2024 年第4 期(總第16期)145
nonproliferation commitment. The contemporary policy implication is that Taiwan’s high-tech industries arelikely to display stronger opposition to United States–demanded controls over trade in semiconductor goodswith China.
6. 主權腳本與區(qū)域治理:東盟對新冠疫情的反應(Sovereignty scripts andregional
governance: ASEAN’s response to the Covid-19 pandemic)Kilian Spandler,斯德哥爾摩大學國際關系系副教授
Julia Hartelius,皇家墨爾本理工大學全球研究學院客座研究員
Alva Montia,斯德哥爾摩大學
Fredrik S?derbaum,斯德哥爾摩大學
【摘要】本文以東南亞國家聯(lián)盟(東盟)為重點,試圖加深對主權在地區(qū)治理中的作用的理解。作者認為,通過分析東盟如何應對新冠疫情,可以對這一問題提供重要見解。關于東盟的大多數(shù)研究都認為主權是有效區(qū)域治理的障礙,而沒有從概念上對其進行進一步的探討。這種單一的理解無法解釋東盟對這新冠疫情的不同反應。為了更全面地闡述主權與地區(qū)治理之間的關系,本文參考了有關主權的學術研究,強調(diào)主權的展演性和情景性,并建立了一個區(qū)分四種不同主權文本的框架。通過專家訪談和文件分析,我們發(fā)現(xiàn)東盟對新冠疫情的多層面回應是成員國并行制定不同且相互重疊的主權模式的結果,這些主權模式產(chǎn)生了相互競爭的治理模式。研究表明,典型的治理問題——機構激增、不一致以及執(zhí)行差距——可以被理解為源于實踐主權和國家地位的不同要求。本文建議在東盟以外的其他政策領域和地區(qū)組織中檢驗該框架。
【原文】This article seeks to advance our understanding of the role of sovereignty for regional governance,
with a focus on the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN). We argue that important insights intothis issue can be gleaned by analyzing how ASEAN has responded to the Covid-19 pandemic. Most existingresearch on ASEAN considers sovereignty an obstacle to effective regional governance without further
interrogating it conceptually. Such a monolithic understanding fails to account for ASEAN’s variegatedresponse to the pandemic. To develop a fuller account of the relation between sovereignty and regional
governance, we engage with scholarship on sovereignty that emphasizes its performative and contextual
character, and develop a framework that distinguishes four different sovereignty scripts. Drawing onexpert
interviews and document analysis, we show that ASEAN’s multifaceted Covid-19 response is a result of
member states’ parallel enactment of diverging and overlapping sovereignty scripts, which engender
competing modes of governance. Our study shows that typical governance problems – institutional
proliferation and incoherence as well as implementation gaps – can be understood as emergingfromdiverging imperatives for practicing sovereignty and statehood. We suggest that our framework can be testedin other policy fields and regional organizations beyond ASEAN.
【編譯:張瀟文】【責任編輯:嚴瑾怡】