摘要
现实主义者与新自由制度主义者都曾广泛使用博弈方法支持自己有关国际冲突与合作的观点,前者认为参与博弈的国家通常关注相对收益从而导致国际合作的悲观前景,后者认为参与博弈的国家通常关注绝对收益从而导致国际合作的乐观前景。无疑,以上两种分析为二战后国际经济法的发展历程提供了良好的解释思路,也对其产生不同的影响。不过,这种立足于理性主义认识论的博弈方法在对国际经济法发展的解释或影响上有着不可避免的局限性。
Either Realists or Neo-liberalists have used game theory extensively to support their points on international conflict and cooperation. While the former conclude the concentration of the gaming countries on the relative gains will lead to a pessimistic prospect, the latter conclude the concetration of the gaming countries on the absolute gains will lead to a optimistic one. Undoubtedly, two different track of thoughts served as good analytic models to analyse the logic understanding of the development of international economic law after world war II. However, it inevitably has logic bounds in the analysis.
出处
《外交学院学报》
CSSCI
2005年第1期50-55,共6页
Journal of Foreign Affairs College
关键词
博弈论
绝对收益
相对收益
国际经济法
国际关系理论
Game theory
Absolute gains
Relative gains
International economic law
Theory of International relations
