1919年9月，澳門葡萄牙政府(以下簡稱「澳葡當局」)在澳門內港海域進行濬海工程，此舉馬上引起廣州軍政府嚴重抗議。軍政府認為一切濬海工程，皆違反1887年清政府與葡萄牙簽訂《中葡和好通商條約》的規定，該條約明言澳門在「未經定界以前，一切事宜俱照依現時情形勿動，彼此均不得有所增減、改變之事。」當時澳門邊界未定，因此澳葡當局無權實施濬海工程。不久，雙方代表就此事進行交涉，唯兩方立場差距懸殊，一時無法解決。就在交涉僵持不下之際，澳門內港又發生一件衝突事件，葡國水師越界盤查中國軍艦，並威脅該艦必須填寫港口入口冊，否則將驅逐出港。軍政府雖向澳葡當局嚴正抗議，但對方辯稱葡國水師是在葡國領海內執勤，是中國軍艦越界停泊，違約在先。兩國互不相讓，氣氛變得極為緊張。 上述衝突其實充分展現了「澳門內港問題」的兩大主軸，即船隻航行及濬海工程問題，皆屬於領海權的糾紛。糾紛的徵結，就在於領海界線未定。軍政府亦認知到內港問題的嚴重性，因此在當時交涉中一方面迫使澳葡當局停止濬海工程，另一方面則要求與葡國協商，以濬海工程為條件，換取葡國在內港領海上有所讓步。最終軍政府與澳葡當局在1920年9月簽訂《港口工程合約》及《澳門港口章程》，軍政府同意葡國進行濬海工程，葡國則不得干涉中國軍艦航行及停泊澳門內港的權利。雖然軍政府並未達成劃定澳門界線之目的，但在維護中國對澳門的領海權上，仍有實質的收穫。 但在過往研究中，大多以澳門主權爭議作為切入點，因此對1919年之衝突事件，多著眼於整體交涉中是否喪失了澳門主權的議題，不僅沒有深入了解內港問題的源起，更忽略了1920年交涉結果對維護澳門領海所帶來的實質幫助。 因此，本論文將運用中研院近史所的《澳門專檔》和相關資料，以澳門內港問題為核心，探討中國—包含清政府、北京政府及軍政府—如何處理內港問題，最終於 1920 年取得實質成果的過程。本論文除緒論和結論外，共分三章。第一章焦點為內港的港口管理問題，此問題主要體現在葡國水師干涉中國軍艦於內港航行及停泊，及強迫中國漁船領照繳費等糾紛事件，本章探討該問題的起源，歷來糾紛交涉的過程及結果。第二章則探討內港的港口工程問題，討論相關糾紛的起因及交涉經過。第三章重點為中葡兩國就內港問題所作的兩次交涉，一是1909年的澳門勘界會議，從會議過程中可以了解兩國對內港問題的看法為何；二是1920年交涉事件的過程，從中檢視雙方最終達成協議的近因為何。透過以上三章，我們將了解澳門內港問題的起因，並從相關糾紛事件的交涉過程中，分析中葡雙方的立場，最終探討兩國最終能夠達成協議的原因。本文希望藉由相關討論，以釐清內港問題的始末，並重新探討中國在澳門問題上的外交成就，以補過去研究中不足之處。

本論文旨在對清代臺灣的海防做一歷史建構。其問題意識在於提出“以陸制海”的運作模式，用以討論清廷經營臺灣海防的過程與缺失，並藉此說明當時中國未能發展海權的困難與阻礙。 / The theme of thesis is historical-reconstruction for maritime defense of Taiwan in Qing dynasty. A question consciousness will be offered by "land against sea" of application type and suggest two important points. First,the contents will discuss both process and mistakes which the Qing government managed maritime defense. On the other hand, the conclusion will explain the difficulties and obstacles which China didn't have develop the Sea Power.

政策是公權力對大眾利益表現一種型態，為確保其一貫施政品質，公共治理的理論，逐漸重視政策的效果 - 政策論證（policy argument），尤其以全民政治為基礎的政策治理，對於整體資源的投入/產出，必須強化其自體檢核功能。 航運的操作有兩項基本的動因，一個是船，另一個是船員，兩者缺一不可，然後貨才能「暢其流」，尤其船員的因素，是航運興衰的關鍵動因。我國在邁進開發國家之列時，對於各類專業人才必須予以適當的培訓及保障，整體經濟的生產力才能提升，並能強化競爭力，邁向國際化，航運業界、政府及學界均應有此共識，在面對國際船員訓練、發證的考驗時，同心協力，參與國際海事組織(IMO)船員訓練發證政策的挑戰，突破港口國管制(PSC)的檢查，使船員在工作保障及社會福利有所依循，以符合船員訓練STCW 78/95國際公約修訂的檢查及港口國管制(PSC)的要求標準。 中國方面，因為是國際海事組織(IMO)的會員，對於船員訓練及發證，均按照STCW78/95國際公約的規定與要求，頒布一系列規章及訓練規範，而且根據中國「民法通則」規定，法律條約沒有規定的，可適用國際慣例，中華民國的船員執業證照則處於相對不確定的狀況，尚待政府的國際政策躓琢。 由於兩岸經濟依存，政治對立，各自表述，在意識形態上產生不接軌的現象，再加上國際情勢發展的不對稱影響，我國船員訓練主管單位及相關港監部門及學術組織，本於國家利益的基礎上，為謀我國航運業的發展及保障船員的工作權，除強化國內的船員訓練品質，另確有必要務實的參與國際組織相關活動及其相互間的合作，將我國現職船員訓練符合STCW 78/95國際公約之發證政策與執行規定，順利遞送國際海事組織(IMO)的秘書處，並確認發證履行報告，完成從第三走廊(軌道)列入〈白名單〉（White List）之列(如本論文第五章敘述)。 本研究肇因於國際公約的修訂，影響我國船員訓練執業證書的認可，政府從一貫的船員政策實施過程為核心，配合考試、適任評估，目標是符合國際公約STCW 78/95的標準及船員證照認證的公共治理為論證(policy argument)，從質性研究的模式，並依政治學方法論的比較研究法及政策論證的步驟與國際關係（IR）的談判元素，全文以建構類型(constructive typology) 理論，作為理論架構，驗證第三軌道的模式。 / Decision-making is the pattern that shows a certain type of state authority; administrative power displays the attitude to the general interests based on effectiveness of administration. In order to guarantee its consistent administrative quality, the administration theory shows how a state manages its public policy. Also, governments undoubtedly pay much attention to the outcome of them. How those public policies are approved (i.e., policy arguments), also exemplify the fact that decision-making is based on the participation of individuals in whole society. Inputs/output model could strengthen our knowledge from the key function of physical examination. There are two basic theories regarding the operation of shipping. One is the ship; with the other one names the seafarer. None of them can be dispensed with—can commodities be transported smoothly only through this understanding. Seafarer's role, in particular, is the key factor attributing to the shipping frequency. The Republic of China (ROC) on Taiwan has to offer proper crew training so as to guarantee all kinds of qualified personnel in a specific field are sufficient while striding forward to develop its economy. Only if the productivity could be promoted, can the ROC strengthen competitiveness, march forward to further internationalization. Shipping could reflect a certain country’s industrial level, governmental effectiveness and its educational development. As local trains’ seafarers— instead of by international authorities, this country encounters the license-issuing problem. Only through concerted efforts, can this country meet ordeals when participating in International Maritime Organization (IMO)’s training and license-issuing process, pass through the inspection that the port state controlled (PSC), make seafarers’ rights guaranteed. In addition, the ROC has to assure seafarers’ welfare, in accordance with the inspection of the international convention revising (STCW 78/95) and to the standard demanded by the port state control (PSC). The People’s Republic of China (PRC) is a member of International Maritime Organization (IMO). The PRC obeys the regulations and request of international convention STCW78/95, the general rule of the civil law, and announces a series of training rules when training seafarers and issuing licenses. The PRC also declares that they could apply to international custom if their lacks of local regulations. In contrast, the seafarers of the Republic of China are still not for sure that they could be issues operation certificates. The ROC government is awaited to do something. Economies along the two sides of the Taiwan Straits have become mutually interdependent, whereas their political relations are still stridently confrontational. Due to the huge gap between their international statuses, the authorities that responsible for seafarer training and harbor supervisors, as well as scholars, have to promote the training quality of our seafarers, participate caucuses and activities of various international organizations so as to assure the ROC’s sea transportation and their working opportunities. The government has to submit its 78/95 STCW regulations training post crewman to the Secretariat of the International Maritime Organization (IMO), confirm license-issuing and fulfill the report, enlist itself to the White List from the “Third Track (as noted in Chapter 5).” This research could be attributed to the revision of the international convention, which affects the validity the ROC’s approval to the certificates in seafarer training and issuing licenses. The government designs courses from consistent policies of seafarer training, helping seafarers pass examination and evaluation and finally reach the standard of international convention named STCW 78/95. In addition, one of the government’s objectives is to comply the policy argument of governance concerning license issuing. This author tries to apply to quality research, comparative methodology, and negotiating factor in international relations (IR), and constructive typology for the purpose of verifying the operation of the “Third Track.”

No description available.

Ces dernières décennies ont été marquées par une accélération des échanges mondiaux. Le transport maritime du fait de son coût peu élevé a contribué à ce développement. En effet, aujourd’hui près de quatre vingt dix pourcent des marchandises transportées dans le monde le sont par voie maritime. L’augmentation des volumes échangés et la capacité des navires ont fait augmenter les risques d’incidents et du même coup la responsabilité de tous les acteurs des contrats maritimes de transport de marchandises. La responsabilité du chargeur, qui a été longtemps restreinte à un simple cas excepté libérant la responsabilité du transporteur, prend son essor. Elle s’autonomise autour de la construction d’un régime général et spécial qu’il convient de mieux ordonner. A cet égard, l’étude comparative des expériences sino-françaises dans le domaine des responsabilités du chargeur fait apparaître de nombreuses disparités et différences de traitement. Les Règles de Rotterdam s’inscrivent dans cette perspective en consacrant ce phénomène. Elles prennent en considération de nouveaux types de chargeurs tels que le chargeur documentaire afin de mieux s’adapter à la réalité de l’opération de transport. Les risques d’atteinte à l’environnement par des marchandises dangereuses sont aussi pris en compte. Mais contrairement à la responsabilité du transporteur, la responsabilité contractuelle et délictuelle du chargeur est illimitée. En attendant une ratification des Règles de Rotterdam, la liberté contractuelle constitue un moyen intéressant pour le chargeur de limiter sa responsabilité dans le respect des dispositions d’ordre public ou de ses obligations impératives. / Recent decades have seen an acceleration of world trade. Due to its low cost, maritime transport has contributed to this development. Indeed, nearly ninety percent of goods transported in the world are seaborne. The increase in trading volumes and vessel capacity have increased the risk of incidents and thereby the responsibility of all actors in maritime carriage of goods contracts. The responsibility of the shipper, which has long been restricted to a simple except case releasing the carrier’s liability, is now taking off. This new autonomy, built around general and special ratings, should be better organized. In this regard, the comparative study of Chinese and French experiences in the responsibility of the shipper reveals many disparities and differences in treatment. The Rotterdam Rules follow the recent trend by taking into account new types of shippers, such as the documentary shipper, in order to better adapt to the reality of transport operations. The risks to the environment due to hazardous goods are also taken into account. But unlike the carrier's liability, the shipper’s liability and tort are unlimited. Pending the Rotterdam Rules’ ratification, contractual freedom is an interesting way for the shipper to limit his liability and tort in the respect of safety law or imperative obligations. / 国际间交换近数十年来加速了，海上运输的低价格，助长了他的发展，的确现在几乎百分之九十的国际货物运输都靠海运。由于交换的批量和船的容量增加，使得事件的风险和海上运输合同的各方责任提高了。托运人的责任长期以来限制在一个例外, 让承运人的责任释放。托运人的责任浮现，他的存在是建立在普通制度和专门制度中，需要更好的理清。在此情况下，中法海商法经验的比较，在托运人的责任上显出许多的差距和不同的待遇。在透视中 «鹿特丹规则»呈现了此现象。他考虑到新的托运人的类型，譬如提单托运人为了更符合实际运输的实现，被危险货物造成环保损害的风险,也算在内。但是不比承运人的责任，托运人的合同责任和侵权责任是无限的。在等待«鹿特丹规则»的批准之下，自由合同是一个有意思的办法, 为了限制托运的责任，需要遵守治安法和托运人的必需义务。