在一九九七年亞洲金融風暴中東亞國家飽受打擊，APEC此一亞太地區最重要的經 貿合作機制，卻未採取具體的援助措施扮演任何關鍵性的角色。從風暴開始部份APEC會 員體提議希望在APEC架構下單獨成立基金，至後來會員體商議由APEC設立基金然後交 由IMF托管，到最後APEC高峰會議決議完全由IMF主導，其過程政治意味濃厚。而APEC 鬆散的處理方式充分展現其對話性濃厚的論壇本質，僅是提供各會員體溝通、協商與建議的 管道，距離眾所期盼的有功能及有制度的國際建制仍相距甚遠。亞洲金融危機期間APEC 的地位、功能、價值受各方質疑，本文旨在探討此次APEC會員體形成處理東亞金融危機 共識的因素，並討論所謂APEC建制的本質對共識形成的影響。基本上，APEC的成長與美 國有心主導有密切的關係，但值得注意的是（APEC本身組織發展，符合了亞太國定政治文 化的一些特性，在組織方面，強調包容性，並在開始刻意模糊其組織目標、以循序漸進及務 實性的態度，求同存異、培養與追求共識。此些特質是APEC成長的基礎，也提供了其進 一步發展的空間。）但是也就是因為此種APEC建制的特質，使得強權國家美國在此次金 融風暴中得以發揮影響力，造成APEC在此次風暴中無法扮演舉足輕重的角色。

　　　　　The 1997 financial crisis in Asia was the first serious challenge faced by the APEC members in the entire nine years of the organization's history. A number of APEC members currently have serious economic problems and need assistance. A proposal to create a special bailout fund of up to $100 billion for Asian economies was rejected by the organization however. In Vancouver, APEC officials supported the idea of cooperative financing arrangements that could supplement the IMF. In other words, APEC leaders have agreed that APEC will not play a lead role in ameliorating the region's financial turmoil. This paper explores the factors that have affected APEC's original plan of establishing a new regional mechanism for Asian financial stability. It argues that a major reason behind APEC's failure to deal with the crisis was due to the organization's unique operating style which focuses on finding areas of consensus and often puts aside resolving the more difficult issues where agreement or political will is lacking.