學術產出-Theses
Article View/Open
Publication Export
-
題名 在獨立與依附之間：馬來西亞沙巴與砂拉越自主權運動研究
Between Independent and Dependent: A Research of Autonomy Movement in Sabah and Sarawak, Malaysia作者 周兆鴻
Hong, Chew Zhao貢獻者 孫采薇
Sun, Tsai-Wei
周兆鴻
Chew Zhao Hong關鍵詞 馬來西亞
沙巴
砂拉越
自主權
自治
比較政治
Malaysia
Sabah
Sarawak
Autonomy
Independence
Comparative Politics日期 2022 上傳時間 2-Sep-2022 15:22:52 (UTC+8) 摘要 1963年，馬來西亞在冷戰時局下匆匆成立，由馬來亞、沙巴（舊稱北婆羅洲）、砂拉越及新加坡共同組成。沙巴及砂拉越（簡稱「沙砂」）在1963年《馬來西亞協定》保障下享有多項自主權益，如海關、石油稅收、宗教、語言等。新加坡獨立之後，長期面對西馬為首的聯邦政府直接或間接干預沙砂內政，導致沙巴及砂拉越的自主權地位逐漸式微，從平等建國夥伴化為之後的馬來西亞第12、13州。然而，由於2013年之後的國陣政府受重創，砂拉越成為了國陣政府得以繼續執政的「造王者」（關鍵少數）。同時，具有強烈本土意識的阿德南上臺擔任砂首長，積極捍衛並爭取砂拉越自主權。砂拉越也出現許多以爭取自主權自居的民間團體組織，形成了一股結合體制內外的「自主權運動」。反之，原本有著一樣歷史條件的沙巴，卻在此時並未如同砂拉越般發展大規模的自主權運動。本文以層級分析法作為途徑，比較沙巴及砂拉越自主權運動在2013年後的方式及發展，以及不同層級所催生因素帶來的影響。結論發現，沙巴及砂拉越自主權運動作為東南亞新興的自治運動場域，許多對此課題的研究或報導，經常將沙巴及砂拉越作為同個歷史命運共同體，混為一談。但其實兩個地區之間在自主權運動的歷史條件、運作方式、困境等都有顯著的差異。砂拉越所掌握的條件暫時掌握優勢，並已發展出一定規模的「獨派」勢力，而鄰邦沙巴則面對外交及非法移民等「內憂外患」的窘境，使自主權運動及訴求進程緩慢。
Malaysia was hastily established in 1963 during the Cold War and was formed by Malaya, Sabah (formerly known as North Borneo), Sarawak and Singapore. Sabah and Sarawak enjoyed a number of autonomous rights, such as customs, petroleum taxation, religion, and language, under the guarantee of the founding contract Malaysia Agreement 1963. After Singapore`s independence from the federation, the federal government led by West Malaysia interfered directly or indirectly in the internal affairs of Sabah and Sarawak for a long time, resulting in the gradual decline of the autonomy in Sabah and Sarawak, from equal partners in nation-building “downgraded” to the 12th and 13th states of Malaysia. However, after 2013, Sarawak became the "kingmaker" for the BN (Barisan Nasional) government to remain in power as the BN government was severely damage after the 13th General Election. At the same time, Adenan Satem, who has a strong sense of localism, came to power as the Premier of Sarawak (formerly known as Chief Minister) and actively defended and fought for Sarawak`s autonomy. At the same time, many civil society organizations emerged in Sarawak that claimed to fight for autonomy, forming an "autonomy movement" that combined both inside and outside the system. On the contrary, Sabah had the same historical conditions but did not develop a large-scale autonomy movement like Sarawak did at this time.This paper uses hierarchical analysis as a way to compare the ways and developments of the autonomy movements in Sabah and Sarawak after 2013, as well as the effects of the factors spawned at different levels. The conclusion is that many studies and reports on the Sabah and Sarawak autonomy movements as emerging autonomy movements in Southeast Asia often confuse Sabah and Sarawak as the same historical common destiny. In fact, there are significant differences between the two regions in terms of historical conditions, operation, and dilemmas of the autonomy movement. Sarawak has a temporary advantage in terms of conditions and has developed a certain scale of "independent" power, while Sabah, the neighbouring state, faces the dilemma of both internal and external problems such as diplomacy and illegal immigration, which slow down the progress of the autonomy movement and its demands.參考文獻 （一）、中文資料 4政黨退出 砂國陣解散 砂也變天。(2018，6月12日)。光明日報。取自https://guangming.com.my/4%E6%94%BF%E9%BB%A8%E9%80%80%E5%87%BA-%E7%A0%82%E5%9C%8B%E9%99%A3%E8%A7%A3%E6%95%A3-%E7%A0%82%E4%B9%9F%E8%AE%8A%E5%A4%A9布羅代爾 (1987)。歷史和社會科學：長時段。史學理論，3，119。吳秀光 (2001)。政府談判之博弈理論分析，臺北市：時英。吳佳翰 (2020，8月7日)。菲律賓宣稱沙巴是「不可分割主權」，為何馬來西亞沙巴州首長卻異常沉默？關鍵評論。取自https://www.thenewslens.com/article/138847/fullpage吳益婷 (2015，9月7日) 。阿德南效應有待檢驗。燧火評論。取自http://www.pfirereview.com/20150907b/宋學文 (2008)。層次分析對國際關係研究的重要性及模型建構 [電子版]。問題與研究，47(4)，167-199。李泰德 (2018，6月15日)。沙巴強人政治與西瓜效應。當代評論。取自http://contemporary-review.com.my/2018/06/15/1-83/沙巴律師協會就40% 沙巴特別撥款爭議 入稟法庭申請司法檢討。(2022，6月9日)。華僑日報，取自 http://www.ocdn.com.my/news.cfm?NewsId=103330沙巴被冠全國最貧窮州屬劉靜芝：應獲更多財案撥款。(2020年，11月5日)。詩華日報。取自 https://news.seehua.com/?p=623505沙巴漢 (2013，1月21日)。沙巴身分證計畫剖析。當今大馬。取自https://www.malaysiakini.com/letters/219569治下宗教問題日趨嚴重 哈迪：阿都拉是弱勢首相。(2007，8月1日)。當今大馬。取自https://www.malaysiakini.com/news/70664阿德南：西馬領袖會背後插刀。(2015，6月4日)。百格新聞。取自https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7_FEh_7TdJs俞劍鴻 (2020，4月18日)。希望聯盟2.0是否能夠拿下砂拉越（州）的政權？台北論壇。取自https://www.taipeiforum.org.tw/article_d.php?lang=tw&tb=3&cid=168&id=6442施欣妤 (2018)。緬甸的族群衝突與管理之分析 : 以克欽族為例（1994～2015）。國立政治大學政治學系碩士論文，臺北市。洪泉湖、施正鋒、楊三億 (2017)。當代歐洲民族運動：從蘇格蘭獨立公投到克里米亞危機。臺北市：聯經。砂希盟承諾現金回饋石油稅。(2018，5月1日)。東方日報。取自https://www.orientaldaily.com.my/news/east-malaysia/2018/05/01/241373財長：砂州3年後恐破產。(2019，6月22日)。東方日報。取自https://www.orientaldaily.com.my/news/nation/2019/06/22/295353國慶慶典上 砂首長阿德南揶揄中央撥款。(2016，8月31日)。百格新聞。取自https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oOpCG3HZPr4張孝儀 (2019)。東西馬的差異與現實。當代評論。取自http://contemporary-review.com.my/2019/02/17/1-148/張慧芝 (譯) (2003)。多元社會的民主。臺北市：桂冠。(Arend Lijphart，1977)陳偉玉 (2010)。東馬華人與馬來西亞聯邦之組成。國立政治大學國家發展研究所博士論文，臺北市。曾指砂州3年後恐破產 砂首長：與火箭合作很愚蠢。(2020，2月29日)。透視大馬。取自 https://www.themalaysianinsight.com/chinese/s/223635黃秋偉 (2021，12月19日)。建議行動黨另立新黨 脫離西馬火箭光環。星洲日報。取自 https://sarawakelection.sinchew.com.my/20211219/190007kc1300/黃翰斌 (2008)。加拿大聯邦和魁北克主權運動(1976-2003)。國立臺灣大學政治學研究所碩士論文，臺北市。錢甄玲 (2021，9月14日)。砂全民團結黨：單方面宣佈砂獨很危險 光和獨立口號走不遠。星洲日報。取自 https://sarawak.sinchew.com.my/20210914/%E7%A0%82%E5%85%A8%E6%B0%91%E5%9B%A2%E7%BB%93%E5%85%9A%E4%B9%A1%EF%BC%9A%E5%8D%95%E6%96%B9%E9%9D%A2%E5%AE%A3%E5%B8%83%E7%A0%82%E7%8B%AC%E5%BE%88%E5%8D%B1%E9%99%A9-%EF%BC%8E%E5%85%89%E5%96%8A%E7%8B%AC/關家汶 (2020，9 月 8 日)。誰是薇薇奧娜？為什麽部長們要公開指責一名18歲少女說謊、造假？訪問 (The Interview)。取自 https://theinterview.asia/hot-topics/31839/ （二）英文與外文資料Abang Jo out to ensure Sarawak remains `fix-deposit` state for BN. (2017, October 05). The Sun daily. Retrieved from https://www.thesundaily.my/archive/abang-jo-out-ensure-sarawak-remains-fix-deposit-state-bn-YTARCH489660.Abang Jo: ‘Premier’ designation not for me but to differentiate Sarawak from other states. (2022, February 20). Malay Mail. Retrieved from https://www.malaymail.com/news/malaysia/2022/02/20/abang-jo-premier-designation-not-for-me-but-to-differentiate-sarawak-from-o/2042696Abang Johari ikrar teruskan dasar Adenan. (2017). Free Malaysia Today. Retrieved from https://beta2.freemalaysiatoday.net/post/abang-johari-ikrar-teruskan-dasar-adenanAdeline, Low H. C. (2001). The Past in the Present: Memories of the 1964 “Racial Riots” in Singapore [Electronic version]. Asian Journal of Social Science, 29(3), 431–455.Adenan affirms Sarawak will remain in Malaysia, behind PM. (2015, August 11). The Borneo Post. Retrieved from https://www.theborneopost.com/2015/08/11/adenan-affirms-sarawak-will-remain-in-malaysia-behind-pm/Adenan firm on Sarawak’s English policy, non-Muslim use of ‘Allah’. (2015, December 23). Malay Mail. Retrieved from https://www.malaymail.com/news/malaysia/2015/12/23/adenan-firm-on-sarawaks-english-policy-non-muslim-use-of-allah/1028447Ajamain, Z. (2015). The Queen`s Obligation & Inter-Governmental Committee Report. Kota Kinabalu: BruConn Sdn Bhd.Alaini, R. N. (2012). A Historical Perspective Of Federalism In Malaysia And Its Effects On The Current System Of Federalism. International Journal of Business, Economics and Law, 1, 125-129.Anand, R. (2013, May 6). Najib blames polls results on `Chinese tsunami`. Malaysiakini. Retrieved from https://www.malaysiakini.com/news/229231Anjumin, E. (2021, September 25). Call for MA63 final report to be made public. New Straits Times. Retrieved from https://www.nst.com.my/news/politics/2021/09/730730/call-ma63-final-report-be-made-publicAzhar, A. (2017, October 24). Warisan rides on `Sabahans for Sabah` concept. Malaysiakini. Retrieved from https://www.malaysiakini.com/news/399267Bala, B. (2003, January 6). Sabah dan Sarawak dalam Buku Teks Sejarah: Liputan dan Ketepatan. The Philippine Star. Retrieved from https://www.philstar.com/headlines/2003/01/06/190512/rp-pulls-out-sabah-welfare-officeBalqish, B. (2016, April 30). Taib tidak ganggu urusan kerajaan: Adenan. Sarawak Voice. Retrieved from https://sarawakvoice.com/2016/04/30/taib-tidak-ganggu-urusan-kerajaan-adenan/Bentham, J., & Schofield, P. (1995). Colonies, Commerce, and Constitutional Law: Rid Yourselves of Ultramaria and other writings on Spain and Spanish America. England: Clarendon Press.Bhattacharyya, H. (2010). Federalism in Asia: India, Pakistan and Malaysia. Abingdon: Routledge.Black, I. (1968). The ending of Brunei rule in Sabah, 1878–1902. Journal of the MalayanBranch of the Royal Asiatic Society 41(2): 176–192.Blauner, R. (1969). Internal Colonialism and Ghetto Revolt. Social Problems, 16(4), 393-408.Calica, A. (2003, January 6). RP pulls out Sabah welfare office.Casanova, P.G. (1975). Internal colonialism and national development. Studies inComparative International Development, 1, 27–37.Chin, J. (1995). The Politics of Federal Intervention: The Malaysian Experience. Department of International Relations, International Pacific College.Chin, J. (1996). PBDS and ethnicity in Sarawak politics. Journal of Contemporary Asia, 26, 512-526.Chin, J. (1997). Politics of federal intervention in Malaysia, with reference to Sarawak, Sabah and Kelantan. Journal of Commonwealth & Comparative Politics, 35(2), 96-120.Chin, J. (2004). Sabah and Sarawak: The More Things Change the More They Remain the Same. Southeast Asian Affairs, 156-168.Chin, U. H. (1996a). Chinese Politics in Sarawak: A study of the Sarawak United People’s Party. Oxford University Press.Cornelius, W., Martin, P. L. & Hollifield J. F. (1994). Introduction: The Ambivalent Quest for Control.” Controlling immigration: A global perspective, 3-41.DAP Sarawak willing to set aside differences to work with GPS to preserve PH govt, says Chong. (2020, February 29). The Borneo Post. Retrieved from https://www.theborneopost.com/2020/02/29/dap-sarawak-willing-to-set-aside-differences-to-work-with-gps-to-preserve-ph-govt-says-chong/Dent, M. J. (2004). Identity Politics: Filling the Gap Between Federalism and Independence. Burlington, VT: Ashgate.Elazar, D. J. (1999). How the Prismatic Form of Canadian Federalism both Unites and Divides Canada. Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs. Retrieved from https://www.jcpa.org/dje/articles2/canfed.htmErcan, S. A., & Hendriks, C. M. (2013). The democratic challenges and potential of localism: insights from deliberative democracy [Electronic version]. Policy Studies, 34(4), 422-440.Eusoff & Foo (2018, July 03). MACC: 15 files opened against Taib Mahmud but we can`t act against him. The Edge Markets. Retrieved from https://www.theedgemarkets.com/article/macc-15-files-opened-against-taib-mahmud-we-cant-act-against-himFaisal S. Hazis. (2012). Domination and contestation: Muslim bumiputera politics in Sarawak. Singapore: Institute of Southeast Asian Studies (ISEAS) Press.Fleurke, F. M., & Willemse, R. H. (2006). Measuring local autonomy: A decision-making approach. Local Government Studies, 32, 71-87.Francois, R. & Smith, M. (2003). The Four Dimensions of Canadian Federalism. In Rocher, F. & Smith, M. (Eds.), New Trends in Canadian Federalism (2nd ed.) (pp. 21-44). Toronto: Broadview Press.Gagnon, A. & Iacovino, R. (2016). Federalism, Citizenship and Quebec. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.Geraldine, A. (2017, November 7). Shell Excel in Oil Extraction from Sabah Deepwaters. New Straits Times. Retrieved from https://www.nst.com.my/business/2017/11/300512/shell-excel-oil-extraction-sabah-deepwaters Harding, A. (2017). Devolution of Powers in Sarawak: A Dynamic Process of Redesigning Territorial Governance in a Federal System. Asian Journal of Comparative Law, 12(2), 257-279. doi:10.1017/asjcl.2017.13Harding, A. J., & Chin, J. (2015). 50 Years of Malaysia: Federalism Revisited. Singapore : Marshall Cavendish International (Asia).John, C. H. O. (1967). The Federation of Malaysia: An Experiment in Nation-Building. The American Journal of Economics and Sociology, 26(4), 425-437.Jones, M. (2001). Conflict and Confrontation in South East Asia, 1961–1965: Britain, the United States, Indonesia and the Creation of Malaysia. New York: Cambridge University Press.Joseph, N. B. (2020, January 8). Don’t question my ancestry – Shafie. The Borneo Post. Retrieved from https://www.theborneopost.com/2020/01/08/dont-question-my-ancestry-shafie/Koslowski, R. (2000). Migrants and Citizens: Demographic Change in the European States System. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.Kua, K. S. (2007). May 13: Declassified Documents on the Malaysian Riots of 1969. Cheras, Kuala Lumpur: Suaram Komunikasi.Kymlicka, W. (1998). Human Rights and Ethnocultural Justice. Swansea: University of Wales.Lehning, P. B. (1998). Theories of secession (1st ed.). London: Routledge.Leigh, M. (1974). The Rising Moon: Political Change In Sarawak. Selangor: SIRDLijphart, A. (1977). Democracy in Plural Societies: A Comparative Exploration. New Haven: Yale University PressLim, R. (2008). Federal-State Relations in Sabah, Malaysia: The Berjaya Administration, 1976-85. Singapore: Institute of Southeast Asian Studies.Lo, J. (2016, March 27). Sabah’s costly living and economic future. Daily Express. Retrieved from http://www.dailyexpress.com.my/read.cfm?NewsID=1960Marilyn, T. (2016, February 25). Adenan reaffirms Sarawak’s recognition of UEC. The Borneo Post. Retrieved from https://www.theborneopost.com/2016/02/25/adenan-reaffirms-sarawaks-recognition-of-uec/Means, G. P. (1968). Eastern Malaysia: The Politics of Federalism. Asian Survey, 8(4), 289-308.Mersat, N. I. (2017). REALIGNMENT OF STATE–CENTRE RELATIONS: The Adenan Factor in Sarawak. Southeast Asian Affairs, 221–234. https://www.jstor.org/stable/26492604Milne, R. S. & Ratnam, K. J. (1974). Malaysia - New States in a New Nation: Political Development of Sarawak and Sabah in Malaysia. London: Frank Cass and Company Limited.Najib pledges bigger allocation for Sabah than 20% oil royalty. (2013, April 24). The Borneo Post. Retrieved from https://www.theborneopost.com/2013/04/24/najib-pledges-bigger-allocation-for-sabah-than-20-oil-royalty/Nordlinger, E. A. (1965). Democratic Stability and Instability: The French Case [Review of The Bureaucratic Phenomenon: An Examination of Bureaucracy in Modern Organizations and Its Cultural Setting in France., by M. Crozier]. World Politics, 18(1), 127-157.Ongkili, J. P. (1967). The Borneo Response to Malaysia, 1961-1963. Singapore: Donald Moore Press.Osman, M. N. M. (2017). A Transitioning Sabah in a Changing Malaysia. Kajian Malaysia, 35, 23-40. Pak Lah: I am prime minister, I decide. (2006, August 15). Malaysiakini. Retrieved from https://www.malaysiakini.com/news/55368 Petroleum payments to Sabah, Sarawak, Terengganu and Kelantan total RM61.32 Bln. (2020, November 11). The Sun daily. Retrieved fromhttps://www.thesundaily.my/local/petroleum-payments-to-sabah-sarawak-terengganu-and-kelantan-total-rm6132-bln-NK4941078 Petronas has no value without Sabah. (2014, April 26). Free Malaysia Today. Retrieved from Sarawak.https://www.freemalaysiatoday.com/category/opinion/2014/04/26/petronas-has-no-value-without-sabah-sarawak?fbclid=IwAR2sabM1T3hsVVLem1yPVdXD26kkBO7k1su40JfPN2weYyHuJYx5mwl3dpcPratchett, L. (2004). Local Autonomy, Local Democracy and the ‘New Localism’. Political Studies, 52(2), 358-375.Putnam, R. D. (1988). Diplomacy and Domestic Politics: The Logic of Two-Level Games. International Organization, 42(3), 427-460.Ram Anand (2013). Najib blames polls results on `Chinese tsunami`. Malaysiakini. https://www.malaysiakini.com/news/229231.Roff, M. C. (1974). The Politics of Belonging: Political Change in Sabah and Sarawak. Kuala Lumpur: Oxford University Press.Ronald, L. W. & Douglas M. B. (1991). Options for a New Canada. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.Sadiq, K. (2005). When States Prefer Non-Citizens over Citizens: Conflict over Illegal Immigration into Malaysia. International Studies Quarterly, 49(1), 101-122.Sanib Said. (1985). Malay Politics in Sarawak, 1946–1966: The search for unity andpolitical ascendancy. USA: Oxford University Press.Santos, J, (2020, December 22). RM1 bil federal funds for BRT in KK never came. The Vibes. Retrieved from https://www.thevibes.com/articles/news/10874/rm1-bil-federal-funds-for-brt-in-kk-never-cameSarawak civil service to continue using English officially, says Abang Johari. (2022, June 07). The Star. Retrieved from https://www.thestar.com.my/news/nation/2022/06/07/sarawak-civil-service-to-continue-using-english-officially-says-abang-johariSinger, John D. (1961). The Level-of-Analysis Problem in International Relations [Electronic version]. World Politics, 14(1), 77-92. Siroky, D. S., & Cuffe, J. (2015). Lost Autonomy, Nationalism and Separatism. Comparative Political Studies, 48(1), 3-34.Smith, J. (2004). Federalism. Vancouver: UBC Press.Stein, M. B. (1968). Federal political systems and federal societies. World Politics, 20(4), 721-747.Steiner, J. (1971). The Principles of Majority and Proportionality. British Journal of Political Science, 1(1), 63-70.Stockwell, A. J. (2003). Malaysia: the making of a grand design [Electronic version]. Asian Affairs, 34(3), 227-242.Tawie, S (2015, February 24). A year on, critics soften up to Sarawak CM Adenan. The Malay Mail. Retrieved from https://www.malaymail.com/news/malaysia/2015/02/24/a-year-on-critics-soften-up-to-sarawak-cm-adenan/847383Tommy Thomas: Spanish arbitrator Gonzalo Stampa acted unprofessionally in awarding RM63 bln to defunct Sulu sultanate. (2022, April 4). The Borneo Post. Retrieved from https://www.theborneopost.com/2022/04/04/tommy-thomas-spanish-arbitrator-gonzalo-stampa-acted-unprofessionally-in-awarding-rm63-bln-to-defunct-sulu-sultanate/ Webmaster, MT. (2016). Sarawak CM: I’m Adenan, not ‘Pek Moh’. Malaysia Today. Retrieved from https://www.malaysia-today.net/2016/04/30/sarawak-cm-im-adenan-not-pek-moh/Welsh, B., Somiah, V. & Loh, B. Y. H. (2021). Sabah from the Ground: The 2020 Elections and the Politics of Survival. Singapore: ISEAS Publishing.Wong, C. H. & Chin, J. (2011). Malaysia: Centralized Federalism in an Electoral One-Party State. In R. Saxena (Ed.), Varieties of Federal Governance: Major Contemporary Models (pp. 208-231). Foundation Books.Yeung, W. (2016). From Populism To Localism. New Bloom. Retrieved from https://newbloommag.net/2016/04/15/from-populism-to-localism/Zainun, N., & Hazis, F. S. (2015). Patronage, power and prowess: Barisan Nasional`s equilibrium dominance in East Malaysia. Kajian Malaysia (Journal of Malaysian Studies), Universiti Sains Malaysia. 描述 碩士
國立政治大學
政治學系
108252023資料來源 http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0108252023 資料類型 thesis dc.contributor.advisor 孫采薇 zh_TW dc.contributor.advisor Sun, Tsai-Wei en_US dc.contributor.author (Authors) 周兆鴻 zh_TW dc.contributor.author (Authors) Chew Zhao Hong en_US dc.creator (作者) 周兆鴻 zh_TW dc.creator (作者) Hong, Chew Zhao en_US dc.date (日期) 2022 en_US dc.date.accessioned 2-Sep-2022 15:22:52 (UTC+8) - dc.date.available 2-Sep-2022 15:22:52 (UTC+8) - dc.date.issued (上傳時間) 2-Sep-2022 15:22:52 (UTC+8) - dc.identifier (Other Identifiers) G0108252023 en_US dc.identifier.uri (URI) http://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/141724 - dc.description (描述) 碩士 zh_TW dc.description (描述) 國立政治大學 zh_TW dc.description (描述) 政治學系 zh_TW dc.description (描述) 108252023 zh_TW dc.description.abstract (摘要) 1963年，馬來西亞在冷戰時局下匆匆成立，由馬來亞、沙巴（舊稱北婆羅洲）、砂拉越及新加坡共同組成。沙巴及砂拉越（簡稱「沙砂」）在1963年《馬來西亞協定》保障下享有多項自主權益，如海關、石油稅收、宗教、語言等。新加坡獨立之後，長期面對西馬為首的聯邦政府直接或間接干預沙砂內政，導致沙巴及砂拉越的自主權地位逐漸式微，從平等建國夥伴化為之後的馬來西亞第12、13州。然而，由於2013年之後的國陣政府受重創，砂拉越成為了國陣政府得以繼續執政的「造王者」（關鍵少數）。同時，具有強烈本土意識的阿德南上臺擔任砂首長，積極捍衛並爭取砂拉越自主權。砂拉越也出現許多以爭取自主權自居的民間團體組織，形成了一股結合體制內外的「自主權運動」。反之，原本有著一樣歷史條件的沙巴，卻在此時並未如同砂拉越般發展大規模的自主權運動。本文以層級分析法作為途徑，比較沙巴及砂拉越自主權運動在2013年後的方式及發展，以及不同層級所催生因素帶來的影響。結論發現，沙巴及砂拉越自主權運動作為東南亞新興的自治運動場域，許多對此課題的研究或報導，經常將沙巴及砂拉越作為同個歷史命運共同體，混為一談。但其實兩個地區之間在自主權運動的歷史條件、運作方式、困境等都有顯著的差異。砂拉越所掌握的條件暫時掌握優勢，並已發展出一定規模的「獨派」勢力，而鄰邦沙巴則面對外交及非法移民等「內憂外患」的窘境，使自主權運動及訴求進程緩慢。 zh_TW dc.description.abstract (摘要) Malaysia was hastily established in 1963 during the Cold War and was formed by Malaya, Sabah (formerly known as North Borneo), Sarawak and Singapore. Sabah and Sarawak enjoyed a number of autonomous rights, such as customs, petroleum taxation, religion, and language, under the guarantee of the founding contract Malaysia Agreement 1963. After Singapore`s independence from the federation, the federal government led by West Malaysia interfered directly or indirectly in the internal affairs of Sabah and Sarawak for a long time, resulting in the gradual decline of the autonomy in Sabah and Sarawak, from equal partners in nation-building “downgraded” to the 12th and 13th states of Malaysia. However, after 2013, Sarawak became the "kingmaker" for the BN (Barisan Nasional) government to remain in power as the BN government was severely damage after the 13th General Election. At the same time, Adenan Satem, who has a strong sense of localism, came to power as the Premier of Sarawak (formerly known as Chief Minister) and actively defended and fought for Sarawak`s autonomy. At the same time, many civil society organizations emerged in Sarawak that claimed to fight for autonomy, forming an "autonomy movement" that combined both inside and outside the system. On the contrary, Sabah had the same historical conditions but did not develop a large-scale autonomy movement like Sarawak did at this time.This paper uses hierarchical analysis as a way to compare the ways and developments of the autonomy movements in Sabah and Sarawak after 2013, as well as the effects of the factors spawned at different levels. The conclusion is that many studies and reports on the Sabah and Sarawak autonomy movements as emerging autonomy movements in Southeast Asia often confuse Sabah and Sarawak as the same historical common destiny. In fact, there are significant differences between the two regions in terms of historical conditions, operation, and dilemmas of the autonomy movement. Sarawak has a temporary advantage in terms of conditions and has developed a certain scale of "independent" power, while Sabah, the neighbouring state, faces the dilemma of both internal and external problems such as diplomacy and illegal immigration, which slow down the progress of the autonomy movement and its demands. en_US dc.description.tableofcontents 表次 7圖次 8第一章 緒論 9第一節 研究背景 10第二節 研究動機與論文架構 16第三節 研究方法與資料來源 21第四節 個案與時間選擇 22第五節 章節安排 23第六節 研究貢獻與限制 23第二章 文獻回顧 25第一節 馬來西亞成立與沙巴、砂拉越的「特殊地位」 25第二節 聯邦主義相關文獻回顧 28第三節 「自主權運動」、自治運動與分離主義 32第四節 小結 35第三章 因勢利導的砂拉越自主權運動 37第一節 砂拉越自主權背景概述 （1963-2013） 38第二節 砂拉越自主權運動近期發展（2013-2022） 40第三節 砂拉越自主權運動之國家層級因素 44第四節 砂拉越自主權運動之地方層級因素 50第五節 小結 64第四章 內憂外患的沙巴自主權運動 67第一節 沙巴自主權背景（1963-2013） 68第三節 沙巴自主權運動近期發展 (2013-2022) 70第三節 沙巴自主權運動之國家層級因素 73第四節 沙巴自主權運動之地方層級因素 80第五節 小結 98第五章 結論 101第一節 研究發現 101第二節 研究展望 106參考資料 110 zh_TW dc.format.extent 8310710 bytes - dc.format.mimetype application/pdf - dc.source.uri (資料來源) http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0108252023 en_US dc.subject (關鍵詞) 馬來西亞 zh_TW dc.subject (關鍵詞) 沙巴 zh_TW dc.subject (關鍵詞) 砂拉越 zh_TW dc.subject (關鍵詞) 自主權 zh_TW dc.subject (關鍵詞) 自治 zh_TW dc.subject (關鍵詞) 比較政治 zh_TW dc.subject (關鍵詞) Malaysia en_US dc.subject (關鍵詞) Sabah en_US dc.subject (關鍵詞) Sarawak en_US dc.subject (關鍵詞) Autonomy en_US dc.subject (關鍵詞) Independence en_US dc.subject (關鍵詞) Comparative Politics en_US dc.title (題名) 在獨立與依附之間：馬來西亞沙巴與砂拉越自主權運動研究 zh_TW dc.title (題名) Between Independent and Dependent: A Research of Autonomy Movement in Sabah and Sarawak, Malaysia en_US dc.type (資料類型) thesis en_US dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) （一）、中文資料 4政黨退出 砂國陣解散 砂也變天。(2018，6月12日)。光明日報。取自https://guangming.com.my/4%E6%94%BF%E9%BB%A8%E9%80%80%E5%87%BA-%E7%A0%82%E5%9C%8B%E9%99%A3%E8%A7%A3%E6%95%A3-%E7%A0%82%E4%B9%9F%E8%AE%8A%E5%A4%A9布羅代爾 (1987)。歷史和社會科學：長時段。史學理論，3，119。吳秀光 (2001)。政府談判之博弈理論分析，臺北市：時英。吳佳翰 (2020，8月7日)。菲律賓宣稱沙巴是「不可分割主權」，為何馬來西亞沙巴州首長卻異常沉默？關鍵評論。取自https://www.thenewslens.com/article/138847/fullpage吳益婷 (2015，9月7日) 。阿德南效應有待檢驗。燧火評論。取自http://www.pfirereview.com/20150907b/宋學文 (2008)。層次分析對國際關係研究的重要性及模型建構 [電子版]。問題與研究，47(4)，167-199。李泰德 (2018，6月15日)。沙巴強人政治與西瓜效應。當代評論。取自http://contemporary-review.com.my/2018/06/15/1-83/沙巴律師協會就40% 沙巴特別撥款爭議 入稟法庭申請司法檢討。(2022，6月9日)。華僑日報，取自 http://www.ocdn.com.my/news.cfm?NewsId=103330沙巴被冠全國最貧窮州屬劉靜芝：應獲更多財案撥款。(2020年，11月5日)。詩華日報。取自 https://news.seehua.com/?p=623505沙巴漢 (2013，1月21日)。沙巴身分證計畫剖析。當今大馬。取自https://www.malaysiakini.com/letters/219569治下宗教問題日趨嚴重 哈迪：阿都拉是弱勢首相。(2007，8月1日)。當今大馬。取自https://www.malaysiakini.com/news/70664阿德南：西馬領袖會背後插刀。(2015，6月4日)。百格新聞。取自https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7_FEh_7TdJs俞劍鴻 (2020，4月18日)。希望聯盟2.0是否能夠拿下砂拉越（州）的政權？台北論壇。取自https://www.taipeiforum.org.tw/article_d.php?lang=tw&tb=3&cid=168&id=6442施欣妤 (2018)。緬甸的族群衝突與管理之分析 : 以克欽族為例（1994～2015）。國立政治大學政治學系碩士論文，臺北市。洪泉湖、施正鋒、楊三億 (2017)。當代歐洲民族運動：從蘇格蘭獨立公投到克里米亞危機。臺北市：聯經。砂希盟承諾現金回饋石油稅。(2018，5月1日)。東方日報。取自https://www.orientaldaily.com.my/news/east-malaysia/2018/05/01/241373財長：砂州3年後恐破產。(2019，6月22日)。東方日報。取自https://www.orientaldaily.com.my/news/nation/2019/06/22/295353國慶慶典上 砂首長阿德南揶揄中央撥款。(2016，8月31日)。百格新聞。取自https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oOpCG3HZPr4張孝儀 (2019)。東西馬的差異與現實。當代評論。取自http://contemporary-review.com.my/2019/02/17/1-148/張慧芝 (譯) (2003)。多元社會的民主。臺北市：桂冠。(Arend Lijphart，1977)陳偉玉 (2010)。東馬華人與馬來西亞聯邦之組成。國立政治大學國家發展研究所博士論文，臺北市。曾指砂州3年後恐破產 砂首長：與火箭合作很愚蠢。(2020，2月29日)。透視大馬。取自 https://www.themalaysianinsight.com/chinese/s/223635黃秋偉 (2021，12月19日)。建議行動黨另立新黨 脫離西馬火箭光環。星洲日報。取自 https://sarawakelection.sinchew.com.my/20211219/190007kc1300/黃翰斌 (2008)。加拿大聯邦和魁北克主權運動(1976-2003)。國立臺灣大學政治學研究所碩士論文，臺北市。錢甄玲 (2021，9月14日)。砂全民團結黨：單方面宣佈砂獨很危險 光和獨立口號走不遠。星洲日報。取自 https://sarawak.sinchew.com.my/20210914/%E7%A0%82%E5%85%A8%E6%B0%91%E5%9B%A2%E7%BB%93%E5%85%9A%E4%B9%A1%EF%BC%9A%E5%8D%95%E6%96%B9%E9%9D%A2%E5%AE%A3%E5%B8%83%E7%A0%82%E7%8B%AC%E5%BE%88%E5%8D%B1%E9%99%A9-%EF%BC%8E%E5%85%89%E5%96%8A%E7%8B%AC/關家汶 (2020，9 月 8 日)。誰是薇薇奧娜？為什麽部長們要公開指責一名18歲少女說謊、造假？訪問 (The Interview)。取自 https://theinterview.asia/hot-topics/31839/ （二）英文與外文資料Abang Jo out to ensure Sarawak remains `fix-deposit` state for BN. (2017, October 05). The Sun daily. Retrieved from https://www.thesundaily.my/archive/abang-jo-out-ensure-sarawak-remains-fix-deposit-state-bn-YTARCH489660.Abang Jo: ‘Premier’ designation not for me but to differentiate Sarawak from other states. (2022, February 20). Malay Mail. Retrieved from https://www.malaymail.com/news/malaysia/2022/02/20/abang-jo-premier-designation-not-for-me-but-to-differentiate-sarawak-from-o/2042696Abang Johari ikrar teruskan dasar Adenan. (2017). Free Malaysia Today. Retrieved from https://beta2.freemalaysiatoday.net/post/abang-johari-ikrar-teruskan-dasar-adenanAdeline, Low H. C. (2001). The Past in the Present: Memories of the 1964 “Racial Riots” in Singapore [Electronic version]. Asian Journal of Social Science, 29(3), 431–455.Adenan affirms Sarawak will remain in Malaysia, behind PM. (2015, August 11). The Borneo Post. Retrieved from https://www.theborneopost.com/2015/08/11/adenan-affirms-sarawak-will-remain-in-malaysia-behind-pm/Adenan firm on Sarawak’s English policy, non-Muslim use of ‘Allah’. (2015, December 23). Malay Mail. Retrieved from https://www.malaymail.com/news/malaysia/2015/12/23/adenan-firm-on-sarawaks-english-policy-non-muslim-use-of-allah/1028447Ajamain, Z. (2015). The Queen`s Obligation & Inter-Governmental Committee Report. Kota Kinabalu: BruConn Sdn Bhd.Alaini, R. N. (2012). A Historical Perspective Of Federalism In Malaysia And Its Effects On The Current System Of Federalism. International Journal of Business, Economics and Law, 1, 125-129.Anand, R. (2013, May 6). Najib blames polls results on `Chinese tsunami`. Malaysiakini. Retrieved from https://www.malaysiakini.com/news/229231Anjumin, E. (2021, September 25). Call for MA63 final report to be made public. New Straits Times. Retrieved from https://www.nst.com.my/news/politics/2021/09/730730/call-ma63-final-report-be-made-publicAzhar, A. (2017, October 24). Warisan rides on `Sabahans for Sabah` concept. Malaysiakini. Retrieved from https://www.malaysiakini.com/news/399267Bala, B. (2003, January 6). Sabah dan Sarawak dalam Buku Teks Sejarah: Liputan dan Ketepatan. The Philippine Star. Retrieved from https://www.philstar.com/headlines/2003/01/06/190512/rp-pulls-out-sabah-welfare-officeBalqish, B. (2016, April 30). Taib tidak ganggu urusan kerajaan: Adenan. Sarawak Voice. Retrieved from https://sarawakvoice.com/2016/04/30/taib-tidak-ganggu-urusan-kerajaan-adenan/Bentham, J., & Schofield, P. (1995). Colonies, Commerce, and Constitutional Law: Rid Yourselves of Ultramaria and other writings on Spain and Spanish America. England: Clarendon Press.Bhattacharyya, H. (2010). Federalism in Asia: India, Pakistan and Malaysia. Abingdon: Routledge.Black, I. (1968). The ending of Brunei rule in Sabah, 1878–1902. Journal of the MalayanBranch of the Royal Asiatic Society 41(2): 176–192.Blauner, R. (1969). Internal Colonialism and Ghetto Revolt. Social Problems, 16(4), 393-408.Calica, A. (2003, January 6). RP pulls out Sabah welfare office.Casanova, P.G. (1975). Internal colonialism and national development. Studies inComparative International Development, 1, 27–37.Chin, J. (1995). The Politics of Federal Intervention: The Malaysian Experience. Department of International Relations, International Pacific College.Chin, J. (1996). PBDS and ethnicity in Sarawak politics. Journal of Contemporary Asia, 26, 512-526.Chin, J. (1997). Politics of federal intervention in Malaysia, with reference to Sarawak, Sabah and Kelantan. Journal of Commonwealth & Comparative Politics, 35(2), 96-120.Chin, J. (2004). Sabah and Sarawak: The More Things Change the More They Remain the Same. Southeast Asian Affairs, 156-168.Chin, U. H. (1996a). Chinese Politics in Sarawak: A study of the Sarawak United People’s Party. Oxford University Press.Cornelius, W., Martin, P. L. & Hollifield J. F. (1994). Introduction: The Ambivalent Quest for Control.” Controlling immigration: A global perspective, 3-41.DAP Sarawak willing to set aside differences to work with GPS to preserve PH govt, says Chong. (2020, February 29). The Borneo Post. Retrieved from https://www.theborneopost.com/2020/02/29/dap-sarawak-willing-to-set-aside-differences-to-work-with-gps-to-preserve-ph-govt-says-chong/Dent, M. J. (2004). Identity Politics: Filling the Gap Between Federalism and Independence. Burlington, VT: Ashgate.Elazar, D. J. (1999). How the Prismatic Form of Canadian Federalism both Unites and Divides Canada. Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs. Retrieved from https://www.jcpa.org/dje/articles2/canfed.htmErcan, S. A., & Hendriks, C. M. (2013). The democratic challenges and potential of localism: insights from deliberative democracy [Electronic version]. Policy Studies, 34(4), 422-440.Eusoff & Foo (2018, July 03). MACC: 15 files opened against Taib Mahmud but we can`t act against him. The Edge Markets. Retrieved from https://www.theedgemarkets.com/article/macc-15-files-opened-against-taib-mahmud-we-cant-act-against-himFaisal S. Hazis. (2012). Domination and contestation: Muslim bumiputera politics in Sarawak. Singapore: Institute of Southeast Asian Studies (ISEAS) Press.Fleurke, F. M., & Willemse, R. H. (2006). Measuring local autonomy: A decision-making approach. Local Government Studies, 32, 71-87.Francois, R. & Smith, M. (2003). The Four Dimensions of Canadian Federalism. In Rocher, F. & Smith, M. (Eds.), New Trends in Canadian Federalism (2nd ed.) (pp. 21-44). Toronto: Broadview Press.Gagnon, A. & Iacovino, R. (2016). Federalism, Citizenship and Quebec. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.Geraldine, A. (2017, November 7). Shell Excel in Oil Extraction from Sabah Deepwaters. New Straits Times. Retrieved from https://www.nst.com.my/business/2017/11/300512/shell-excel-oil-extraction-sabah-deepwaters Harding, A. (2017). Devolution of Powers in Sarawak: A Dynamic Process of Redesigning Territorial Governance in a Federal System. Asian Journal of Comparative Law, 12(2), 257-279. doi:10.1017/asjcl.2017.13Harding, A. J., & Chin, J. (2015). 50 Years of Malaysia: Federalism Revisited. Singapore : Marshall Cavendish International (Asia).John, C. H. O. (1967). The Federation of Malaysia: An Experiment in Nation-Building. The American Journal of Economics and Sociology, 26(4), 425-437.Jones, M. (2001). Conflict and Confrontation in South East Asia, 1961–1965: Britain, the United States, Indonesia and the Creation of Malaysia. New York: Cambridge University Press.Joseph, N. B. (2020, January 8). Don’t question my ancestry – Shafie. The Borneo Post. Retrieved from https://www.theborneopost.com/2020/01/08/dont-question-my-ancestry-shafie/Koslowski, R. (2000). Migrants and Citizens: Demographic Change in the European States System. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.Kua, K. S. (2007). May 13: Declassified Documents on the Malaysian Riots of 1969. Cheras, Kuala Lumpur: Suaram Komunikasi.Kymlicka, W. (1998). Human Rights and Ethnocultural Justice. Swansea: University of Wales.Lehning, P. B. (1998). Theories of secession (1st ed.). London: Routledge.Leigh, M. (1974). The Rising Moon: Political Change In Sarawak. Selangor: SIRDLijphart, A. (1977). Democracy in Plural Societies: A Comparative Exploration. New Haven: Yale University PressLim, R. (2008). Federal-State Relations in Sabah, Malaysia: The Berjaya Administration, 1976-85. Singapore: Institute of Southeast Asian Studies.Lo, J. (2016, March 27). Sabah’s costly living and economic future. Daily Express. Retrieved from http://www.dailyexpress.com.my/read.cfm?NewsID=1960Marilyn, T. (2016, February 25). Adenan reaffirms Sarawak’s recognition of UEC. The Borneo Post. Retrieved from https://www.theborneopost.com/2016/02/25/adenan-reaffirms-sarawaks-recognition-of-uec/Means, G. P. (1968). Eastern Malaysia: The Politics of Federalism. Asian Survey, 8(4), 289-308.Mersat, N. I. (2017). REALIGNMENT OF STATE–CENTRE RELATIONS: The Adenan Factor in Sarawak. Southeast Asian Affairs, 221–234. https://www.jstor.org/stable/26492604Milne, R. S. & Ratnam, K. J. (1974). Malaysia - New States in a New Nation: Political Development of Sarawak and Sabah in Malaysia. London: Frank Cass and Company Limited.Najib pledges bigger allocation for Sabah than 20% oil royalty. (2013, April 24). The Borneo Post. Retrieved from https://www.theborneopost.com/2013/04/24/najib-pledges-bigger-allocation-for-sabah-than-20-oil-royalty/Nordlinger, E. A. (1965). Democratic Stability and Instability: The French Case [Review of The Bureaucratic Phenomenon: An Examination of Bureaucracy in Modern Organizations and Its Cultural Setting in France., by M. Crozier]. World Politics, 18(1), 127-157.Ongkili, J. P. (1967). The Borneo Response to Malaysia, 1961-1963. Singapore: Donald Moore Press.Osman, M. N. M. (2017). A Transitioning Sabah in a Changing Malaysia. Kajian Malaysia, 35, 23-40. Pak Lah: I am prime minister, I decide. (2006, August 15). Malaysiakini. Retrieved from https://www.malaysiakini.com/news/55368 Petroleum payments to Sabah, Sarawak, Terengganu and Kelantan total RM61.32 Bln. (2020, November 11). The Sun daily. Retrieved fromhttps://www.thesundaily.my/local/petroleum-payments-to-sabah-sarawak-terengganu-and-kelantan-total-rm6132-bln-NK4941078 Petronas has no value without Sabah. (2014, April 26). Free Malaysia Today. Retrieved from Sarawak.https://www.freemalaysiatoday.com/category/opinion/2014/04/26/petronas-has-no-value-without-sabah-sarawak?fbclid=IwAR2sabM1T3hsVVLem1yPVdXD26kkBO7k1su40JfPN2weYyHuJYx5mwl3dpcPratchett, L. (2004). Local Autonomy, Local Democracy and the ‘New Localism’. Political Studies, 52(2), 358-375.Putnam, R. D. (1988). Diplomacy and Domestic Politics: The Logic of Two-Level Games. International Organization, 42(3), 427-460.Ram Anand (2013). Najib blames polls results on `Chinese tsunami`. Malaysiakini. https://www.malaysiakini.com/news/229231.Roff, M. C. (1974). The Politics of Belonging: Political Change in Sabah and Sarawak. Kuala Lumpur: Oxford University Press.Ronald, L. W. & Douglas M. B. (1991). Options for a New Canada. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.Sadiq, K. (2005). When States Prefer Non-Citizens over Citizens: Conflict over Illegal Immigration into Malaysia. International Studies Quarterly, 49(1), 101-122.Sanib Said. (1985). Malay Politics in Sarawak, 1946–1966: The search for unity andpolitical ascendancy. USA: Oxford University Press.Santos, J, (2020, December 22). RM1 bil federal funds for BRT in KK never came. The Vibes. Retrieved from https://www.thevibes.com/articles/news/10874/rm1-bil-federal-funds-for-brt-in-kk-never-cameSarawak civil service to continue using English officially, says Abang Johari. (2022, June 07). The Star. Retrieved from https://www.thestar.com.my/news/nation/2022/06/07/sarawak-civil-service-to-continue-using-english-officially-says-abang-johariSinger, John D. (1961). The Level-of-Analysis Problem in International Relations [Electronic version]. World Politics, 14(1), 77-92. Siroky, D. S., & Cuffe, J. (2015). Lost Autonomy, Nationalism and Separatism. Comparative Political Studies, 48(1), 3-34.Smith, J. (2004). Federalism. Vancouver: UBC Press.Stein, M. B. (1968). Federal political systems and federal societies. World Politics, 20(4), 721-747.Steiner, J. (1971). The Principles of Majority and Proportionality. British Journal of Political Science, 1(1), 63-70.Stockwell, A. J. (2003). Malaysia: the making of a grand design [Electronic version]. Asian Affairs, 34(3), 227-242.Tawie, S (2015, February 24). A year on, critics soften up to Sarawak CM Adenan. The Malay Mail. Retrieved from https://www.malaymail.com/news/malaysia/2015/02/24/a-year-on-critics-soften-up-to-sarawak-cm-adenan/847383Tommy Thomas: Spanish arbitrator Gonzalo Stampa acted unprofessionally in awarding RM63 bln to defunct Sulu sultanate. (2022, April 4). The Borneo Post. Retrieved from https://www.theborneopost.com/2022/04/04/tommy-thomas-spanish-arbitrator-gonzalo-stampa-acted-unprofessionally-in-awarding-rm63-bln-to-defunct-sulu-sultanate/ Webmaster, MT. (2016). Sarawak CM: I’m Adenan, not ‘Pek Moh’. Malaysia Today. Retrieved from https://www.malaysia-today.net/2016/04/30/sarawak-cm-im-adenan-not-pek-moh/Welsh, B., Somiah, V. & Loh, B. Y. H. (2021). Sabah from the Ground: The 2020 Elections and the Politics of Survival. Singapore: ISEAS Publishing.Wong, C. H. & Chin, J. (2011). Malaysia: Centralized Federalism in an Electoral One-Party State. In R. Saxena (Ed.), Varieties of Federal Governance: Major Contemporary Models (pp. 208-231). Foundation Books.Yeung, W. (2016). From Populism To Localism. New Bloom. Retrieved from https://newbloommag.net/2016/04/15/from-populism-to-localism/Zainun, N., & Hazis, F. S. (2015). Patronage, power and prowess: Barisan Nasional`s equilibrium dominance in East Malaysia. Kajian Malaysia (Journal of Malaysian Studies), Universiti Sains Malaysia. zh_TW dc.identifier.doi (DOI) 10.6814/NCCU202201313 en_US
