中國共產黨建政8年後，就宣布完成全行業社會主義改造（1949-1956），實現了公有制與計畫經濟體制，取消了中國既有的混合經濟體制與私有財產制度。然而，自70年代末期開始，一連串試圖搞活經濟的措施開啟了中國經濟制度變化的序幕，30年來，中國已經由公有制計畫經濟體制，轉變到今日混合所有制市場經濟形態。 那些力量驅動了這場變化？那些變數與其交互作用影響，變化了經濟改革的方向？通過經濟制度變化的過程，那些成果帶來經濟制度走上不歸路的效用呢？這是筆者試圖解釋的課題。 事實上，中國經濟制度的變化，是一連串政權行動者「始料未及」的變化的結果，這場制度變遷─中國由公有制計畫經濟體制重新回到混合所有制市場經濟體制，一開始並未有指引變革行動的藍圖，變革的方向亦是在變化的過程上才漸次浮現的，它受到制度的限制，也受到偶發事件的影響，當然也就不意味是整體領導層的共識結果，它是在特定歷史結構與制度交錯相互影響下的產物。換句話說，是歷史（時間序列上的事件與變化）、制度與行動者組構了這場變遷。同時，這也是一場動態的變遷過程，變遷的路徑有來自制度遺產的影響，它也存在著路徑依賴的現象。 不過，路徑因行動者與制度安排的激勵而強化，從而實現變遷，但也在行動者基於觀念（意識形態）或利益下予以限制，從而轉折到不同的方向上。筆者認為，在中國獨特的政經體制下，路徑自我強化的現象不是內部自我激勵造成的結果，而是來自外部的因素；在路徑依賴的背後，制度結構與行動者的作用具有不容忽視的影響。 筆者認為，改變中國經濟制度最重要的取徑，就是「雙軌制」。「雙軌制」是一項行動者非意圖的創造，它始自陳雲倡議「摸著石頭過河」，獲得鄧小平的贊同，從而形成「試點」模式，並作為該模式的指導原則。 此外，觀念的引進與衝突是這場變化過程的重要部份，像是在推動「經濟特區試點政策過程中尤為明顯；當政權領導人受外部引入的觀念的影響，產生經濟特區政策，而領導人內部也因觀念的分歧，形成足以阻滯特區試點政策的衝突；他們之間的衝突（正統派vs改革派）貫穿整個變遷過程，這也正好說明了觀念因素在中國改變經濟制度過程上的重要影響。 / 8 years after the establishment of the People’s Republic of China, the Chinese Communist Party claimed that socialist reform has been successfully conducted. Public ownership and planned economy replaced mixed economy as well as private ownership. In the end of 1970s, however, a series of economic reform challenged public ownership with planned economy, which leads China enter into a mixed ownership economy. This thesis attempts to sort out the forces and consequences that drive economic reform. Through the transition of economic system, which leads China’s economy into a no return road. In fact, economic reform in China is an unexpected result by political regulators. Originally, it did not have a blueprint to lead the way. The direction from public ownership to mixed economy emerged throughout the reform, which is not a common consensus from the political leaders. Instead, it is dominated by history, political system as well as regulator in a dynamic way. This path dependency with institutional heritage character is the spot light of economic reform. The author claims the importance and direction of this reform is dominated by external factor. The most importance factor that change China’s economic is the launch of dual system. This system, with the slogan of “crossing the river by groping the stones along the way,” is proposed by CHEN Yun and approved by Deng Xiao-Ping. The introduction of concept is an important factor through the reform, which can be seemed from the process during the promotion of Special Economic Zones SEZs. When political regulators received outer concept and launched SEZs, internal diversity emerged that blocking the reform. Conflicts between orthodoxy and reformist can be seemed throughout reform period, influencing the forces and consequences of China’s economic system.

To predict and prevent future armed conflicts like Russia’s war against Georgia in 2008 and Ukraine in 2022, there is more value in knowing how these wars occurred rather than why they occurred. The Russian Playbook is built from three distinct “plays” employed by Moscow and organised in the theoretical framework of Historical Institutionalism through Path Dependence modelling. This research focuses on Ukraine, Georgia, and Moldova as cases for comparison by building on the Soviet legacy in each state which forms the antecedent historical conditions of the Playbook’s Path Dependence. Where Play 1 focuses on offensive and defensive influence seeking as a form of structural persistence, Play 2’s shaping and weaponisation acts to counter reactive sequences. Both Plays function within path dependency’s punctuated equilibrium and appear consistently throughout Ukraine, Georgia, and Moldova following the collapse of the Soviet Union. When Play 1 and Play 2 are overpowered by reactive sequences that cannot be countered, Moscow deems the disequilibrium as irremediable and the path towards conflict begins. Play 3 refers to the start of lock-in effects towards conflict, beginning with “pre-crisis” conditions. Play 3’s Lock-in Effectsserve as the period in which a predictable conflict outcome is likely to occur, though lock-in refers to the path adherence in preparation for future conflict. This Play occurs in both Georgia and Ukraine at the time of this research, though its future employment within Moldova should not be excluded. These actions, in the form of the Russian Playbook and its Plays act as a guide for operationalising and implementing Russia’s grand strategy. This research goes beyond individual figureheads of Russia or specific institutions and instead focuses on patterns that exist throughout historical cases. These patterns show there is nothing particularly “new” in how Russia operates despite the vast number of newly coined phrases including “hybrid” leading people to believe otherwise. As such, Putin did not create the Russian Playbook, he inherited it. / <p>Master's of Political Science with a Specialisation in International and European Relations.</p>