本文探究歐盟整合過程中出現的多樣性整合模式，並進而探討不同的整合模式對兩岸關係的適用性為何。依據「國家認同與定位的相關性」及「是否為領導或創始國」等兩項變數，本文區分出歐盟四種整合模式：德國模式對整合運動的承諾與支持度最高，其次為芬蘭模式與 法國模式，英國模式則為最低。基於台灣與中國大陸政府對台灣主權存在爭議的現實，持願景路線的德國或法國模式均無法適用於兩岸關係的整合模式，兩岸整合前景最好的情況為芬蘭模式，最不理想為英國模式。模型化的結果因而可以解釋為何兩岸日益密切的經濟整合並 未對政治領域產生外溢效果。本文因而主張，使台灣成為兩岸整合運動中對等的領導力量，符合中國大陸的利益，中國並應將其「一個中國」政策由目前政治、主權內涵轉變為文化與價值認同的概念。在所檢驗的整合理論中，新現實－建構主義論較主流的兩理論－新功能主 義與政府間主義－更能適用與解釋這些模型化的結果。

This paper investigates the diverse approaches of EU members’ integration with the EU through modeling, and assesses the applicability of each model to the Taiwan-China relations. Building upon two variables – ‘the association with national identity and reorientation’, and ‘being the leading or founding member’ – four EU members’ integrative models stand out. The German model is proven to be the most integrationist, followed by the Finnish and the French models. The UK model appears to be the least committed. Due to controversies of sovereignty, the visionary German and French models are not applicable to Taiwan-China integrations and the prospects are for the pragmatic Finnish model at best, and the UK model at worst. These modeling outcomes can then explain why the growing economic integration between the two sides has not produced spillover effects into the political arena. This paper therefore argues that it would be in China’s interest to make Taiwan an equal leading player in Taiwan-China integrations, and to transform its ‘one-China policy’ from the current political and sovereignty contents to a cultural and value-laden concept. Among the theories being examined, (neo)realist-constructivism demonstrates more applicability than two mainstream integration theories - neofunctionalism and intergovernmentalism.