势提供诸如安全、市场等“国际公共产品”，并对小国因经济一体化做出调整付出的代价做出补偿，来换取小国的政治支持。因此，成功的国际一体化主导模式应该是一种“大国和平主导”模式，欧洲一体化的“法德核心”是“大国和平主导”的典型案例。国际一体化不但演绎了“大国和平主导”的逻辑，也有一种内在的“大国和平主导”需求。“大国和平主导”观点为阐释东亚经济一体化主导问题提供了一种有益的理论视角。实际上，东亚“区域化”历史进程中的演绎了某种大国主导的逻辑，日本作为“雁阵模式”的主导者与中国作为“东亚产业链”的“轴心”，在东亚地区整合中发挥了一定的大国主导作用。毫无疑问，“大国和平主导”也许能够为解决日渐显现的东亚主导问题提供思路，也能为解开中日关系“症结”提供一剂良方。未来东亚经济一体化对大国和平主导有一种必然的内在需求。东亚经济一体化需要“大国和平主导”，那么，东亚地区哪些国家能够担当这样的角色呢?通过对东亚经济一体化主导问题的初步理论分析，本文得出这样的基本结论：中国和日本最有可能成为主导国，中日合作主导是最好的主导模式。中国是东亚疆域最大的国家，也是东亚最大的市场，又是东亚经济的“发动机”，中国参与并主导东亚经济一体化进程，符合历史发展逻辑。由于主导地区一体化能够获得政治经济收益，中国主导符合中国利益。基于日本作为世界经济大国的经济科技实力，它能够在提供资金技术等方面发挥其主导性。而且，日本在地区经济一体化问题上已经表现出一定积极动向，中国应该采取与日本合作的主导战略，通过东亚的“法德核心”来推动东亚经济一体化进程。东亚经济一体化需要在中日积极合作的基础上，通过创设一定的地区制度来实现。更多还原

【Abstract】 This dissertation discusses East Asian economic integration by focusing on leadership issue in an IPE perspective.As foreshadows, the Introduction gives a brief narration on the selection of the subject, key definitions, relevant theories, and analytical framework. The theory of IPE makes it clear, through mutually beneficial cooperation among members, the international regional integration will contribute to each nation’s seeking after their economic interests respectively, and will further the achievement of relevant political security end. However, why hasn’t East Asia realistically achieved such end so far? Is the rivalry of leadership the main cause of the lag in East Asian integration?Leadership issue is one of the key elements of realizing the integration among East Asia economies. But, how can we put the two study variables which seem to collide with each other into the same theoretical framework since international leadership issue and economic integration are departed in different domain, one in rivalry, the other in cooperation, not to fall into a theoretical paradox? What kind of leadership model does not deviate from the logic of cooperation in international integration? This dissertation advances an idea of "Power Peaceful Leadership" in international integration, and intends to adopt this theory to discuss relevant issues.In Chapter Two, the author mainly discusses the influences and effects of powers and institution on leadership issue in East Asian economic integration. The study on international relation has two main trends: one is centered on market dysfunction, the other focuses on power relations. The former suggests that systems supply with information and guarantee cooperation. This is a trend of Neo-Constitutionalism in the international relation. The latter thinks that power is the base in formulating rules and determining the results. This is a trend of Realism in the international relation. This dissertation first looks power and institution as the core variables. Then it brings leadership issue in East Asian economic integration into the theoretical coordinate of power and institution. The author strives to clarify its influences and restrictions on leadership issue in East Asian economic integration. After a briefly analysis of power, institution and leadership in international integration, the author expounded not only the leadership rivalry in East Asian economic integration by the function of the power relations, but also the influences of the institution and mechanism on leadership issue in East Asian economic integration. The author concluded that the lack of institution in East Asia is the key factor which restricts the leadership issue in the regional economic integration. East Asian economic integration needs big power to promote the creation of institution. Thus there exists not only serious leadership issue, but also the creation of institution as well, both construct interdependent relation.Chapter Three discusses several prominent elements referring to the leadership issue in East Asian economic integration. East Asian region possesses economic and political diversity, and the regional political relations appear to be complicated. It has the symptom of "Political Scattering". This causes the international relation in East Asia characteristics of "Outward Interruption". Therefore, the leadership issue of East Asian economic integration has a certain sensitive relation with some external elements such as the USA. Accordingly, only handle these external elements appropriately, especially that of the USA, can the leadership problem be solved. Because the regional powers such as China and Japan possess special status and vital influence in the setup of East Asian economies, the Sino-Japanese relation thus becomes the important variable in East Asian economic integration. However, the phenomenon of "Bickering Giants" in Sino-Japanese relation recently protrudes certain "Leadership Complex". The competition between China and Japan, the restriction of each other caused by the "non-cooperation" come to the lack of core nations’ leadership, which causes the "paradox" of the leadership of ASEAN. As an international organization formed by medium-size and small-size nations, ASEAN is in a dilemma: to take the leading role of East Asian economic integration is beyond its capability, and it can’t become the engine in the integration. In East Asia, the elements such as "Dilemma Security" and nationalism and so on also restrict the leadership issue of East Asian economic integration.Chapter Four and Five mainly analyze the "Power Peaceful Leadership" in East Asian economic integration in theoretical dimension. The capability of one nation is the chief element that determines whether one nation can win in international competition. International integration deduces certain logic of "Power Dominance". However, the capability of "Powers Dominance" does not mean its compulsion, but the capability of persuasion and offering benefits, which is accompanied by some international prestige, recognized and accepted by its followers. Chiefly based on cooperative leadership model, international integration attaches importance to the moral of leadership and the function of institution norms. It will restrict the preference of compulsion. Powers will depend on the means of consulting or offering benefits to gain the leadership status. The "Power Peaceful Leadership" in the International integration is not "Hegemony Dominance", but "Direct Leadership", which needs corresponding with international regime. Because international institution and regime are important variables in the international integration, the "Power Peaceful Leadership" has a deep "Institution Brand". Besides, in order to win small-size nations’ political support, it is necessary for powers to make promises of peace and security to them, to offer international "Public Goods" such as security, market and so on, through its own predominant economic and political resources, to compensate for the cost which the small-size nations has paid for the economic integration. From this dimension, a successful leadership model of international integration should be a "Power Peaceful Leadership" model, as "France-Germany Core" in European economic integration, which is a typical case of the "Power Peaceful Leadership". In a Word, international integration not only deduces the logic of the "Power Peaceful Leadership", but implicates an inherent necessity of it.The "Power Peaceful Leadership" supplies us a useful theoretical perspective to interpret the leadership issue of East Asian economic integration. In fact, some logic of the "Power Peaceful Leadership" has been shown during the process of "Regionalization" in East Asia. For example, as the dominance in the "Geese Model", Japan plays a power leadership role in a certain sense in the East Asian regional integration, so does China as the axis of the East Asian industrial chain. Doubtless, the "Power Peaceful Leadership" will probably afford us a useful thinking to solve the problems in East Asian integration. And it will give us a much better method to deal with the crux of Sino-Japanese relationship. The integration of East Asian economies has an intrinsic necessity to the "Power Peaceful Leadership".The integration of East Asian economies needs the "Power Peaceful Leadership", which nation in East Asia can play this kind of role? By analyzing the leadership issue in East Asian economic integration, this dissertation can draw such a conclusion: China and Japan have the probability to become leading countries. Sino-Japanese cooperation will be the best leadership model. China is the largest countries in territory in East Asia, with the largest market. Also being the "engine" of East Asian Economy, China participates in and takes the lead of the process and it conforms to the logic of the historical development.Based on its economic and technological strength, Japan can show its leading capability by affording capital and technology. What’s more, Japan has manifested somewhat activeness. China should take a strategy to cooperate with Japan to push the process of East Asian economic integration by East Asian "France-Germany Core". Only by creating some regional regimes can East Asian economic integration be achieved, on the basis of Sino-Japanese active cooperation.更多还原