社會科學院: 政治學研究所指導教授: 左正東; 張登及王馨Wang, HsinHsinWang2017-03-032018-06-282017-03-032018-06-282016http://ntur.lib.ntu.edu.tw//handle/246246/273721東亞國家如韓國、臺灣、香港和新加坡等在二戰後經濟呈現高度成長，甚至被譽為「東亞經濟奇蹟」。如此高度的經濟成就，一時謂為政治經濟學的風潮，其中較受學界青睞的解釋為Chalmers Johnson所提出的東亞「發展型國家理論」（Developmental State Theory）。 1997年亞洲金融風暴後，發展型國家論的持續性及適用性深受新自由主義學派的質疑。韓國在亞洲金融危機後，經濟受到重創，甚至不得不接受「國際貨幣組織」（IMF）的救援，並採取新自由主義的經濟改革措施。另外，在全球化及金融危機後，韓國也一改過去保護主義的政策，積極追求「自由貿易協定」（FTA）的簽訂，遂有論者認為韓國拋開過去的發展型國家模式，成為新自由主義國家。然發展型國家模式是否因此在韓國式微，引起筆者的研究興趣。 本文試圖以韓美FTA為例，並探討兩個問題：首先，在推動韓美FTA的過程時，是否正如新自由主義學者主張韓國已拋棄過去發展型國家的特色，走向全面自由化；抑或是揉合了兩者之特點的「發展型新自由主義」呢？其次，若韓國的發展型國家主義的特色仍存在，那麼有別於過去的威權時代，在韓美FTA簽訂的過程中，國家的角色、國家與企業及國家與社會和民意的互動又為何呢？本研究希望透過上述問題，瞭解韓國的國家轉變與調適方向。After WWII, the economic miracle in East Asia has given rise to a great theoretical debate of the economic transformation in this region. One of the famous theoretical responses to the transformation of Newly Industrialized Countries (NICs) in East Asia is “Developmental State Theory” established by Chalmers Johnson. However, developmental state theory has encountered several challenges especially after Asian Financial Crisis in 1997. South Korea was one of the Asian countries which suffered from the big disaster and some have criticized it was owing to the active and direct state intervention, strong economic and industrial policies, and the chaebol-oriented crony capitalism that induced this economic meltdown. Furthermore, the financial crisis served as the wake up call to Korea to generate substantial economic gains; therefore, the state started to shift its policy from tradition focus on mercantilism to a neoliberalism country through its trade-liberalized Free Trade Agreement (FTA) policy. This research mainly focuses on the negotiation process of the KORUS FTA which is one of the influential FTAs of Korea. After outlining the background of the KORUS FTA, this research seeks to analyzine two following research questions: first, after globalization and Asian Financial Crisis, did Korea totally transform its economic ideology from developmentalism to neoliberalism? Or actually it turned to be the “developmental neoliberalism” state which remained its characteristic of developmentalism but also combined with the conception of neoliberalism? Second, if the characteristic of developmentalism still remains, what’s the role of state, the reaction between state and the chaebols and the society when facing numerous obstacles against KORUS FTA? By analyzing these two research questions, this study seeks to have a better understanding of the transformed Korea.  3706240 bytesapplication/pdf論文公開時間: 2019/8/24論文使用權限: 同意有償授權(權利金給回饋本人)發展型國家理論發展型新自由主義模式1997年亞洲金融危機全球化民主化韓美自由貿易協定developmental state theorydevelopmental neoliberalism model1997 Asian financial crisisglobalizationdemocratizationU.S.- Korea FTA (KORUS FTA)[SDGs]SDG10[SDGs]SDG16thesis10.6342/NTU201600302http://ntur.lib.ntu.edu.tw/bitstream/246246/273721/1/ntu-105-R02322009-1.pdf