Responsive image
博碩士論文 etd-0524119-162947 詳細資訊
Title page for etd-0524119-162947
論文名稱
Title
南方共同市場的困境:國家、區域與跨區域的挑戰
The Dilemma of MERCOSUR: National, Regional and Extra-Regional Challenges
系所名稱
Department
畢業學年期
Year, semester
語文別
Language
學位類別
Degree
頁數
Number of pages
233
研究生
Author
指導教授
Advisor
召集委員
Convenor
口試委員
Advisory Committee
口試日期
Date of Exam
2019-04-16
繳交日期
Date of Submission
2019-06-24
關鍵字
Keywords
南方共同市場、拉丁美洲區域整合、區域性認同、區域整合
regional integration, MERCOSUR, regional identity, Latin American integration
統計
Statistics
本論文已被瀏覽 5767 次,被下載 100
The thesis/dissertation has been browsed 5767 times, has been downloaded 100 times.
中文摘要
在穩定性、整合程度及制度化方面,「南方共同市場」是整個拉丁美洲和加勒比
海地區最成功的區域整合。就如同其他區域整合計畫,「南方共同市場」在近20
年間經歷跌宕起伏,許多研究透過政治和經濟科學領域來解釋這些盛衰、起伏,
以預測該區域整合之未來發展。本研究分析「南方共同市場」自1991 年建立以來
的演進與重大事件,主要目的是以更全面性的方法來研究該區域整合,並解釋一
系列重大事件,其中有傳統方法未能解釋或選擇忽視的面向。透過文獻回顧,顯
示絕大多數研究都以功利主義邏輯來解釋整合的過程。現實主義和自由主義幾乎
都把焦點放在經濟利益、安全和地緣戰略邏輯,而不關注社會文化邏輯。徹底分
析共同的歷史背景、語言、發展夢想和障礙等面向後,本研究發現這些社會文化
建構之區域認同在過去二十年中變得更加強大。根據本論文之研究結果,這種社
會文化對經濟、安全和地緣戰略等方面之整合具有重要意義,若忽視這些面向,
對「南方共同市場」的全面研究就無法完整呈現.
Abstract
MERCOSUR is the most successful integration Alternative in the whole Latin American
and Caribbean region in terms of stability and the degree of integration and
institutionalization. As other integration proposals elsewhere, the South American bloc
has experienced important ups and downs through its nearly two decades of existence,
which different fields of the political and economic sciences have tried to explain in order
to anticipate the future of this regional bloc. This study analyses the evolution of
MERCOSUR and its major events since its creation back in 1991. The main purpose of
our study is to argue in favor of more comprehensive approaches to study this regional
integration bloc in order to explain a series of events, which more traditional approaches
have failed to explain or have chosen to neglect. A quick review of the existing literature
on this topic showed that the vast majority of studies have focused on mere utilitarian
logics to explain the integration process. Both, realist and liberalist positions have, one
way or another, placed almost all weight on economic interests, security and geostrategic
logics, leaving too little or no room at all for sociocultural logics. Upon a thorough
analysis of matters of shared historical background, common language, common
development dreams and common obstacles; we have observed that a regional identity
based on these complex sociocultural issues have grown stronger over the last two
decades. This sociocultural issues have, according to our findings, as much weight over
the integration or lack of it, as do matters of economic, security and geostrategic. In this
light, we conclude that a comprehensive study of MERCOSUR cannot be considered
complete if it neglects these important aspects.
目次 Table of Contents
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ........................................................................................... i
摘要 .............................................................................................................................iv
ABSTRACT .................................................................................................................. v
Table of contents ..........................................................................................................vi
INTRODUCTION ......................................................................................................... 1
Chapter I: TERMINOLOGY DELIMITATION AND METHODOLOGY .................... 7
1.1. Motivation and purpose of the investigation ............................................................ 7
1.2. Investigation structure ........................................................................................... 13
1.3. Concepts and terminology..................................................................................... 15
1.3.1. Regional integration ...................................................................................15
1.3.2. Sociological aspects ...................................................................................22
1.4. Methodology ........................................................................................................ 24
1.4.1. The constructivist approach to integration ..................................................24
1.4.2. The interpretivist approach to integration ...................................................27
1.4.3. The historic approach to integration ...........................................................30
Chapter II: THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK .............................................................. 33
2.1. The classical theories ............................................................................................ 34
2.2. The new theories ................................................................................................... 53
vii
Chapter III: MAJOR RESTRUCTURATION OF MERCOSUR INTEGRATION
PROCESS (2003-2006) ............................................................................................... 68
3.1. Sociological aspects after the regional crisis of 1999-2002: National, Regional and
Global conditions ........................................................................................................ 68
3.1.1. Global Situation .........................................................................................69
3.1.2. Regional situation ......................................................................................75
3.1.2.1. Multiple blocs: Convergence, Overlapping and Competition ...................88
3.1.3. Nacional situation .................................................................................... 101
3.1.4. Brazil’s Dilemma: Regional Leader or Emerging Global player?.............. 114
3.2. Crisis-prompted restructuration process of MERCOSUR .................................... 119
3.2.1. Strengthening the political dialogue: The BAC and other intra-bloc
agreements ......................................................................................................... 120
3.2.2. Strengthening the Institutionalization of the Social and Cultural Aspects of the
Integration Agenda ............................................................................................ 124
3.2.3. Institutionalization of the political integration: Administrative, Legislative,
Political and Economic Institutions .................................................................... 137
3.3. Shortcomings of the Restructuration Process of MERCOSUR ............................ 144
3.3.1. Brazil’s Contested Regional Leadership and Ambitions for more Influence on
the Global stage ................................................................................................. 150
3.4. Concluding remarks of chapter III ....................................................................... 168
Chapter IV: A NEW CRISIS: NATIONAL, REGIONAL, GLOBAL CHALLENGES
(2011-2019) ............................................................................................................... 171
viii
4.1. Challenges in the form of economic, social and political struggles in MERCOSUR
members .................................................................................................................... 171
4.2. Challenges in the form of the ongoing regional integration and re-integration
processes ................................................................................................................... 179
4.3. Challenges emanating from external factors related to the geopolitical and trade
reconfiguration of the world ...................................................................................... 182
4.4. Challenges resulting from the Trump phenomenon in Latin America and elsewhere
................................................................................................................................. 185
Chapter V: GENERAL CONCLUSIONS .................................................................. 187
5.1. Probing the shortcomings in the regional integration literature ............................ 189
5.2. In the case of MERCOSUR, sociocultural aspects are as important as economic and
geostrategic ones ....................................................................................................... 192
5.3. Integration drive for MERCOSUR: a complex mixture of factors ....................... 200
5.4. How the major crisis of the early 2000s prompted the major transformation of this
integration process ..................................................................................................... 203
5.5. Perspectives for MERCOSUR vis-à-vis the national, regional and extra-regional
challenges it continues to face.................................................................................... 206
BIBLIOGRAPHY ..................................................................................................... 209
參考文獻 References
Books sources
Alvin, Y. (1990). Social Change and Development, Modernization, Dependency and World
System Theories. Londres, Sage Library of Social Research.
Amorim Neto, O. (2011). De Dutra a Lula: a condução e os determinantes da política externa
brasileira. Rio de Janeiro, Brasil, Editora Elsevier.
Baptista, L.O. (1998). El Mercosur, sus instituciones y su ordenamiento jurídico. San Pablo,
Editorial LTR.
Bartesaghi, I. (2014). Las relaciones comerciales entre América Latina y Asia Pacífico: desafíos
y oportunidades. Uruguay, Observatorio América Latina – Asia Pacífico ALADI, CAF y
CEPAL.
Berlinski, J., Kume, H., Vaillant, M., Piani, G., Ons, A., Miranda, P. and Romero, C. A. (2006).
Hacia una Política Comercial Común del MERCOSUR. Argentina, Siglo XXI Editora
Iberoamericana, Red MERCOSUR.
Boutros, B. G. (1992). Agenda for peace. New York, United Nations.
Bull, H., Watson, A. (Ed.) (1984). The Expansion of International Society. New York, Oxford
University Press.
Caputo, D. (2015). Un péndulo austral. Argentina entre el populismo y el establishment.
Buenos Aires, Argentina, Capital Intelectual.
Cardoso, F. H. and Enzo, F. (1967). Dependência e Desenvolvimento na América Latina. Rio
de Janeiro, Brasil, Civilização Brasileira.
Costa, R. (2010). Mercosur y la negociación de la tarifa externa común. Uruguay, CEBRI.
Cox, R. and Sinclair, T. (1996). Approaches to world order. Cambridge, Cambridge University
Press.
210
Doleac, C. (2014). Are the Organization of American States’ Imperialist Roots too Deep to
Extirpate Today? Council on Hemispheric Affairs.
Dos Santos, T. (2002). La Teoría de la Dependencia: Balance y Perspectivas. Balance y
perspectivas. México, Plaza y Janés.
Escudé, C. (1998). Historia de un éxito. In Cisneros, Andrés. Política Exterior Argentina 1989-
1999. Argentina, Grupo Editor Latinoamericano S.R.L.
Fanely, J. M. y Bouzas, R. (2001). Mercosur: Integración y Crecimiento. Programa Mercosur
de la Fundación OSDE, con la supervisión académica y certificación de la Universidad
Nacional de San Martín. Argentina, Fundación OSDE.
Fukuyama, F. (1992). The End of History and the Last Man. London, Penguin.
Guzzini, S. (1998). Realism in international relations and international political economy: the
continuing story of a death foretold. New York, Routledge.
Haas, E. (1958). The Uniting of Europe. Stanford, Stanford University Press.
Hasenclever, A., Mayer P. and Rittberger, V. (1997). Theories of international regimes.
Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.
Herrington, L. (1981). Why the Rise of China Will Not Lead to Global Hegemony. EInternational
Relations.
Hodge, B. and Kress, G. (1988). Social semiotics. Cambridge, Polity press.
Keohane, R. O. and Nye, J. S. (1977). Power and Interdependence: World Politics in Transition.
Boston, Little, Brown and Company.
Livingstone, G. (2009). America’s Backyard: The United States and Latin America from the
Monroe Doctrine to the War on Terror. London, Zed Books.
Marcelo, P. M. (2000). A estrutura institucional do Mercosul. São Paulo, Brasil, Edições
Aduaneiras.
Mariscal, N. (2003). Teorías políticas de la integración europea, España, Editorial Tecnos.
211
Marois, T. (2012). States, Banks and Crisis: Emerging Finance Capitalism in Mexico and
Turkey. London, UK, Department of Development Studies, School of Oriental and
African Studies, University of London, London, Cheltenham and Northampton.
Mattli, W. (1999). The logic of regional integration: Europe and beyond. Cambridge,
Cambridge University Press.
Puntigliano, A. R. and Briceño-Ruiz, J. (Ed.). (2013) Resilience of Regionalism in Latin
America and the Caribbean. Development and Autonomy. Houndmills, Palgrave
Macmillan.
Vázquez, G. R. (2007). El MERCOSUR por dentro. Bogotá, Colombia, ditorial Ántropos.
Wallace, H. (2000). The Institutional Setting. In H. Wallace and W. Wallace. Policy-Making in
the European Union. Oxford, Oxford University Press.
Zimmern, A. (1931). The Study of International Relations. Oxford, Clarendon Press.
Book chapters
Abreu, S. (2000). Uruguay: socio pequeño del Mercosur. En Mateo, F. (Ed.). Los países
pequeños: su rol en los procesos de integración. Documento de divulgación No. 8, INTAL,
Buenos Aires, Argentina, pp. 41-81.
Acharya, A. and Johnston A. I. (2007). Comparing Regional Institutions: An Introduction, in
A. Acharya and A. I. Johnston (Ed.). Crafting Cooperation. Regional International
Institutions in Comparative Perspective, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, pp. 1-
31.
Adler, E. (2013). Constructivism in International Relations: Sources, Contributions, and
Debates, in W. Carlsnaes, T. Risse and B. A. Simmons (Ed.). Handbook of International
Relations, London, Sage, pp. 112-144.
Aggarwal, V. K. and Fogerty, E. A. (2004). Between Regionalism and Globalism: European
Union Interregional Trade Strategies. In V. K. Aggarwal & E. A. Fogerty (Ed.). EU Trade
212
Strategies: Between Regionalism and Globalism. Basingstoke, Palgrave Macmillan. Betts,
A. pp. 1-40.
Bermúdez, I. (1999). Mercosur en la crisis internacional. En Borón, A., Gambina, J. y Minsburg,
N. (Ed.). Tiempos violentos: Neoliberalismo, globalización y desigualdad en América
Latina. EUDEBA-CLACSO, Buenos Aires, Argentina, pp. 121-128.
Boutros, B. G. (2000). An agenda for democratization. In Barry Holden, (Ed.). Global
democracy, key debates. London, Routledge, pp. 105-161.
Bouzas, R. (1997). Mercosur y liberalización comercial preferencial en América del Sur:
resultados, temas y proyecciones. In P. Meller and R. Lipsey (Ed.). NAFTA y
MERCOSUR: un diálogo canadiense-latinoamericano. Chile, CIEPLAN-Dolmen, pp.
139-162.
Bouzas, R. (1999). Las negociaciones comerciales externas de Mercosur: administrando una
agenda congestionada. In R. Roett (Ed.). Mercosur: integración regional y mercados
mundiales. Argentina, ISEN Nuevo Hacer, pp.115-132.
Bouzas, R. (2005). Compensating asymmetries in regional integration agreements: lessons from
Mercosur. In P. Giordano, F. Lanzafame and J. Meyer- Stamer (Ed.). Asymmetries in
Regional Integration and Local Development. Washington, BID, pp. 85-112.
Bouzas, R., Gratius, S., Soltz, H. and Sberro, S. (2008) Teoría y Práctica de las Instituciones y
Procesos de Decisión. In G. Susanne (Ed.). MERCOSUR y NAFTA: Instituciones y
Mecanismos de Decisión en Procesos de Integración Asimetricos. Vervuert,
Iberoamericana, pp. 33-95.
Cresta, J. A. (2008). Asimetrías en el MERCOSUR: un enfoque macroeconómico. In F. Masi
e I. Tierra (Ed.). Asimetrías en el MERCOSUR: ¿un impedimento para el crecimiento?
Editorial Zonalibro, pp. 41-85.
Emmers, R. (2007), Securitization, in A. Collins (Ed.). Contemporary Security Studies. Oxford,
Oxford University Press, pp. 109-127.
213
French, J. D. (2010). Many lefts, one path? Chavez and Lula, in A. C. Maxwell and H. Eric
(Ed.). Latin America’s Left Turn: Politics, Policies, and Trajectories of Change. Boulder,
Lynne Rienner Publishers, pp. 41-60.
Goldstein, J. and Keohane, R. O. (1993). Ideas and Foreign Policy: An Analytical Framework.
In Goldstein, J. and Keohane, R. O. (Ed.). Ideas and Foreign Policy: Beliefs, Institutions,
and Political Change. Ithaca, Cornell University Press. pp. 3-30.
Gonzalez Cravino, S. (2000). Globalización, integración y cohesión social - El caso Mercosur.
In Franco and Di Filippo (Ed.). Las dimensiones sociales de la integración regional en
América Latina. Santiago de Chile, CEPAL, pp. 35-54.
Herz, M. (2014). Regional Governance. In T. G. Weiss and R. Wilkinson (Ed.), International
Organization and Global Governance. New York, Routledge, pp. 236-250.
Hurrell, A. (1995). Regionalism in Theoretical Perspective. In L. Fawcett and A. Hurrell (Ed.).
Regionalism in World Politics. Regional Organization and International Order. Oxford,
Oxford University Press, pp. 37-73.
Lebow, R. N. (2007). Classical Realism, in T. Dunne, M. Kurki and S. Smith (Ed.).
International Relations Theories. Oxford, Oxford University Press, pp. 52.70.
Mariano, K. P., Vigevani, T. e Oliveira, M. F. (2000). Na Democracia e atores políticos no
Mercosul. Lima, M. C. e Medeiros, M. de A. (Ed.). O Mercosul no limiar do século XXI.
Sao Paulo, Brasil, Cortez Editora, pp. 250-285.
Schmidt, V. (2001). Discourse and the legitimation of economic and social policy change in
Europe. In Weber, S. (Ed.). Globalization and the European political economy. New York,
Columbia University Press, pp. 229-272.
Schmitter, P. C. (2004). Neo-Neofunctionalism, in A. Wiener and T. Diez (Ed.). European
Integration Theory. Oxford, Oxford University Press, pp. 45-74.
Smith, S. (2007). Introduction. In T. Dunne. M. Kuki, and S. Smith (Ed.). International
Relations Theories: Discipline and Diversity. Oxford, Oxford University Press, pp. 1-12.
214
Spektor, M. (2010). Brazil: The Underlying Ideas of Regional Policies. In F. Daniel (Ed.).
Regional Leadership in the Global System: Ideas, Interests and Strategies of Regional
Powers. Aldershot, Ashgate Publishing, pp. 191-204.
Academic articles
Bennholdt-Thomsen, V. and Garrido, A. (1981). Marginalidad en América Latina. Una crítica
de la teoría. Revista Mexicana De Sociología, vol. 43, No. 4, pp. 1505-1546.
Bergeron, G. (1971). Commentaire de la communication du professeur Arend Lijphart.
Canadian Journal of Political Science, vol. 4 No. 1, pp. 18-21.
Berna, l. y Meza, R. (2013). Modelos o esquemas de integración y cooperación en curso en
América Latina (UNASUR, Alianza del Pacifico, ALBA, CELAC): una mirada
panorámica. Ibero-Amerikanisches Institut, No. 12, pp. 1 -22.
Bethell, L. (2010). Brazil and ‘Latin America’ Journal of Latin American Studies, vol. 42 No.
3, pp. 457-485.
Burges, S. (2007). Building a Global Southern Coalition: The Competing Approaches of
Brazil’s Lula and Venezuela’s Chávez. Third World Quarterly, vol. 28, No. 7, pp. 1343-
1358.
Carranza, M. E. (2003). Mercosur, the Free Trade Area of the Americas, and the Future of U.S.
Hegemony in Latin America. Fordham International Law Journal, vol. 27, No 4, pp. 14.
Conexión INTAL (2016). Made in CHI-LAT. Conexión, Ideas de Integración, No. 237.
Costa Vaz, A. (2001). Mercosul aos dez anos: crise de crescimento ou perda de identidade? En
Revista Brasileira de Política Internacional, vol. 44, No. 1, pp. 43-54.
De Tracy, A. Destutt (1829). Gazette de France. Paris, France, 8 août 1829, pp. 3-4.
Delaney, J. H. (2002). Imagining “El Ser Argentino”: Cultural Nationalism and Romantic
Concepts of Nationhood in Early Twentieth-Century Argentina. Journal of Latin
American Studies, vol. 34, No. 3, pp. 625-658.
215
Di Filippo, A. y Franco, R. (2012). Aspectos sociales de la integración (LC/L.996/Add.3), Vol.
4.
Doleac, C. (2014). Are the Organization of American States’ Imperialist Roots too deep to
Extirpate Today? Council on Hemispheric Affairs. http://www.coha.org/are-theorganization-
of-american-states-imperialist-roots-too-deep-to-extirpate-with-today/.
(Last Accessed: June 20, 2019).
Esteradeodal, A., Goto, J. and Saez, R. (2001). The New Regionalism in the Americas: the Case
of Mercosur. Journal of Economic Integration, vol. 16, No. 2, pp. 180-202.
Fernandez, J. (1966). The Nationalism Syndrome in Argentina. Journal of Inter-American
Studies, vol. 8, No. 4, pp. 551-564.
Fernando, P. (2003). Retos y desafíos para un nuevo MERCOSUR. CEI, Revista Argentina de
Economía Internacional, Vol. 84, No. 1.
Fioramonti, L. and Poletti, A. (2008). Facing the Giant: Southern Perspectives on the European
Union. Third World Quarterly, vol. 29, No. 1, pp. 167-180.
Gómez-Quiñones, J. (1982). Critique on the National Question, Self-Determination and
Nationalism. Latin American Perspectives, vol. 9, No. 2, pp. 62-83.
Gonzalez, C. S. (1998). Globalización, integración y cohesión social – El caso MERCOSUR.
Serie Políticas Sociales 14, Aspectos Sociales de la Integración, CEPAL, Vol. 3, No. 14,
pp. 35-55.
Gunder, F. A. (1967). Capitalism and Underdevelopment in Latin America: Historical Studies
of Chile and Brazil. The American Historical Review, Vol. 74, No. 5, pp. 1757-1758.
Haas, E. B. and Schmitter, P. C. (1964). Economics and Differential Patterns of Political
Integration: Projections about Unity in Latin America, International Organization, vol.
18, No. 4, pp. 705-737.
Hammond, J. and Filho, J. (2007). Introduction: Brazil under Cardoso. Latin American
Perspectives, vol. 34, No. 5, pp. 5-8.
216
Hettne, B. (1991). Security and Peace in Post-Cold War Europe. In Journal of Peace Research,
vol. 28, No. 3, pp. 279-294.
Hettne, B. and Söderbaum, F. (2000). Theorising the Rise of Regionness. New Political
Economy, vol. 5, No. 3, pp. 457-473.
Hettne, B. and Söderbaum, F. (2000). Theorizing the rise of regionness. New Political Economy
Routledge, vol. 5, No. 3, pp. 345-473.
Jaguaribe, H. (1982). Brasil-Argentina: Breve análisis de las relaciones de conflicto y
cooperación. Estudios Internacionales, vol. 15, No. 57, pp. 9-27.
Jelin, E. (2001). Cultural Movements and Social Actors in the New Regional Scenarios: The
Case of MERCOSUR. International Political Science Review, Revue Internationale De
Science Politique, vol. 22, No. 1, pp. 85-98.
Josselin, J. M. and Marciano, A. (2006). The political economy of European federalism. Series:
Public Economics and Social Choice. Centre for Research, in Economics and
Management, University of Rennes 1 and University of Caen, vol. 12.
Keohane, R. O. and Nye, J.S. (1987). Power and interdependence revisited. International
Organization vol. 41, No. 4, pp. 724-753.
Klotz, A., Lynch, C., Checkel, J. and Dunn, K. (2006). Moving beyond the Agent-Structure
Debate. International Studies Review, vol. 8, No. 2, pp. 355-381.
L. Bethell (2010). Brazil and ‘Latin America’ Journal of Latin American Studies, vol. 42, No.
3, pp. 457-485.
Lechini, G. (2007). Middle Powers: IBSA and the New South-South Cooperation. NACLA
Report on the Americas, vol. 40, No. 5, pp. 28-33.
Malamud, A. (2005). MERCOSUR Turns 15: Between Rising Rhetoric and Declining
Achievement. Cambridge Review of International Affairs, vol. 18, No. 3, pp. 421-436.
Mario, E. C. (2003). MERCOSUR: The Free Trade Area of the Americas, and the Future of
U.S. Hegemony in Latin America. Fordham International Law Journal vol. 27, No. 3, pp.
1029-1065.
217
Miriam, G. S. (2010). A diplomacia brasileira e as visões sobre a inserção externa do Brasil:
institucionalistas pragmáticos x autonomistas. Mural Internacional, vol. 1, No. 1, pp. 45-
52.
Mitrany, D. (1948). The functional approach to world organization. International Affairs, Royal
Institute of International Affairs, vol. 24, No. 3, pp. 350-363.
Morais, L. and Saad-Filho, A. (2011). Brazil beyond Lula: Forging Ahead or Pausing for Breath?
Latin American Perspectives, vol. 38, No. 2, pp. 31-44.
Muñoz, A. S. (2012). El nuevo mapa político y económico de América Latina: Alianza Pacifico
versus UNASUR. Estudios Geográficos, No. 273, pp. 703-719.
Nye, J. S. (1968). Comparative Regional Integration: Concept and Measurement. International
Organization, vol. 22, No. 4, pp. 855-880.
Oliveira, R. C. (2006). Autonomia e universalismo como condicionantes da política externa
brasileira. Revista de Informação Legislativa, vol. 43, No. 171, pp. 133-153.
Peña, F. (2011). ALADI, UNASUR y el MERCOSUR: ¿Ejes de la construcción institucional
de una región que enfrenta sus desafíos? Newsletter Mensual Septiembre 2011.
Phillips, N. (2007). The Limits of ‘Securitization’: Power, Politics and Process in US Foreign
Economic Policy. Government and Opposition, vol. 42, No. 2, pp. 158 - 189.
Ruggie, J. G., Katzenstein, P. J., Keohane, R.O. and Schmitter, P.C. (2005). Transformations
in World Politics: The Intellectual Contributions of Ernst B. Haas. Annual Review of
Political Science, vol. 8, pp. 271-96.
Russell, R. and Tokatlian, J. G. (2003). From Antagonistic Autonomy to Relational Autonomy.
A Theoretical Reflection from the Southern Cone. Latin American Politics and Society,
vol. 45 No. 1, pp. 1-24
Sanahuja, J. A. (2007). Regionalismo e integración América Latina: balance y perspectivas.
Pensamiento Iberoamericano, La Nueva Agenda de desarrollo en América Latina, Vol. 1,
No. 1, pp. 75-106.
218
Saraiva, M. G. (2010). A diplomacia brasileira e as visões sobre a inserção externa do Brasil:
institucionalistas pragmáticos x autonomistas. Mural Internacional, vol. 1, pp. 45-52.
Schmitter P. C. (1969). Three Neo-Functional Hypotheses about International Integration.
International Organization, vol. 23, No. 1, pp. 161-166.
Secretaría Permanente del SELA y González Cravino, C. S. (1998). Aspectos sociales de la
integración (LC/L.996/Add.2), Vol. 3.
Stairs, D. (1970). Deutsch Karl W: The Analysis of International Relations. Canadian Journal
of Political Science, vol. 3, No. 1, pp. 171-172.
Stuldreher, A. (2004). La regionalización como estrategia frente a la globalización. La
concepción de política externa conjunta en los bloques de América Latina y el Caribe.
Estudios Internacionales, vol. 37, No. 145, pp. 25-50.
Sunkel, O. (1998). Desarrollo e integración regional: ¿otra oportunidad para una promesa
incumplida? En Revista de la CEPAL, No. extraordinario “CEPAL 50 años”, pp. 229-
241.
Tussie, D. (2009). Latin America: Contrasting Motivations for Regional Projects, Review of
International Studies, vol. 35, No. 1, pp. 169-188.
Vigevani, T. and Cepaluni, G. (2007). Lula’s Foreign Policy and the Quest for Autonomy
through Diversification. Third World Quarterly, vol. 28, No. 7, pp. 1309-1326.
Vigevani, T. and Júnior, H. (2011). The Impact of Domestic Politics and International Changes
on the Brazilian Perception of Regional Integration. Latin American Politics and Society,
vol. 53, No. 1, pp. 125-155.
Watson A. E. (1996). The United States and Japan: Mutual Interests and Cooperation in Latin
America. U.S. Department of State Dispatch 7, pp. 62-65.
Yeats, J. A. (1998). Does Mercosur’s Trade Performance Raise Concerns about the effects of
Regional Trade Arrangements? In The World Bank Economic Review, vol. 12, No. 1, pp.
1-28.
219
Zao, S. (2016). From Soft to Structured Regionalism: Building Regional Institutions in the
Asia–Pacific. Journal of Global Policy and Governance, vol. 2, No. 2, pp. 145-166.
Working papers
Hettne, B. (2003). Regionalism, Interregionalism and World Order: The European Challenge
to Pax Americana. American University Council on Comparative Studies, Working Paper
Series, no. 3.
Kirk, R. and Stern, M. (2003). The new Southern African Customs Union Agreement. Africa
Region Working Paper Series, No. 57, World Bank.
Olarreaga, M., Soloaga, I. and Winters, L. A. (1999). What’s Behind Mercosur’s Common
External Tariff? World Bank, Policy Research, Working Paper No. 2231.
Tealde, E. y Juan, L. (2008). Un nuevo mecanismo para la distribución de la renta arancelaria
en uniones aduaneras y su aplicación al caso del MERCOSUR. Unidad de Análisis
Asesoría de Política Comercial Ministerio de Economía y Finanzas, Documento de
Trabajo Nº 1 Junio 2008.
Zhang, Z., Sato, K. and Mc Aleer, M. (2001). Is East Asia an Optimum Currency Area?
International Center for the Study of East Asian Development, Working Paper, No. 37.
Official Speeches
ABC Color, (March 29, 2009). Régimen presidencial impide al MERCOSUR poder
supranacional. Interview with Dr. Jorge Fontoura, Brazilian, Fifth Judge of
MERCOSUR’s Permanent Court of Arbitration. http://www.abc.com.py/edicionimpresa/
politica/regimen-presidencial-impide-al-mercosur-poder-supranacional-
1159444.html. (Last accessed: June 20, 2019).
Argentine Foreign Ministry (August 11, 2011). ALADI-Carlos “Chacho” Álvarez: discurso
de asunción como Secretario General (Speech pronounced by Former Argentinian Vice220
president, Carlos ‘Chacho’ Álvarez during his inauguration as General Secretary of the
Latin American Integration Association, ALADI). Montevideo, Uruguay.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0doGFRHrJ1A. (Last accessed: June 20, 2019).
Hausmann, R. (2010). Diversificación Económica y Prosperidad: Comentarios sobre el
Uruguay. Universidad Católica del Uruguay.
La Red 21, Uruguay (June 3, 2002). Irrelevancia internacional, desconfianza regional
(Editorial reflecting on President Cardoso’s comments regarding the US) “el hecho de
ser irrelevantes [para Estados Unidos] nos da espacio para hacer lo que queramos”.
http://www.lr21.com.uy/editorial/84752-irrelevancia-internacional-desconfianzaregional.
(Last accessed: June 20, 2019).
Organization of American States (March 3, 1991).Treaty Establishing a Common Market
between the Argentine Republic, the Federal Republic of Brazil, the Republic of
Paraguay and the Eastern Republic of Uruguay (Treaty od Asuncion).
http://www.sice.oas.org/trade/MRCSR/treatyasun_e.asp. (Last accessed: June 20, 2019).
The American Presidency Project (March, 2007). Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva Press Conference
with US President George W. Bush in Sao Paulo, Brazil.
http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/index.php?pid=24571. (Last accessed: June 20,
2019).
The White House, Office of the Press Secretary (March 4, 2009). Remarks by the President
on procurement. http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/remarks-presidentprocurement-
3409. (Last accessed: June 20, 2019).
Official documents
Alberola, E., Buisán, A. y Fernández de Lis, S. (2002). The quest for nominal and real
convergence trough integration in Europe and Latin America. Servicio de Estudios del
Banco de España. Documento de Trabajo No. 0213.
Alexander, E. W. (1996). The United States and Japan: Mutual Interests and Cooperation in
Latin America. U.S. Department of State Dispatch 7, 62-65.
221
Ayacucho Declaration. (2004). Pampa de La Quinua, Ayacucho, Diciembre 2004.
http://www.sice.oas.org/agreements_e.asp. (Last accessed: June 20, 2019).
Ayacucho Declaration. (December 9, 2004). Pampa de La Quinua, Ayacucho.
Banco Central de la República de Argentina (2016). Estadísticas e indicadores.
http://www.bcra.gov.ar. (Last accessed: June 20, 2019).
Banco Central del Paraguay (2018). Indicadores económicos. http://www.bcp.gov.py. (Last
accessed: June 20, 2019).
Banco Central del Uruguay (2018). Indicadores Económicos. http://www.bcu.gub.uy. (Last
accessed: June 20, 2019).
Banco Central do Brasil (2016). Economy and Finance, Exchange and Foreign Capital.
http://www.bcb.gov.br/?english. (Last accessed: June 20, 2019).
Banco Interamericano de Desarrollo (2000). Desarrollo más allá de la economía. Informe
Progreso Económico y Social de América Latina, IPES, Washington.
CEPAL (2009). América Latina y el Caribe. Series Históricas de Estadísticas Económicas.
1950-2008. División de Estadística y Proyecciones Económicas, Comisión Económica
para América Latina y el Caribe.
CEPAL, FAO, IICA (2010). Volatilidad de precios en los mercados agrícolas (2000 – 2010),
implicaciones para América Latina y Opciones de Política.
De Villalobos, R. (2015). El Comercio Agropecuario en el Mercosur. Veinte Años después del
Tratado de Asunción. BID-INTAL, Nota Técnica n° IDB-TN 809, de Junio 2015.
http://publications.iadb.org/. (Last accessed: June 20, 2019).
Declaration of Buenos Aires. (1971). International Legal Materials, vol. 10, No. 2, pp. 448-450.
Lucángeli, J. (1991). Integración comercial, intercambio intraindustrial y creación y desvío de
comercio: el intercambio comercial entre la Argentina y Brasil en los años recientes. In
Documento de Trabajo IE/01, Serie Int Eco. Secretaría de Programación Económica,
Proy Arg 91/019, PNUD.
222
Rodrik, D. (2005). Políticas de Diversificación Económica. Revista de la CEPAL, ISSN 1682-
0908, No. 87, pp. 7-23.
Treaty of Asuncion (1991). Treaty Establishing a Common Market between the Argentinian
Republic, the Federal Republic of Brazil, the Republic of Paraguay and the Eastern
Republic of Uruguay, March 3, 1991.
http://www.sice.oas.org/trade/MRCSR/treatyasun_e.asp. (Last accessed: June 20, 2019).
United Nations (2018). Human Development Report 2018. New York, United Nations
Development Program.
World Trade Organization (2010). Regional Trade Agreements Database (R.T.A.).
http://rtais.wto.org/UI/PublicAllRTAList.aspx. (Last accessed: June 20, 2019).
News sources
Bartesaghi, I. (2013). La encrucijada de la política exterior del Uruguay: ¿el Mercosur, la
Alianza del Pacífico o ambas? http://www.eldial.com/nuevo/index.asp. (Last accessed:
June 20, 2019).
C-span.org (January 1, 2003). Brazilian Presidential Inauguration (Speech by President Luiz
Inácio Lula da Silva at his Inaugural Ceremony), National Congress - Brasilia.
https://www.c-span.org/video/?174488-1/brazilian-presidential-inauguration. (Last
accessed: June 20, 2019).
pagina12.com. (October 3, 2006). Cómo el ballottage incide en Bolivia.
https://www.pagina12.com.ar/diario/elmundo/subnotas/73927-23962-2006-10-03.html.
(Last accessed: June 20, 2019).
Pinheiro, G. S. (2016). MERCOSUR y China: tres caminos. Dossier Caminhos e
Perspectivas da Integração Latino Americana, Ritimo.
https://www.ritimo.org/MERCOSUR-y-China-tres-caminos. (Last accessed: June 20,
2019).
223
The Washington Post (May 10, 2006). Bolivia Gas Plan Causes Rift in S. America.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wpdyn/
content/article/2006/05/10/AR2006051001243.html. (Last accessed: June 20,
2019).
電子全文 Fulltext
本電子全文僅授權使用者為學術研究之目的,進行個人非營利性質之檢索、閱讀、列印。請遵守中華民國著作權法之相關規定,切勿任意重製、散佈、改作、轉貼、播送,以免觸法。
論文使用權限 Thesis access permission:校內校外完全公開 unrestricted
開放時間 Available:
校內 Campus: 已公開 available
校外 Off-campus: 已公開 available


紙本論文 Printed copies
紙本論文的公開資訊在102學年度以後相對較為完整。如果需要查詢101學年度以前的紙本論文公開資訊,請聯繫圖資處紙本論文服務櫃台。如有不便之處敬請見諒。
開放時間 available 已公開 available

QR Code