東華大學圖書館 |

語系: 繁體中文

說明(常見問題)

回圖書館首頁

手機版館藏查詢

登入

回首頁

切換: 標籤 | MARC模式 | ISBD

Power, identity and multilateralism:...

Capie, David Hamish.

FindBook

Google Book

Amazon

博客來

Power, identity and multilateralism: The United States and regional institutionalization in the Asia-Pacific.

紀錄類型:	書目-語言資料,印刷品 : Monograph/item
正題名/作者:	Power, identity and multilateralism: The United States and regional institutionalization in the Asia-Pacific./
作者:	Capie, David Hamish.
面頁冊數:	247 p.
附註:	Adviser: Amitav Acharya.
Contained By:	Dissertation Abstracts International63-09A.
標題:	History, Asia, Australia and Oceania. -
電子資源:	http://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/twdaoapp/servlet/advanced?query=NQ71966
ISBN:	0612719669

Power, identity and multilateralism: The United States and regional institutionalization in the Asia-Pacific.
Capie, David Hamish.

Power, identity and multilateralism: The United States and regional institutionalization in the Asia-Pacific. - 247 p.

Adviser: Amitav Acharya.

Thesis (Ph.D.)--York University (Canada), 2002.

This dissertation addresses the apparently anomalous pattern of Asia-Pacific institution-building since World War II. Why were the United States, Canada and the countries of Western Europe able to forge a successful multilateral alliance across the Atlantic after World War II, but in the Pacific, a ‘hub and spokes’ bilateral model of alliances between the U.S. and six Asian states was all that resulted? Similarly, why did the Asia-Pacific's multilateral institutions only begin to appear after 1989? Traditional theories of institutional development claim that a dominant hegemon is a prerequisite for the creation of multilateral institutions. Why then, in Asia, did it take the apparent decline of American hegemony before multilateral institutions like Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) and the ASEAN Regional Forum (ARF) appeared?

ISBN: 0612719669Subjects--Topical Terms:

626624
History, Asia, Australia and Oceania.

Power, identity and multilateralism: The United States and regional institutionalization in the Asia-Pacific.
LDR:03356nam 2200337 a 45 001 933483
005 20110505
008 110505s2002 eng d
020 $a 0612719669
035 $a (UnM)AAINQ71966
035 $a AAINQ71966
040 $a UnM $c UnM
100 1 $a Capie, David Hamish. $3 1257212
245 1 0 $a Power, identity and multilateralism: The United States and regional institutionalization in the Asia-Pacific.
300 $a 247 p.
500 $a Adviser: Amitav Acharya.
500 $a Source: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 63-09, Section: A, page: 3346.
502 $a Thesis (Ph.D.)--York University (Canada), 2002.
520 $a This dissertation addresses the apparently anomalous pattern of Asia-Pacific institution-building since World War II. Why were the United States, Canada and the countries of Western Europe able to forge a successful multilateral alliance across the Atlantic after World War II, but in the Pacific, a ‘hub and spokes’ bilateral model of alliances between the U.S. and six Asian states was all that resulted? Similarly, why did the Asia-Pacific's multilateral institutions only begin to appear after 1989? Traditional theories of institutional development claim that a dominant hegemon is a prerequisite for the creation of multilateral institutions. Why then, in Asia, did it take the apparent decline of American hegemony before multilateral institutions like Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) and the ASEAN Regional Forum (ARF) appeared?
520 $a Few explanations for the ‘Asia-Pacific anomaly’ have been offered. Rationalist approaches such as neorealism and hegemonic stability theory do not perform well when considered against these two cases. Threat-based realism and neoliberalism retain some explanatory value, but they do not capture important parts of the process whereby the United States was persuaded to accept the creation of multilateral dialogues like the ARF.
520 $a Rather than focussing on the distribution of capabilities, the balance of threats or the role of material incentives in explaining cooperation, this dissertation looks at the social structure of trans-Pacific relations. It argues that only by taking into account different cultural and political norms can we explain the apparently anomalous pattern of Asia-Pacific institution-building after World War II. Only by factoring in a role for ideas, socialisation and social influences can we explain how an incipient regional identity has been formed that overcame identity dissonance and allowed for multilateral institutions to bloom since 1989.
520 $a The dissertation concludes that there is a need for theorising that accords greater priority to identity and ideas, without eliminating the insights gained from materialist and threat-based approaches. It supports calls for the adoption of an eclectic approach to theorising of regional security issues in the Asia-Pacific, and urges more analysis of the transformation of the American bilateral alliance system.
590 $a School code: 0267.
650 4 $a History, Asia, Australia and Oceania. $3 626624
650 4 $a History, Modern. $3 516334
650 4 $a History, United States. $3 1017393
650 4 $a Political Science, International Law and Relations. $3 1017399
690 $a 0332
690 $a 0337
690 $a 0582
690 $a 0616
710 2 0 $a York University (Canada). $3 1017889
773 0 $t Dissertation Abstracts International $g 63-09A.
790 $a 0267
790 1 0 $a Acharya, Amitav, $e advisor
791 $a Ph.D.
792 $a 2002
856 4 0 $u http://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/twdaoapp/servlet/advanced?query=NQ71966