Thesis (Ph.D.)--University of New South Wales, 2004. / Title from PDF t.p. (viewed on Aug. 4, 2006). Includes bibliographical references (p. 423-490).

Zugl.: Marburg, Universiẗat, Diss., 2005.

南中國海內有零星島群，其中以南沙群島為最，乃是世上最多國家涉及主權爭端的海域，其背後有當年殖民主義所遺留下來的歷史因素、現代海洋法公約所造成的曖昧不清的劃界以及主權權利劃分的問題，以及海洋資源的爭奪與政治上戰略地位的考量。上述因素相互關連並交織成南沙群島的主權爭議，中華民國、中華人民共和國、越南、菲律賓、馬來西亞與汶萊六方各執一詞，從法理、歷史甚至是國土安全等論點來宣示主權，不過各爭端國在論點上各有利弊，所以南沙群島的主權劃歸至今仍無解。但是即便各方在主權議題上互不相讓，然而就南沙群島主權爭議而言，這些理性的行為者在幾番考量下仍願意共同合作。就目前的情況來看，先行暫時擱置主權，再進行共同開發似乎是唯一可行的方法，特別是合作的目標物為海上石油與油氣資源，因為能源資源乃是具有高度價值的不可再生性資源，而據相關單位估計，目前全球已開發的石油資源即將面臨耗竭狀態，因此潛在的石油存量才更加吸引各國的目光。 / 依照各方的合作意願與態度，本論文將以新自由制度主義中理性選擇下的合作精神與建制概念分析南海共同開發的可適用性與限制性。先論述共同開發的意涵，再闡述新自由制度主義與共同開發的關連性。接者為了配合南海的共同開發，筆者先介紹學者針對南海合作的觀點，再針對一九九零年馬來西亞與泰國暹邏灣大陸架資源共同開發案、二零零二年中國與越南北部灣劃界與漁業協定、二零零五年中、菲、越三國南海聯合海洋地震工作協議與二零零八年中國與菲律賓所發表的有關共同捕魚區的合作建議等四項案例作分析，從實際合作中探討未來針對南沙群島水域的共同開發可行性，並從新自由制度主義探討合作的展望與限制。 / Of all the islands in the South China sea, the island groups of the Spratlys is one of the most keenly disputed territories in Southeast Asia, where overlapping claims for sovereignty and territorial jurisdiction are hotly debated. There are a lot of reasons giving rise to the debate. First some scholars view the problem over the Spratlys as part of the historical legacies left behind by the former Western colonial powers. Second, other scholars place greater emphasis on ambiguous legal aspects of territorial jurisdiction. Third still other scholars emphasize political and geo-strategic considerations to explain the complex situation. Lastly nowadays a lot of studies focus on the possibilities of the discovery of major gas and oil field. Those perspectives above can explain why there is no concrete agreement among the six parties including the Republic of China, the People’s Republic of China, the Philippines, Vietnam, Malaysia and Brunei. Although the issue of sovereignty and territorial jurisdiction is too complicate to deal with now, those rational actors still may cooperate and jointly explore and exploit. At present the only possible way to joint development is to first put sovereignty aside and then collaborate. / In this thesis, the objective is to analyze the feasibility and limitation of joint development from Neo-liberal Institutionalism which is mainly about cooperation and regime. First I explain what joint development is and then analyze the linkage between Neo-liberal Institutionalism and joint development. And the next part focuses on the Spratly islands and I analyze four cases including the agreement between Malaysia and Thailand on the constitution and other matters relating to the establishment of the joint authority, the agreement between China and Vietnam on Beibu gulf, the joint authority agreement on joint seismic survey of the South China Sea among the oil companies of China, Vietnam and the Philippines, and the recommendation of common fishing zone. I analyze and predict whether the joint development is feasible in the future through the analysis of practical cooperation.

No description available.

This thesis presents a cross-national, cross-regime examination of foreign policy decision-making in the Spratly Islands dispute, focusing on China, Malaysia and the Philippines. It argues that how and why these countries have acted in particular ways towards the dispute relates to the relationship among foreign policy decision-making, government behaviour and domestic politics. The theoretical foundation of the study is foreign policy analysis. It applies the decision units approach advanced by Margaret and Charles Hermann and Joe Hagan to investigate who made foreign policy decisions on the Spratly Islands dispute in the three countries during the period 1991-2002, and how this influenced government behaviour. In addition, the contextual influence of domestic politics is considered. Four case studies inform the empirical analysis: the approaches taken by Malaysia and the Philippines to bolster their respective sovereignty claim, China???s establishment of a comprehensive maritime jurisdictional regime covering the Spratly Islands among other areas, China-Philippines contestation over Mischief Reef and the development of a regional instrument to regulate conduct in the South China Sea. Three conclusions are drawn. First, the decision units approach identifies the pivotal foreign policy decision-makers in each of the countries examined and the process involved. Second, it explains the relationship between decision unit characteristics -- self-contained or externally influenceable -- and each government???s behaviour towards the dispute. Injecting domestic politics into the analysis highlights motivations of and constraints faced by decision-makers, conditioning the form and content of government action. Third, it demonstrates a low predictive capability: the ???fit??? between hypothesised and actual government behaviour is poor. While it is not a comprehensive analytical tool, the combined decision units-domestic politics approach offers deeper insight into government decisions and behaviour on the Spratly Islands dispute than hitherto reported in the literature.

This thesis presents a cross-national, cross-regime examination of foreign policy decision-making in the Spratly Islands dispute, focusing on China, Malaysia and the Philippines. It argues that how and why these countries have acted in particular ways towards the dispute relates to the relationship among foreign policy decision-making, government behaviour and domestic politics. The theoretical foundation of the study is foreign policy analysis. It applies the decision units approach advanced by Margaret and Charles Hermann and Joe Hagan to investigate who made foreign policy decisions on the Spratly Islands dispute in the three countries during the period 1991-2002, and how this influenced government behaviour. In addition, the contextual influence of domestic politics is considered. Four case studies inform the empirical analysis: the approaches taken by Malaysia and the Philippines to bolster their respective sovereignty claim, China???s establishment of a comprehensive maritime jurisdictional regime covering the Spratly Islands among other areas, China-Philippines contestation over Mischief Reef and the development of a regional instrument to regulate conduct in the South China Sea. Three conclusions are drawn. First, the decision units approach identifies the pivotal foreign policy decision-makers in each of the countries examined and the process involved. Second, it explains the relationship between decision unit characteristics -- self-contained or externally influenceable -- and each government???s behaviour towards the dispute. Injecting domestic politics into the analysis highlights motivations of and constraints faced by decision-makers, conditioning the form and content of government action. Third, it demonstrates a low predictive capability: the ???fit??? between hypothesised and actual government behaviour is poor. While it is not a comprehensive analytical tool, the combined decision units-domestic politics approach offers deeper insight into government decisions and behaviour on the Spratly Islands dispute than hitherto reported in the literature.