本文選題：決策 + 理性行為者　； 參考：《復(fù)旦大學(xué)》2008年博士論文

【摘要】： 自1989年以來(lái),美國(guó)開(kāi)始深入介入香港“一國(guó)兩制”的實(shí)施。香港回歸前美國(guó)出臺(tái)針對(duì)香港的特殊移民政策,關(guān)注香港的民主化進(jìn)程與人權(quán),并制定《美國(guó)——香港政策法》。香港回歸后,美國(guó)一直支持香港走向西方式民主,并不斷介入香港的政治改革過(guò)程。這就是中美之間的“香港問(wèn)題”。那么美國(guó)的香港政策是一個(gè)怎樣的決策過(guò)程?美國(guó)的香港政策對(duì)香港“一國(guó)兩制”的影響如何? 針對(duì)上述兩個(gè)問(wèn)題,本文將從對(duì)外政策研究的決策過(guò)程出發(fā),綜合分析美國(guó)香港政策生成的宏觀、中觀和微觀三個(gè)層次的因素,即國(guó)際環(huán)境的變化、美國(guó)國(guó)內(nèi)政治和社會(huì)環(huán)境、以及決策者個(gè)體特點(diǎn)。為了使三個(gè)層次的分析更加便于操作,本文在宏觀層次引進(jìn)了理性行為者模式,在中觀層次引進(jìn)了跨機(jī)構(gòu)政治模式,在微觀層次引入決策者個(gè)體特點(diǎn)和認(rèn)知因素,來(lái)分析美國(guó)的香港的政策決策是一個(gè)怎樣的過(guò)程,并比較不同決策結(jié)果所生成的美國(guó)香港政策對(duì)“一國(guó)兩制”影響程度的差異。 通過(guò)分析,本文發(fā)現(xiàn),美國(guó)對(duì)香港這一具有國(guó)際政治經(jīng)濟(jì)“二元特征”地區(qū)的政策具有以下特點(diǎn):老布什政府在維護(hù)美國(guó)在港利益與保持中美友好關(guān)系之間尋求平衡;克林頓政府盡管也在維護(hù)美國(guó)在港利益和維持中美關(guān)系之間尋求平衡,但這種平衡偏向于維護(hù)美國(guó)在港利益;小布什政府第一階段出于全球反恐以及朝核問(wèn)題等戰(zhàn)略需要而急于和中國(guó)謀求發(fā)展良好關(guān)系,所以為了中美關(guān)系大局,美國(guó)的平衡是偏向維護(hù)中美關(guān)系的,而第二階段小布什政府逐步加大了在全球推動(dòng)民主的戰(zhàn)略,盡管也有平衡,但是偏重于擴(kuò)展美國(guó)在香港的利益。總之,美國(guó)的香港政策表現(xiàn)出確定性和不確定性。確定性的一面就是歷屆美國(guó)政府盡力在維護(hù)中美關(guān)系和擴(kuò)展美國(guó)在香港的利益之間尋求平衡。不確定性就是這種平衡并不總是穩(wěn)定的,有時(shí)候偏向于維護(hù)中美關(guān)系,有時(shí)候偏向于擴(kuò)展美國(guó)在港利益。 美國(guó)的香港政策為何有上述特點(diǎn)?理性行為者模式可以解釋美國(guó)香港政策的確定性,跨機(jī)構(gòu)政治模式和決策者個(gè)體因素可以解釋美國(guó)香港政策的不確定性。作為理性行為者的美國(guó)政府既要維護(hù)美國(guó)在香港的利益,又要維護(hù)中美關(guān)系,所以會(huì)盡量在二者之間尋求平衡,因此理性行為者模式能夠解釋為什么三屆美國(guó)政府都盡力在維護(hù)中美關(guān)系和維護(hù)美國(guó)在港利益之間尋求平衡;跨機(jī)構(gòu)政治模式能夠解釋在意識(shí)形態(tài)、利益團(tuán)體和黨派政治等因素影響下,國(guó)會(huì)努力維護(hù)美國(guó)在港利益;決策者個(gè)體因素能夠解釋,當(dāng)決策者個(gè)人傾向中國(guó)和重視現(xiàn)實(shí)戰(zhàn)略時(shí)會(huì)維護(hù)中美關(guān)系,而決策者不傾向中國(guó)和重視國(guó)內(nèi)價(jià)值時(shí)會(huì)維護(hù)美國(guó)在港利益。但這三種方式單獨(dú)都不具有充分解釋力。美國(guó)自1989年以來(lái)歷屆政府的香港政策決策過(guò)程都是這三種決策方式在綜合起作用。 但是不同的政府時(shí)期三種決策視角的解釋力不一樣。老布什政府時(shí)期理性行為者模式解釋力最強(qiáng),所以該政府的政策以在維護(hù)中美關(guān)系和維護(hù)美國(guó)在港利益之間尋求平衡為主�？肆诸D政府時(shí)期跨機(jī)構(gòu)政治模式解釋力最強(qiáng),所以該政府的政策偏重維護(hù)美國(guó)在港利益。小布什政府時(shí)期決策者個(gè)體因素解釋力最強(qiáng),所以美國(guó)的香港政策體現(xiàn)出不穩(wěn)定特點(diǎn),在2003年前偏重于維護(hù)中美關(guān)系,而2003年后偏重于維護(hù)美國(guó)在港利益。 就美國(guó)1989年以來(lái)歷屆政府的香港政策對(duì)“一國(guó)兩制”的影響而言,小布什政府2003年以前的政策負(fù)面影響較小,老布什政府的政策負(fù)面影響相對(duì)較大,克林頓政府和小布什政府2003年之后的政策負(fù)面影響最大。從政策意圖和政策績(jī)效來(lái)說(shuō),當(dāng)美國(guó)的對(duì)港政策目標(biāo)是傾向于維護(hù)中美關(guān)系時(shí),其政策對(duì)“一國(guó)兩制”發(fā)展的負(fù)面影響較小;當(dāng)美國(guó)的主要政策目標(biāo)是在維護(hù)中美關(guān)系和維護(hù)美國(guó)在港利益之間尋求平衡時(shí),其政策對(duì)“一國(guó)兩制”發(fā)展的負(fù)面影響較大;當(dāng)美國(guó)的主要政策目標(biāo)是為了維護(hù)美國(guó)在香港的利益時(shí),其政策對(duì)“一國(guó)兩制”發(fā)展的負(fù)面影響最大。從決策視角來(lái)看,理性行為者模式主導(dǎo)的政策(老布什政府)對(duì)香港“一國(guó)兩制”負(fù)面影響較大;跨機(jī)構(gòu)模式主導(dǎo)的政策(克林頓政府)對(duì)香港“一國(guó)兩制”負(fù)面影響最大;決策者個(gè)體因素主導(dǎo)的政策(小布什政府)最不穩(wěn)定,決策者重視維護(hù)中美關(guān)系時(shí),其政策對(duì)“一國(guó)兩制”負(fù)面影響較小;當(dāng)決策者重視維護(hù)美國(guó)在港利益時(shí),其政策對(duì)香港“一國(guó)兩制”負(fù)面影響最大。
[Abstract]:Since 1989, the United States has been deeply involved in the implementation of the "one country, two systems" in Hongkong. Before the return of Hongkong, the United States introduced special immigration policy against Hongkong, paid attention to the democratic process and human rights of Hongkong, and formulated the policy law of the United States and Hongkong. After Hongkong's return, the United States has always supported Hongkong to Western democracy and constantly intervened in Hongkong. This is the process of political reform. This is the "Hongkong question" between China and the United States. So what is the policy process of the United States' Hongkong policy? How does the Hongkong policy of the United States influence the "one country, two systems" in Hongkong?
In view of the above two problems, this paper will start from the decision-making process of foreign policy research, comprehensively analyze the three factors of the macro, meso and micro levels of the American Hongkong policy, namely, the changes in the international environment, the domestic political and social environment in the United States, and the individual specificity of the decision-makers. In order to make the analysis of the three levels more convenient to operate, This paper introduces the rational actor model at the macro level, introduces the inter institutional political model at the middle level, introduces the individual characteristics and cognitive factors of the decision-makers at the micro level, and analyzes how the policy decision of Hongkong in the United States is a process, and compares the American Hongkong policy generated by the different decision-making results to the "one country, two systems". The difference in the degree of noise.
Through the analysis, we find that the United States has the following characteristics: Hongkong, an international political and economic "two feature" region, has the following characteristics: the Bush administration seeks a balance between the interests of the United States in Hong Kong and the maintenance of the friendly relations between the United States and the United States; although the Clinton administration is also seeking peace between the United States and the United States in maintaining the interests of the United States in Hong Kong and the maintenance of Sino US relations. But this balance tends to maintain the interests of the United States in port. The George W. Bush administration is eager to develop a good relationship with China in the first stage of the Global Counter-Terrorism and the Korean nuclear issue. So the US balance is biased towards maintaining Sino US relations for the overall situation of China and the United States, and the second stage of the George W. Bush administration has gradually increased. The strategy of promoting democracy in the world, although there is a balance, is biased towards expanding the interests of the United States in Hongkong. In a word, the US policy of Hongkong shows certainty and uncertainty. The certainty is that the United States government tries to seek a balance between the maintenance of Sino US relations and the expansion of the interests of the United States in Hongkong. This is the uncertainty. Balance is not always stable. Sometimes it tends to safeguard Sino US relations. Sometimes it tends to expand the interests of the United States in Hong Kong.
Why does the American Hongkong policy have the above characteristics? The rational actor model can explain the certainty of the American Hongkong policy. The inter institutional political model and the individual factors of the decision-makers can explain the uncertainty of the American Hongkong policy. As a rational actor, the American government should maintain both the interests of the United States and the Sino US relations, In order to seek a balance between the two, the rational actor model can explain why the three U. S. government tries to maintain a balance between China and the United States in the interests of the United States and the interests of the United States in Hong Kong. The inter institutional political model can explain the efforts of Congress to maintain the beauty of ideology, interest groups and party politics. The individual factors of the policy makers can be explained by the individual factors of the decision-makers. When the decision-makers tend to be inclined to China and attach importance to the reality strategy, the policy makers will maintain the Sino US relations while the decision-makers are not inclined to China and pay attention to the domestic value. But these three ways are not fully explanatory. The three decisions are integrated in the decision-making process of the port.
However, the explanatory power of the three decision-making perspectives in different government periods is different. The rational actor mode of the Bush administration is the strongest, so the government's policy is to seek a balance between the maintenance of Sino American relations and the maintenance of American interests in Hong Kong. The Clinton administration's political model has the strongest explanatory power in the period of the government, so the government is the government. In the George W. Bush administration, the policy maker's individual factor has the strongest explanatory power, so the Hongkong policy in the United States embodies the characteristics of instability, emphasizing the maintenance of Sino US relations before 2003, while maintaining the US interest in Hong Kong after 2003.
In terms of the impact of the Hongkong policy on "one country, two systems" since 1989 in the United States, the negative impact of the George W. Bush administration's policy before 2003 is smaller, the negative impact of the policy of the Bush administration is relatively large, and the policies of the Clinton administration and the George W. Bush administration have the greatest negative impact on the policy after 2003. When American policy aims to maintain Sino US relations, its policy has little negative impact on the development of "one country, two systems". When the main policy goal of the United States is to maintain a balance between China and the United States and maintain the interests of the United States in Hong Kong, its policy has a greater negative impact on the development of "one country, two systems"; The main policy objective is to maintain the greatest negative impact on the development of one country, two systems in order to safeguard the interests of the United States in Hongkong. From the perspective of decision-making, the policy led by the rational actor model (the Bush government) has a greater negative impact on the "one country, two systems" in Hongkong; the policy led by the inter agency model (the Clinton administration) is to Hongkong ". One country, two systems "has the greatest negative impact; the policy maker's individual factor led policy (George W. Bush administration) is the most unstable. When the decision-makers attach importance to the maintenance of Sino US relations, the policy has little negative impact on" one country, two systems ". When the decision-makers attach importance to the interests of the United States in Hong Kong, the policy has the greatest negative impact on the" one country, two systems "in Hongkong.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：復(fù)旦大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：博士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2008
【分類(lèi)號(hào)】：K712.5;D618

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 林蕓;美中關(guān)系與香港回歸問(wèn)題[J];東南亞研究;1997年03期

2 黃百煉,王國(guó)紅;主權(quán)、治權(quán)及其他[J];湖南社會(huì)科學(xué);1997年03期

3 張恭德;論建立“香港學(xué)”的幾個(gè)問(wèn)題[J];港澳經(jīng)濟(jì);1995年09期

4 周毅之 ,施漢榮;“一國(guó)兩制”與香港學(xué)[J];廣東社會(huì)科學(xué);1984年02期

5 陳冠庸;關(guān)于建立香港學(xué)的若干問(wèn)題[J];廣東社會(huì)科學(xué);1985年02期

6 陳可q;再論香港學(xué)[J];廣東社會(huì)科學(xué);2004年03期

7 劉澤生;;港澳研究:一份刊物與一個(gè)學(xué)術(shù)專(zhuān)欄——寫(xiě)在香港回歸十周年之際[J];廣東社會(huì)科學(xué);2007年04期

8 王聯(lián)合;淺析冷戰(zhàn)后美國(guó)國(guó)會(huì)在外交上的“復(fù)興”[J];國(guó)際論壇;2001年02期

9 潘銳;論美國(guó)政府的香港政策——《美國(guó)—香港政策法》研究[J];國(guó)際商務(wù)研究;2001年01期

10 劉學(xué)成;美國(guó)中期選舉對(duì)布什政府內(nèi)外政策的影響[J];國(guó)際問(wèn)題研究;2003年01期

相關(guān)博士學(xué)位論文 前1條

1 王為民;美國(guó)對(duì)港政策研究[D];外交學(xué)院;2001年

，

本文編號(hào)：2098523