兩岸關係迥異於世上其他分裂國家，自成一特殊格局，學界對兩岸關係及政府大陸政策之研究亦相當的多，本文的研究目的主要在探尋政府大陸政策之主導因素，是否隨著台灣的民主化進程及政黨輪替，而由「國家中心」轉為「社會中心」，亦即大陸政策反映何者的偏好與利益。依據本文的研究結果發現，民主進程初期的大陸政策，不論是高政治性議題或低政治性議題，其主導因素均屬「國家中心」；至民主進程後期，高政治性議題大陸政策之主導因素兼具「國家中心」與「社會中心」，而低政治性議題大陸政策之主導因素則屬「社會中心」。由此觀之，民主轉型改變了國家與社會的互動關係，也因為民主化的發展，致使國家逐漸開放與社會階層溝通，社會因素因此獲得參與政策決策過程的管道，使社會利益更易於轉化成國家政策。顯然，我政府大陸政策已非全由國家所主導，亦包含社會因素的介入。 / The cross-Strait relations is completely different from those of other divided nations, numerous researches have been made focusing on the cross-Strait relations and Taiwan’s Mainland policies. According, the main object of this research is to explore if the leading factors of the Mainland polices should be transferred from “state-centered” to “society-centered” under the process of democratization and turnover of the political party, that is the Mainland policies reflect whose preference and interest afterall. According to the research results, we can find that in the initiate stage of democratic progress, no matter for Mainland policies of high politics or low politics, the leading factors are “state-centered”. However, in the later stage of democratic progress, the leading factors for the Mainland policies of high politics are both “state-centered” and “society-centered”, and the leading factors for the Mainland policies of low politics are “society-centered”. Therefore, it can be seen that democracy transformation has changed the interaction of state and society, and because of the development of democratization, the state gradually open up to communicate with social classes, so the social factors obtained the channels to participate in the process of policy-making. That is to say the social interests are easier to transfer to the national policies. Obviously, not all the Mainland polices are dominated by state; they also include social factors.

本論文主要研究台灣學生本土宣言與香港學生宣言的相似處，且提供了此兩社群跨國界合作的機會。香港與台灣兩地的活動家在西元2014年1月13日正式接洽。香港及台灣泛民主團體的學生與政治家在台北舉行為期一周的會談，標誌著倡議民主的雙方首次接觸。 本次爭議以地方來說，主要是反對當地政府，以國際來講，則是反對中華人民共和國。此活動有利於民主、自決與身分認同。因此，兩次社會運動與兩方社群推行相似的目標及面對共同的敵人。會談後，雙方新階段的合作展現於台灣「太陽花學運」和香港「讓愛與和平佔領中環活動」。世界正在目睹跨國家社會運動間，為了加強其宣言力量而興起的趨勢。 本研究論點是基於社會運動影響理論，隨機在羅伯特·普特曼雙層賽局理論中，採用了道格·麥克亞當的集體行動間動態交互模型。該理論框架指出，一個國家的社會運動（香港或台灣）可以作為另一個社會的參考，尋求由地方政府創造「國際機會」（如：反對地方政策或一個國家：中華人民共和國）。這種情況已經出現於2014年9月28日，在香港突然出現的抗議活動。而且，幾乎立刻，近4000人聚集在台北的自由廣場以表支持。這樣一大群人，他們大多數為學生，在如此短的時間內聚集，此現象提供了本論文研究基礎，探討是否此情緒也在台灣學生中蔓延。 / The present thesis argues that the resemblance found between Taiwanese students in their local claims and those of Hong Kong students, has provided an opportunity for both societies to start collaborating at a transnational level. The first formal approach between Hong Kong and Taiwan activists came in January 13, 2014. Pro-democracy groups of students and politicians from Hong Kong and Taiwan gathered in Taipei for a weekend of talks. This marked the first real approach between both democratic advocates. Locally the struggle was directed at the governments and internationally against the PRC. The objectives of these movements favor democracy, identity and self-determination. Therefore, both social movements and societies push for similar objectives and share a common foe. After the meeting a new level of cooperation was reached between the two sides that was shown during the Sunflower movement in Taiwan and the Occupy the Central with Love and Peace OCLP in Hong Kong. The world is witnessing the dawn of a cross-national approach between social movements that seek to strengthen the force of their claims. The argument of the present study is based on the Social Movements Impact theory, using Professor’s Doug McAdam’s dynamic interactive model of a collective action, in a Robert Putman’s "Two Level-game" case of opportunity. This theoretical framework suggests that a social movement of one country (Hong Kong or Taiwan) can be used as a reference the society of another to renew the “international opportunity” (rejection of a local policy or a country: PRC) created by the local government. This case was seen on the on September 28, 2014 when abruptly emerged the protests in Hong Kong and, almost immediately, near four thousand people gathered at Taipei’s Liberty Square to show their support. The fact that such a large group of people, most of them students, gathered in so short period of time, provides the ground for the present study to explore if the sentiment is spread in the Taiwanese student community.