地区间主义的两种形式——基于欧盟与中国对非地区间合作经验的分析

Redefining Interregionalism: A Comparative Study of EU and China’s InterregionalRelations with Africa

地区间主义研究的核心问题是地区间制度设计在促进合作上的适用性。制度化与论坛化是当前地区间合作中的两种主要形式,这两种制度选择的区别体现在结构平衡、施动方向、互动结果以及由此所决定的制度适用性上。作者提出:在制度化的地区间合作中,强势的一方因为缺乏足够的回应或制衡,将导致其倡议和政策制定主要从自身角度出发,这在很大程度上削弱了政策和举措的适用性。而在论坛化的地区间合作中,平衡和双向的互动以及合作的意愿能够增加最后的政策和举措的适用性。欧盟推动的对非制度化地区间合作与中非合作论坛推动的论坛化地区间合作是当今地区间主义比较有代表性的案例。通过对欧盟与中国的对非地区间合作的比较研究发现,适用性的制度设计应该建立在地区间结构平衡、双向互动和强烈的政治意愿基础之上。

Interregionalism should focus on whether and how the interregional institutionsare applied to promote cooperation. There are two general forms of interregionalism: thehard one and the soft one. The distinctions lie in the balance of power structure, directionand results of interaction, which are key determinants of the applicability of institutions topromote interregional cooperation. The hypothesis is that, in hard institutionalized interre-gionalism, the stronger one cannot be reacted upon and balanced well by its counterpart,which will lead to self-centric policy -making and finally weaken the applicability of in-terregional institutions. On the contrary, the structural balance, mutual interaction andstrong cooperation in softinstitutionalized interregionalismwill strengthen the applicability ofinterregional institutions. By making a comparative study between China -EUhard institu-tionalized interregional relations and China -African soft relations, the author concludesthat an applicable institution should be designed based on the balance of interregional struc-ture, mutual interaction and strong political will.