Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://ah.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/65425
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor國際事務學院en_US
dc.creator石之瑜;黃瓊萩zh_TW
dc.creatorShih, Chih-Yu; Huang, Chiung- Chiuen_US
dc.date2013.03en_US
dc.date.accessioned2014-04-16T02:23:00Z-
dc.date.available2014-04-16T02:23:00Z-
dc.date.issued2014-04-16T02:23:00Z-
dc.identifier.urihttp://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/65425-
dc.description.abstractThe present study traces the cultural and political contexts within which Beijing considers global governance. They include: (1) Confucian dispositions toward non-interventionism and self-governance; (2) the socialist collectivist ethics that stress persuasion instead of unilateralism; (3) a lingering sense of inferiority arising from underdevelopment that harms self-confidence; and (4) the repugnant experiences with the United Nations (UN) and the United States that have dominated most international organizations since World War II. The consequential Chinese style of global governance is reactive rather than proactive, problem-solving rather than goal-driven, and attentive to obligation and reform more in other major countries than in failing states. That said, China could still assert global leadership by acting as a model of self-governance for other major countries and by intervening in failing states only through closed-door persuasion and exemplification as opposed to open sanctioning.en_US
dc.description.abstractThe present study traces the cultural and political contexts within which Beijing considers global governance. They include: (1) Confucian dispositions toward non-interventionism and self-governance; (2) the socialist collectivist ethics that stress persuasion instead of unilateralism; (3) a lingering sense of inferiority arising from underdevelopment that harms self-confidence; and (4) the repugnant experiences with the United Nations (UN) and the United States that have dominated most international organizations since World War II. The consequential Chinese style of global governance is reactive rather than proactive, problem-solving rather than goal-driven, and attentive to obligation and reform more in other major countries than in failing states. That said, China could still assert global leadership by acting as a model of self-governance for other major countries and by intervening in failing states only through closed-door persuasion and exemplification as opposed to open sanctioning.en_US
dc.format.extent141174 bytes-
dc.format.mimetypeapplication/pdf-
dc.language.isoen_US-
dc.relationJournal of Contemporary China, 22(80), 351-365en_US
dc.titlePreaching Self-Responsibility: the Chinese style of global governanceen_US
dc.typearticleen
item.openairetypearticle-
item.grantfulltextrestricted-
item.openairecristypehttp://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_18cf-
item.cerifentitytypePublications-
item.fulltextWith Fulltext-
item.languageiso639-1en_US-
Appears in Collections:期刊論文
Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat
351365.pdf137.87 kBAdobe PDF2View/Open
Show simple item record

Google ScholarTM

Check


Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.