Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
|Other Titles: ||International labor migration and global governance:case study in migrant labor of industrial in Taiwan|
|Authors: ||徐豪鍵;Hsu, Hao-chien|
|Keywords: ||移工;全球治理;Migrant Labor;Global governance|
|Issue Date: ||2010-01-10 23:47:27 (UTC+8)|
Owing to globalization, all actors in the world face the same difficulties, and share “community of fate”, therefore some scholars address the theory of global governance which actors participate jointly to solve it. The phenomenon of labor migration under globalization we have ever seen in quantity and geography. This thesis analyzes international labor migration in terms of globalization. In the whole labor market which supply of labor is more than demand, the right and interest of migrant labor is usually ignored, and the state of labor receiving or sending is impacted in different degree. So through the concept of global governance, I describe the activity of governance across sectors and levels in this issue.
Then I take importing migrant labor in Taiwan, the center of Asia Pacific and Southeast Asia, for example. After all Taiwan is one of receiving states, and several states are involved in the migration process, so I will start from the regional level, and describe most actors’ efforts and limits of inter-governmental organizations, regimes, non-governmental organizations, states and gross-rooted networks when taking part in governance activities. Moreover I use “participation” as a primacy index and perceived that this region is a nascent migrant system if compared with North America or West Europe, and relative issues or agenda would not be emphasized. According to participation, Taiwan government strictly abridges the right of union of migrant labors, and migrant labor should “indirectly” take part in their own issues through cross-state networks or gross-rooted supported organizations. There is still far away from the ideal of direct participate model, i.e. one be governed whom takes part in governance.
Finally, in my research findings, there is a limitation of global governance in practice, nation-state still owns more or less “central authority”, non-governmental actors could share governance authority after competition with market, and depend on good willingness from government releasing “periphery authority”. Furthermore focused on the role and function of non-government actors by global governance for a long time, how private sector which possesses huge capital and skill strikes balance between governance and profit is still in doubt. In other words, whether public and private sector play the responsible governor or not will be an essential element of global governance.
|Appears in Collections:||[國際事務與戰略研究所] 學位論文|
All items in 機構典藏 are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved.