跳到主要內容

簡易檢索 / 詳目顯示

研究生: 魏宗緯
Wei, Tsung-Wei
論文名稱: 地緣經濟學之研究
The Study of Geoeconomics
指導教授: 黃仁德
口試委員: 劉德海
劉復國
學位類別: 碩士
Master
系所名稱: 社會科學學院 - 經濟學系
Department of Economics
論文出版年: 2026
畢業學年度: 115
語文別: 中文
論文頁數: 226
中文關鍵詞: 地緣經濟學經濟國策互依武器化供應鏈重組國家經濟安全
外文關鍵詞: Geoeconomics, Economic Statecraft, Weaponized Interdependence, Supply Chain Restructuring, National Economic Security
相關次數: 點閱:38下載:0
分享至:
查詢本校圖書館目錄 查詢臺灣博碩士論文知識加值系統 勘誤回報
  • 地緣經濟學探討一國如何運用經濟手段,達成國家安全利益與戰略目標。近年來,關稅戰、金融制裁、科技管制與供應鏈重組等現象,顯示傳統經濟學以效率、成本與比較利益為核心的分析框架,已難以充分解釋國際經濟關係中受到國家安全與戰略競爭影響的現象。經濟連結雖然仍是創造財富的重要基礎,但也形成依賴關係與脆弱性。當國際地緣衝突升高時,國家便可能透過經濟連結的運用,推動整合與競爭、對抗與強制,及防禦與自主等策略,用以擴大自身影響力、改變其他國家行為,或降低對外部經濟體系的依賴。
    地緣經濟學的核心意義,不只是分析工具的轉換,而是全球經濟治理邏輯的重塑。傳統經濟學重視效率、成本與互利交換,地緣經濟學則揭示經濟活動如何嵌入國家安全、大國博弈與相對收益之中。換言之,經濟手段不只是促進經濟成長的政策工具,也成為國家生存、競爭與重塑國際權力關係的工具。關稅、出口管制、技術限制、產業補貼、金融制裁、投資篩選與資產凍結等,皆可能轉化為控制關鍵資源、金融網絡與供應鏈的戰略工具。
    地緣經濟政策效果不能只以對手是否屈服來判斷,而應從政策目標、執行成本、目標國承受能力、規避管道與國際政治效果等面向予以評估。隨著安全考量進入貿易、金融、科技與投資領域,政府與企業皆須在安全與效率之間調整策略。半導體先進製程形成的「矽盾」,使臺灣成為全球供應鏈與大國競爭中的關鍵節點,但也使臺灣面臨供應鏈重組、兩岸衝突與美中競爭下的地緣經濟風險。準此,臺灣未來的核心課題,並非只是維持產業競爭力,而是如何降低依賴脆弱性、維持自身不可替代性,並建立可信賴供應鏈與地緣經濟防火牆。


    Geoeconomics examines how a state uses economic means to achieve national security interests and strategic objectives. In recent years, tariff wars, financial sanctions, technology controls, and supply chain restructuring have shown that the analytical framework of traditional economics, which centers on efficiency, costs, and comparative advantage, is no longer sufficient to fully explain international economic relations shaped by national security and strategic competition. Although economic connectivity remains an important foundation for wealth creation, it also generates relations of dependence and vulnerability. When international geopolitical conflicts intensify, states may use economic connectivity to advance strategies of integration and competition, confrontation and coercion, and defense and autonomy, thereby expanding their influence, altering the behavior of other states, or reducing their dependence on the external economic system.
    The core significance of geoeconomics lies not merely in a shift of analytical tools, but in the reshaping of the logic of global economic governance. Traditional economics emphasizes efficiency, costs, and mutually beneficial exchange, whereas geoeconomics reveals how economic activities are embedded in national security, great-power competition, and relative gains. In other words, economic means are not only policy tools for promoting economic growth, but also instruments for national survival, competition, and the reshaping of international power relations. Tariffs, export controls, technology restrictions, industrial subsidies, financial sanctions, investment screening, and asset freezes may all be transformed into strategic tools for controlling critical resources, financial networks, and supply chains.
    The effects of geoeconomic policies should not be judged solely by whether the opponent submits. Rather, they should be assessed in terms of policy objectives, implementation costs, the target state’s capacity to withstand pressure, evasion channels, and international political effects. As security considerations increasingly enter the fields of trade, finance, technology, and investment, both governments and firms must adjust their strategies between security and efficiency. The “silicon shield” formed by Taiwan’s advanced semiconductor manufacturing processes has made Taiwan a critical node in global supply chains and great-power competition, but it has also exposed Taiwan to geoeconomic risks arising from supply chain restructuring, cross-strait conflict, and U.S.-China competition. Accordingly, Taiwan’s future core task is not merely to maintain industrial competitiveness, but to reduce its dependence-related vulnerabilities, preserve its strategic indispensability, and establish trusted supply chains and a geoeconomic firewall.

    第一章 緒論 1
    第一節 研究動機與目的 1
    第二節 研究內容與章節安排 4
    第二章 地緣經濟學的源起與內涵 7
    第一節 地緣經濟學的源起 7
    第二節 地緣經濟學的內容 9
    第三節 地緣經濟學與地緣政治學和政治經濟學的區別 11
    一、 地緣經濟學與地緣政治學的區別 11
    二、 地緣經濟學與政治經濟學的區別 13
    第四節 地緣經濟學的政策工具 14
    第五節 地緣經濟學的研究目標 15
    一、 目標一:確保國家生存、安全與領土的完整 16
    二、 目標二:權力投射與國際地位的維持 18
    三、 目標三:強化國家經濟韌性 22
    四、 目標四:確保國內經濟繁榮與政權的存續 24
    第六節 結語 27
    第三章 地緣經濟學的名詞釋義 29
    第一節 互依武器化 29
    一、 互依武器化的定義 29
    二、 互依武器化的兩大工具 31
    (一) 全景敞視效果 32
    (二) 咽喉點效果 33
    (三) 聯合威脅 34
    三、 政治權威在互依武器化戰略中的必要性 35
    第二節 經濟國策 37
    一、 經濟國策的定義 37
    二、 新經濟國策的形成 38
    三、 經濟國策在供應鏈上的應用 39
    四、 關鍵技術的戰略價值—咽喉點 41
    第三節 地緣經濟碎片化 42
    一、 地緣經濟碎片化的定義 42
    二、 地緣經濟碎片化的影響 43
    第四節 國家資本主義與戰略資本主義的區別與意涵 45
    一、 國家資本主義與戰略資本主義的區別 45
    二、 國家資本主義的意涵 46
    三、 戰略資本主義的意涵 48
    第五節 結語 50
    第四章 地緣經濟學的經濟策略運作邏輯 53
    第一節 整合與競爭策略的運作邏輯 53
    一、 整合與競爭策略的運作邏輯內涵 54
    二、 整合與競爭策略運作邏輯在中國的實踐 56
    第二節 對抗與強制策略的運作邏輯 60
    一、 對抗與強制策略的運作邏輯內涵 60
    二、 對抗與強制策略運作邏輯在美國的實踐 62
    第三節 防禦與自主策略的運作邏輯 65
    一、 防禦與自主策略的運作邏輯內涵 65
    二、 防禦與自主策略運作邏輯在日本的實踐 68
    三、 防禦與自主策略運作邏輯在臺灣的實踐 70
    第四節 結語 72
    第五章 地緣經濟學與傳統經濟學的區別 75
    第一節 經濟行為者的角色 75
    一、 國家與企業的權力關係複合體 75
    二、 國家與企業的協作機制 76
    第二節 經濟目標的設定 77
    一、 商業與衝突分析邏輯的不同 78
    二、 絕對收益與相對收益的對立 79
    第三節 經濟政策重視的時間跨度 80
    一、 傳統上短期與長期的分立 81
    二、 將短期的政策干預轉化為長期的優勢 82
    第四節 地理與空間的假設 83
    一、 經濟空間的結構假設 84
    二、 供應鏈的重置設計 86
    第五節 結語 87
    第六章 地緣經濟學的政策工具—國際貿易政策 89
    第一節 關稅 89
    一、 關稅的本質 89
    二、 關稅的效果傳導機制 91
    三、 關稅的執行設計 92
    第二節 進口與出口管制 94
    一、 進口與出口管制的本質 94
    二、 進口與出口管制的執行設計 97
    第三節 技術限制 98
    一、 技術限制的本質 98
    二、 技術限制的執行設計 100
    第四節 反傾銷稅與反補貼稅 101
    一、 反傾銷稅與反補貼稅的本質 102
    二、 反傾銷稅與反補貼稅的執行設計 104
    第五節 補貼與產業政策 105
    一、 補貼與產業政策的本質 105
    二、 補貼與產業政策的傳導機制 106
    三、 補貼與產業政策的執行設計 107
    第六節 國際貿易協定 108
    第七節 結語 110
    第七章 地緣經濟學的政策工具—金融與投資政策 113
    第一節 跨境流動性安排 113
    一、 跨境流動性安排的本質 113
    二、 跨境流動性安排的執行設計 118
    第二節 排除參與SWIFT金融網絡 119
    一、 排除參與SWIFT 金融網絡的本質 119
    二、 排除參與SWIFT 金融網絡的執行限制 121
    三、 SWIFT 金融網絡的替代路徑 123
    第三節 投資篩選機制 126
    一、 投資篩選機制的本質 126
    二、 投資篩選機制的執行應用 128
    第四節 資產凍結 130
    一、 資產凍結的本質 131
    二、 資產凍結的執行 132
    第五節 對外經濟援助 133
    一、 對外經濟援助的本質 134
    二、 對外經濟援助的執行設計 135
    三、 中國的對外經濟援助 137
    四、 中國的對外經濟援助與債務陷阱 138
    第六節 結語 140
    第八章 地緣經濟學制裁政策的效果評估與規避管道 141
    第一節 地緣經濟學制裁政策的效果評估 141
    一、 國內聽眾成本與制裁政策效果 142
    二、 目標疊加與制裁政策效果 143
    三、 目標國政治體制與制裁政策效果 146
    第二節 地緣經濟脫鉤的衝擊 149
    一、 在地化安全、供應鏈韌性與供應鏈脫鉤 149
    二、 知識擴散、技術創新與技術脫鉤 151
    三、 風險分擔、金融穩定性與金融脫鉤 152
    四、 地緣經濟脫鉤與經濟發展路徑的選擇 153
    第三節 地緣經濟學制裁政策下的規避管道 154
    一、 法律不確定性下的企業過度遵循行為 155
    二、 經濟制裁下的物資流通管道重塑 156
    三、 受管制物資的去標籤化 157
    四、 境外金融中心、數位技術與資產所有權的匿名化 158
    五、 經濟制裁下的海事身分重構與技術偽裝 161
    第四節 結語 163
    第九章 地緣經濟學的實際案例 165
    第一節 關鍵礦產資源 165
    一、 中國的稀土產業霸權 166
    二、 美國的稀土產業重建 169
    第二節 國際投資 171
    一、 外國直接投資 171
    二、 跨國證券投資 174
    第三節 半導體產業 178
    一、 美國防堵中國半導體先進製程的技術發展 178
    二、 日韓特殊化學材料貿易戰 181
    第四節 產業供應鏈的重組 184
    一、 蘋果公司供應鏈的去風險布局 184
    二、 中國關鍵產業地位的上升 187
    第五節 結語 189
    第十章 地緣經濟學對臺灣的啟示 191
    第一節 地緣經濟下的臺灣半導體產業 191
    一、 半導體製造生態系的空間聚集與壁壘建立 192
    二、 臺灣半導體產業對全球經濟的重要性 193
    三、 臺灣半導體產業供應鏈在地化 195
    四、 美國對臺灣半導體咽喉點的去風險化與長臂管轄 196
    五、 臺灣半導體產業對美國的設廠投資 199
    第二節 中國對臺灣的地緣經濟策略 201
    一、 農漁產品與人員流動的選擇性封鎖 202
    二、 兩岸經貿的制度性施壓 203
    第三節 臺灣的地緣經濟風險與防火牆設置 205
    一、 關鍵技術與資本外流的邊界重塑 205
    二、 戰略性高科技貨品流向的邊境管制 207
    三、 生產基地外移的風險分散重組 208
    四、 可信賴供應鏈的建構 210
    五、 軍購與臺美地緣經濟關係 213
    第四節 結語 214
    參考文獻 217

    丁如(2023),〈世界貿易組織補貼與反補貼規則的平衡機制及其改革〉,《經貿法律評論》,3,頁59-78。
    毛熙彥、賀燦飛(2023),〈經濟全球化新敘事與中國經濟地理學發展新趨勢〉,《地理學報》,78:12,頁2905-2921。
    平思寧、沈智新(2023),〈非發展與非優惠性金援對國家外債影響之分析:以中國金援為例〉,《台灣政治學刊》,27:1,頁1-58。
    宋國友(2023),〈美國對華經貿政策與中美經貿關係新趨勢〉,《國際問題研究》,2,頁58-72。
    胡志丁、畢詩瑤(2024),〈理解西方地緣經濟與地緣經濟學〉,《地理科學進展》,43:2,頁387-401。
    孫成昊、王葉湑、董一凡(2024),〈相互依賴武器化的機制探析——權力來源與政策實踐〉,《歐洲研究》,42:2,頁63-86。
    黃仁德、夏靖詠(2022),《數位貨幣:商機與挑戰》,臺北:五南書局。
    歐陽勛、黃仁德(2011),《國際貿易理論與政策》,修訂9版。臺北:三民書局。
    蔡中民(2015),〈國家資本主義的歷史發展與理論脈絡〉,《臺灣政治學刊》,19:2,頁7-39。
    劉作奎(2022),〈歐盟互聯互通政策的「泛安全化」及中歐合作〉,《理論學刊》,1,頁72-81。
    蘇翊豪(2022),〈美國針對性制裁中國大陸廠商的聽眾成本:訊號理論的剖析〉,《政治科學論叢》,91,頁1-48。
    Aggarwal, V. K. and A. W. Reddie (2025), “New Economic Statecraft and Global Technology Conflicts: The Dilemma for Middle Powers,” Business and Politics, 27:4, pp. 465-483.
    Aiginger, K. and D. Rodrik (2020), “Rebirth of Industrial Policy and an Agenda for the Twenty-First Century,” Journal of Industry, Competition and Trade, 20:2, pp. 189-207.
    Aiyar, S. and A. Ilyina (2023), “Geoeconomic Fragmentation: An Overview,” in S. Aiyar, A. F. Presbitero, and M. Ruta, eds., Geoeconomic Fragmentation: The Economic Risks from a Fractured World Economy (London: CEPR Press), pp. 9-18.
    Alami, I. (2024), “Foreign Investment Screening Mechanisms and Emergent Geographies of (post)Globalization,” Dialogues in Human Geography, 16:1, pp. 52-75.
    Allen, I. (2025), “The War on Trade: Applying the WTO Security Exceptions to Economic Security Measures,” Northwestern Journal of International Law & Business, 45:2, pp. 157-212.
    Allen, W. A., G. Galati, R. Moessner, and W. Nelson (2017), “Central Bank Swap Lines and CIP Deviations,” International Journal of Finance & Economics, 22:4, pp. 394-402.
    Alleyne, L. and P. Blagrave (2025), “Global Commodity Inflation Pass-through: Vulnerability of Small Island Developing States,” IMF Working Paper, No. 2025/138, International Monetary Fund.
    Andrews-Speed, P. and A. Hove (2023), “China’s Rare Earths Dominance and Policy Responses,” OIES Paper, CE7, Oxford Institute for Energy Studies.
    Arriola, C., M. Cai, P. Kowalski, S. Miroudot, and F. van Tongeren (2024), “Towards Demystifying Trade Dependencies: At What Point Do Trade Linkages Become a Concern?” OECD Trade Policy Papers, No. 280, OECD Publishing.
    Arsentyeva, I. I. (2024), “China’s Digital Silk Road: Challenges and Opportunities for Latin America and the Caribbean,” Vestnik RUDN. International Relations, 24:1, pp. 51-64.
    Ayres, G. and L. Tsering (2025), “China’s Facilitation of Sanctions and Export Control Evasion,” Staff Research Report, U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission.
    Babić, M., A. D. Dixon, and I. T. Liu (2022), “Geoeconomics in a Changing Global Order,” in M. Babić, A. D. Dixon, and I. T. Liu, eds., The Political Economy of Geoeconomics: Europe in a Changing World (Cham: Palgrave Macmillan), pp. 1-27.
    Baqaee, D., J. Hinz, B. Moll, M. Schularick, F. A. Teti, J. Wanner, and S. Yang (2024), “What if? The Effects of a Hard Decoupling from China on the German Economy,” Kiel Policy Brief, No. 170, Kiel Institute for the World Economy.
    Barrot, J.N. and J. Sauvagnat (2016), “Input Specificity and the Propagation of Idiosyncratic Shocks in Production Networks,” Quarterly Journal of Economics, 131:3, pp. 1543-1592.
    Baru, S. (2012), “Geo-economics and Strategy,” Survival: Global Politics and Strategy, 54:3, pp. 47-58.
    Baskaran, G. and M. Schwartz (2025), “Developing Rare Earth Processing Hubs: An Analytical Approach,” CSIS Report, Center for Strategic and International Studies, Washington, DC.
    Bateman, J. (2022), “U.S.-China Technological ‘Decoupling’: A Strategy and Policy Framework, ” report, Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, Washington, DC.
    Biersteker, T. J., S. E. Eckert, M. Tourinho, and Z. Hudáková (2013), “The Effectiveness of United Nations Targeted Sanctions: Findings from the Targeted Sanctions Consortium (TSC),” report, Graduate Institute of International and Development Studies, Geneva.
    Biscottini, N. (2016), “A Middle Power in a Regional Context: Italy’s Economic Security, the MENA Region and the Leonardo-Finmeccanica Case,” master’s thesis, Security Studies, LUISS Guido Carli.
    Bluth, C. J. (2021), Europe’s Trade Strategy for the Age of Geoeconomic Globalisation: The EU, China and the US Competing in the Face of the Global Megatrends of Climate, Technology and Demographic Change. London: CEPR Press.
    Bouey, J., L. Hu, K. Scholl, W. Marcellino, R. Dossani, A. A. Malik, K. Solomon, S. Zhang, and A. Shufer (2023), “China’s AI Exports: Technology Distribution and Data Safety,” research report, RAND Corporation, Santa Monica, CA.
    Bradford, A., E. Li, and M. C. Waxman (2025), “How Domestic Institutions Shape the Global Tech War,” Harvard National Security Journal, 16:2, pp. 75-145.
    Brown, S. A. W. (2024), “Beyond the Great Firewall: EU and US Responses to the China Challenge in the Global Digital Economy,” Journal of European Integration, 46:7, pp. 1089-1110.
    Cerdeiro, D. A., J. Eugster, R. C. Mano, D. Muir, and S. J. Peiris (2021), “Sizing Up the Effects of Technological Decoupling,” IMF Working Paper, WP/21/69, International Monetary Fund.
    Chen, L. S. and M. M. Evers (2023), “Wars without Gun Smoke: Global Supply Chains, Power Transitions, and Economic Statecraft,” International Security, 48:2, pp. 164-204.
    Clayton, C., M. Maggiori, and J. Schreger (2025a), “Putting Economics Back into Geoeconomics,” NBER Working Paper, No. 33681, National Bureau of Economic Research.
    Clayton, C., M. Maggiori, and J. Schreger (2025b), “The Political Economy of Geoeconomic Power,” NBER Working Paper, No. 33353, National Bureau of Economic Research.
    Crescenzi, R., A. Dyèvre, and F. Neffke (2022), “Innovation Catalysts: How Multinationals Reshape the Global Geography of Innovation,” Economic Geography, 98:3, pp. 199-227.
    Daniels, O. J. (2023), “CSET Analyses of China’s Technology Policies and Ecosystem: The PRC’s Efforts Abroad,” report, Center for Security and Emerging Technology, Washington, DC.
    Dizaji, S. F. and M. R. Farzanegan (2024), “The Impact of US Trade Sanctions on the Global Trade of Target Countries: Do the Political Institutions of the Targets Matter?,” CESifo Working Paper, No. 10910, CESifo, Munich.
    Dos Santos, T. (1970), “The Structure of Dependence,” The American Economic Review, 60:2, pp. 231–236.
    Eben, M., J. Blockx, S. Marco Colino, L. Hornkohl, P. Mattiolo, J. Thorson, A. Tzanaki, and T. Weck (2025), “Guidelines for the EU Foreign Subsidies Regulation: Comments by ASCOLA Members to the Targeted Consultation Questionnaire by the European Commission,” ASCOLA, https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=5265922.
    Eichenauer, V. Z. and F. Wang (2024), “Mild Deglobalization: Foreign Investment Screening and Cross-Border Investment,” CESifo Working Paper, No. 11538, CESifo, Munich.
    Evenett, S., A. Jakubik, F. Martín, and M. Ruta (2024), “The Return of Industrial Policy in Data,” IMF Working Paper, WP/24/1, International Monetary Fund.
    Farrell, H. and A. L. Newman (2019), “Weaponized Interdependence: How Global Economic Networks Shape State Coercion,” International Security, 44:1, pp. 42-79.
    Grevi, G. (2011), “Geo-economics and Global Governance,” in A. Martiningui and R. Youngs, eds., Challenges for European Foreign Policy in 2012: What Kind of Geo-Economic Europe? (Madrid: FRIDE), pp. 27-36.
    Grossman, G. M. and A. O. Sykes (2025), “Industrial Policy and Subsidies: Assessment of Current Rules and Possible Reforms,” Journal of World Trade, 59:4, pp. 531-578.
    Harvey, D. (2003), The New Imperialism. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    Hirschman, A. O. (1945), National Power and the Structure of Foreign Trade. Los Angeles: University of California Press.
    Huntington, S. P. (1993), “Why International Primacy Matters,” International Security, 17:4, pp. 68-83.
    Igata, A. (2022), “Japan’s Burgeoning Economic Security Strategy: Navigating amidst US-China Competition,” RSC Policy Paper, 2022/07, Robert Schuman Centre for Advanced Studies, European University Institute.
    International Monetary Fund (2023), “Geoeconomic Fragmentation and Foreign Direct Investment,” World Economic Outlook, April, pp. 91-114.
    International Monetary Fund (2025), “Global Prospects and Policies,” World Economic Outlook, April, pp. 1-48.
    Kallen, C. (2025), “Breaking Up: Fragmentation in Foreign Direct Investment,” International Finance Discussion Papers, No. 1413, Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, Washington, D.C.
    Kavakli, K. C., G. Marcolongo, and D. Zambiasi (2023), “Sanction Evasion Through Tax Havens,” BAFFI CAREFIN Working Paper, No. 212, Bocconi University.
    Kim, M. S. (2025), “Chip Security: Reconciling Industrial Subsidies with WTO Rules and National Security Exception,” Harvard National Security Journal, 16:1, pp. 74-135.
    Krugman, P. (1991), Geography and Trade. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
    Lehdonvirta, V., B. Wú, and Z. Hawkins (2025), “Weaponised Interdependence in a Bipolar World: How Economic Forces and Security Interests Shape the Global Reach of US and Chinese Cloud Data Centres,” Review of International Political Economy, 32:5, pp. 1442-1467.
    Lin, L.W. and C. J. Milhaupt (2013), “We Are the (National)Champions: Understanding the Mechanisms of State Capitalism in China,” Stanford Law Review, 65:4, pp. 697-759.
    Lipsey, R. G. and K. Lancaster (1956), “The General Theory of Second Best,” The Review of Economic Studies, 24:1, pp. 11–32.
    Liu, X., Y. Liu, A. Makarin, and J. Wen (2025), “Export Controls and Innovation in Sanctioned Countries,” working paper, No. 25-004, Harvard Business School.
    Luttwak, E. N. (1990), “From Geopolitics to Geo-Economics: Logic of Conflict, Grammar of Commerce,” National Interest, 20, pp. 17-23.
    Malik, A. A., B. Parks, B. Russell, J. J. Lin, K. Walsh, K. Solomon, S. Zhang, T.B. Elston, and S. Goodman (2021), “Banking on the Belt and Road: Insights from a New Global Dataset of 13,427 Chinese Development Projects,” policy report, William & Mary, Williamsburg, VA.
    Mazzucato, M. (2018), “Mission-oriented Innovation Policies: Challenges and Opportunities,” Industrial and Corporate Change, 27:5, pp. 803-815.
    McNally, C. A. (2020), “A Tale of Three Capitalisms,” China-US Focus, https://www.chinausfocus.com/finance-economy/a-tale-of-three-capitalisms.
    Mercille, J. (2008), “The Radical Geopolitics of US Foreign Policy: Geopolitical and Geoeconomic Logics of Power,” Political Geography, 27:5, pp. 570-586.
    Milhaupt, C. J. (2025), “Corporate Governance in an Era of Geoeconomics,” ECGI Law Working Paper, No.790/2024, European Corporate Governance Institute.
    Moraes, H. C. and M. Wigell (2020), “The Emergence of Strategic Capitalism: Geoeconomics, Corporate Statecraft and the Repurposing of the Global Economy,” FIIA Working Paper, No. 117, Finnish Institute of International Affairs.
    Neu, C. R. and C. Wolf, Jr. (1994), “The Economic Dimensions of National Security,” monograph report, RAND Corporation, Santa Monica, CA.
    Norris, W. J. (2010), “Economic Statecraft with Chinese Characteristics: The Use of Commercial Actors in China’s Grand Strategy,” Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Political Science, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
    Okuda, T. and T. Tsuruga (2024), “Geoeconomic Fragmentation and International Diversification Benefits,” IMF Working Paper, WP/24/48, International Monetary Fund.
    Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (2025a), “Economic Security in a Changing World,” report, New Approaches to Economic Challenges, OECD Publishing, Paris.
    Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (2025b), “OECD Supply Chain Resilience Review: Navigating Risks,” report, OECD Publishing, Paris.
    Pinchis-Paulsen, M., K. Saggi, and P. C. Mavroidis (2024), “The National Security Exception at the WTO: Should It Just Be a Matter of When Members Can Avail of It? What About How?” World Trade Review, 23:3, pp. 271-295.
    Pohl, J. H. and M. Wigell (2024), “Corporate Geoeconomics: Reimagining Business in Strategic Capitalism,” working paper, https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.5296509
    Poitiers, N. and K. Sekut (2024), “Knowledge Spillovers and Geopolitical Challenges in Global Supply Chains,” Bruegel Working Paper, No. 04/2024, Bruegel.
    Powell, R. (1991), “Absolute and Relative Gains in International Relations Theory,” American Political Science Review, 85:4, pp. 1303-1320.
    Reinsch, W. A. and J. Whitney (2025), “Silicon Island: Assessing Taiwan’s Importance to U.S. Economic Growth and Security,” CSIS Briefs, Center for Strategic and International Studies, Washington, D.C.
    Roberts, A., H. C. Moraes, and V. Ferguson (2019), “Toward a Geoeconomic Order,” Journal of International Economic Law, 22:4, pp. 655-676.
    Ryngaert, C. (2024), “Weaponizing Economic Interdependence via Extraterritorial Chokepoint Jurisdiction: An International Law Perspective,” Japanese Yearbook of International Law, 67, pp. 4-25.
    Scholvin, S. and M. Wigell (2018), “Geo-Economics as Concept and Practice in International Relations: Surveying the State of the Art,” FIIA Working Paper, No. 102, Finnish Institute of International Affairs, Helsinki.
    Shahzad, A. (2022), “Geoeconomics: The New Geopolitics,” Policy Perspectives, 19:2, pp. 21-40.
    Tan, J. (2024), “How Widespread Is FDI Fragmentation?” IMF Working Paper, WP/24/179, International Monetary Fund.
    van der Kley, D. and N. Yau (2021), “How Central Asians Pushed Chinese Firms to Localize,” Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, https://carnegieendowment.org/research/2021/10/how-central-asians-pushed-chinese-firms-to-localize.
    Verdier, P. (2023), “Sanctions Overcompliance: What, Why, and Does It Matter?” North Carolina Journal of International Law, 48:3, pp. 471-498.
    Vihma, A. (2018), “Geoeconomic Analysis and the Limits of Critical Geopolitics: A New Engagement with Edward Luttwak,” Geopolitics, 23:1, pp. 1-21.
    Wang, J. (2023), “Chinese State Capitalism in the World Order: An International Law and International Relations Perspective,” in P. Delimatsis, G. Dimitropoulos, and A. Gourgourinis, eds., State Capitalism and International Investment Law (Oxford: Hart Publishing), pp. 83-98.
    Wigell, M. (2016), “Conceptualizing Regional Powers’ Geoeconomic Strategies: Neo-imperialism, Neo-mercantilism, Hegemony, and Liberal Institutionalism,” Asia Europe Journal, 14:2, pp. 135-151.
    Wigell, M., H. Borchert, E. H. Christie, C. Fjäder, and L. Hartwig (2022), “Navigating Geoeconomic Risks: Towards an International Business Risk and Resilience Monitor,” FIIA Report, No.71, Finnish Institute of International Affairs, Helsinki.
    Wijaya, T. and A. Hayes (2023), “State Transformation and Social Forces Under the Shadow of Economic Security: The Case of Japan,” Asia-Pacific Journal: Japan Focus, 21:12, pp. 1-22.
    Wiśniewska, I. (2025), “A Game of Cat and Mouse: How Russia Is Circumventing Sanctions,” OSW Report, Centre for Eastern Studies, Warsaw.
    Youngs, R. (2011), “Geo-economic Futures,” in A. Martiningui and R. Youngs, eds., Challenges for European Foreign Policy in 2012: What Kind of Geo-Economic Europe? (Madrid: FRIDE), pp. 13-17.
    Zhang, K. H. (2024a), “Geoeconomics of US-China Tech Rivalry and Industrial Policy,” Asia and the Global Economy, 4:2, pp. 1-9.
    Zhang, X. (2024b), China’s Modern Economic Statecraft: A Wealth-Power Dialectic. Oxford: Routledge.

    QR CODE
    :::