過去研究發展中國家政治發展或民主化議題多從內部結構因素，如第三波民主化理論詳盡描述過去近200 年民主發展，成為理解全球政治民主化過程重要代表；政黨體系分析認為民主和政黨有極大關連性，政府體系是否為一黨極權所掌握、是否不容許其他小黨競爭等，可作為評估國家是否民主標準；經濟社會條件論者認為越發達，社會越多元，民主化表現也就可能越佳；民族主義多被指涉為特定意識形態，用以強調民族自決或政治運動，對中東歐國家民主化發展尤有深刻影響。不過上述理論分析有其限制：第三波民主化詮釋適用地區，如中東與拉丁美洲，解釋效果並不明顯，東歐地區後冷戰時期的民主發展也難以適用；政黨數目和民主化關聯性分析著重在民主化表現上，較少論及推動民主化的要素分析，偏重靜態描述過程而非變動可能；經濟與社會要素分析方式可以作為衡量民主化程度的必要條件，但如果要論及更深刻的民主轉型內容，可能還必須針對選舉制度、中央政府政治體制或司法制度等面向進行分析；民族主義是影響民主化重要變數之ㄧ，然影響不同民族衝突或合作關係另有他因，這在歐洲區域性研究已有明証。根據以上分析，本研究認為外部誘因有相當重要的作用，外部誘因對行為者產生拘束，這些誘因又可分為實質誘因與社會性誘因兩大面向，共同支撐各方交往關係主要構成因素。不過本研究將進一步釐清誘因所產生之路徑依賴與社會學習兩大理論途徑，其不同影響模式與根本差異：前者以制度設計作為支撐被影響者的正向報酬過程，以一種較少成本支付的觀念延續政治發展的期待方向，後者則是擺脫成本效益概念，從學習角度說明期待的政策發展如何可能成為施政偏好與落實的概念。不同的研究途徑配合不同的案例分析將可以發現，歐盟政策工具選擇的將按照地區性的發展差異(有無種族衝突、外部勢力干預等) 有所不同，但路徑依賴與學習理論的交互參酌使用將使誘導東歐與巴爾幹半島國家政治發展朝一種可預期方向前進，此種假定成為政治上實踐之可能，本研究計畫即是在此背景下展開。最後本研究?於此種分析架構舉出三大假定，期望最終能獲得強有力之研究成果。 During the past decades, the researches on political development/democratization are mostly based on the Third Wave Democratization, party system, economic and societal conditions and nationalism. Theory of Third Wave may prevail in many regions in the world; however, countries located in Middle East and Latin America are not this type. Party systems are instrumental in evaluating levels of democracy but act as static descriptive framework on the road to community development. Finally, nationalism, the most powerful intervening factor in the dynamics of Central and Eastern Europe countries, plays an important role in the whole political picture. Nevertheless, nationalism turns into a dependent variable after the end of Cold War; it is influenced by external incentives. The external incentives constrain the actors in a way of substantial and Socialization incentives. The formal provides actors with a pulling force in adapting external/internal pressures; the latter creates a friendly atmosphere for learners the will to learn. In addition to that, path dependence and Socialization theory co-constitute the analytical framework. Path dependence acts as an increasing returns process where the cost/benefit calculation will lead decision-makers to a low price, stable institutional choice in the face of political transformation. Socialization incentives can be divided into two patterns: social learning and lesson drawing models. Social learning model bases on the assumption that a member adopts external rules depending on the degree to which it regards rules adoption as appropriate in terms of identity, values or norms. Lesson-drawing model includes a sociological variant, emphasizing that domestic dissatisfaction will lead policymakers to engage in a process of learning from abroad. To further this logic, the author depicts three hypotheses in line with this discussion and tries to unveil EU/Moldova and EU/Serbia foreign policy analysis in terms of democracy promotion and regional stability in the context of policy preference and policy outcome.
