首页> 外文学位 >TECHNOLOGY, POLITICS, AND WORLD ORDER: A CROSS-ISSUE ANALYSIS OF FUNCTIONAL COOPERATION AMONG ADVANCED INDUSTRIAL COUNTRIES.
【24h】

TECHNOLOGY, POLITICS, AND WORLD ORDER: A CROSS-ISSUE ANALYSIS OF FUNCTIONAL COOPERATION AMONG ADVANCED INDUSTRIAL COUNTRIES.

机译:技术,政治与世界秩序:先进工业国家之间功能合作的跨问题分析。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例

摘要

The primary purpose of the study is to explore the hypothesis that the domestic structural milieu (state-society relationship) provides a crucial link between resource capabilities and international collaboration. It is argued that the relative extent of collaboration among contemporary, highly industrialized countries is not only a function of resource capabilities and political or diplomatic objectives. It is also dependent upon the concrete processes and institutions whereby these potential collaborative efforts are identified, packaged, promoted and implemented. Moreover, the process of collaboration (and the relative influence of both resource capabilities and domestic structural constraints) may vary depending upon the objectives of collaboration. It is important, therefore, to distinguish conceptually among collaboration around the development, use or regulation of technology.;Using data drawn from aggregate and case study analyses, the study found that resource capabilities were positively related to collaboration around the development of technology, but negatively related to collaboration around the regulation of technology. Specifically, both economic development and technological capability were positively related to the pursuit of energy R&D collaboration, but negatively related to the joint pursuit of ocean pollution regulation. This finding suggests that a disaggregation of policy formulation in areas of civilian technical collaboration is indeed warranted in order to account for variation in findings stemming from differing objectives of collaboration.;In both types of collaboration, however, the strong role of the domestic structure in facilitating (or inhibiting) collaboration emerged as the major finding. Centralized structures were found to be associated with greater levels of technical collaboration, regardless of the objective. The case studies of U.S. involvement in these two areas of technical collaboration supplemented these aggregate findings by detailing the precise mechanisms by which domestic structures facilitated (or inhibited) international collaboration. In the energy R&D case, a highly centralized domestic structure in the U.S. promoted policy formulation, while in the ocean pollution regulation case, a highly fragmented domestic structure inhibited policymaking. Thus, policy formulation for the purpose of ocean pollution regulation was constrained by inter-agency conflicts, intervention by Congress, and a basic dissensus between government and private actors. In contrast, energy R&D cooperation was promoted by a centralized domestic structure which minimized jurisdictional conflicts between government agencies and intervention by domestic groups, and which maximized potential resources for collaboration.;These findings are significant for two reasons. First, they suggest the need to disaggregate findings based on the relationship between domestic resources on the one hand and collaboration on the other in order to account for variation in this relationship stemming from different objectives of collaboration. Secondly, they suggest the important influence that a centralized domestic structure may have for policy formulation in areas of civilian technical collaboration. In doing so, this research contributes to the theoretical understanding of international decision processes pertaining to science and technology by expanding our understanding of the preconditions which influence successful international collaboration on global welfare issues.;In pursuit of the hypothesis, two areas of collaboration were examined: (1) scientific and technical collaboration administered by the International Energy Agency (IEA) in the joint development of energy technologies and, (2) scientific and technical collaboration administered by the Inter-Governmental Maritime Consultative Organization (IMCO) in the joint regulation of ocean pollution.
机译:该研究的主要目的是探索以下假设:国内结构环境(国家与社会的关系)在资源能力与国际合作之间提供了至关重要的联系。有人认为,当今高度工业化国家之间合作的相对程度不仅是资源能力和政治或外交目标的函数。它还取决于确定,打包,促进和实施这些潜在协作努力的具体过程和机构。此外,协作过程(以及资源​​能力和国内结构约束的相对影响)可能会根据协作目标而有所不同。因此,重要的是在概念上区分围绕技术的开发,使用或监管的协作。;使用从汇总和案例分析中得出的数据,研究发现资源能力与围绕技术开发的协作正相关,但是与围绕技术法规的协作负相关。具体而言,经济发展和技术能力与追求能源研发合作正相关,而与共同追求海洋污染监管则负相关。这一发现表明,确实有必要对民用技术合作领域的政策制定进行分类,以解决因合作目标不同而导致的结果差异;然而,在两种类型的合作中,国内结构在促进(或抑制)合作是主要发现。无论目标如何,都发现集中式结构与更高水平的技术合作有关。美国参与这两个技术合作领域的案例研究通过详细说明国内机构促进(或抑制)国际合作的确切机制,对这些综合发现进行了补充。在能源研发案例中,美国高度集中的国内结构促进了政策制定,而在海洋污染监管案例中,高度分散的国内结构阻碍了政策制定。因此,为制定海洋污染法规而制定的政策受到机构间冲突,国会的干预以及政府与私人行为者之间的基本分歧的制约。相比之下,能源研发合作是通过集中的国内结构促进的,该结构最大程度地减少了政府机构之间的管辖权冲突和国内团体的干预,并最大程度地扩大了潜在的合作资源。这些发现具有重要意义,原因有两个。首先,他们建议有必要一方面根据国内资源与另一方面的合作之间的关系来分解研究结果,以说明这种合作关系因合作目标不同而产生的差异。其次,他们提出了集中化的国内结构可能会对民用技术合作领域的政策制定产生重要影响。通过这样做,本研究通过扩大我们对影响全球福利问题上成功的国际合作的前提条件的理解,有助于对与科学和技术有关的国际决策过程的理论理解。;为追求这一假设,考察了两个合作领域:(1)由国际能源机构(IEA)进行的科学技术合作,以共同开发能源技术,以及(2)由政府间海事咨询组织(IMCO)进行的科学技术合作,以共同管理能源技术。海洋污染。

著录项

  • 作者

    LESTER, JAMES PINKNEY.;

  • 作者单位

    The George Washington University.;

  • 授予单位 The George Washington University.;
  • 学科 Political Science International Law and Relations.
  • 学位 Ph.D.
  • 年度 1980
  • 页码 264 p.
  • 总页数 264
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种 eng
  • 中图分类
  • 关键词

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号