Regional Governance in East Asia and the Asia-Pacific

East Asia ◽  
2009 ◽  
Vol 26 (4) ◽  
pp. 321-341 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yasumasa Komori
2019 ◽  
Vol 124 (8) ◽  
pp. 4395-4412 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ruowen Yang ◽  
Shu Gui ◽  
Jie Cao

2017 ◽  
Vol 43 (3) ◽  
pp. 494-515 ◽  
Author(s):  
Björn Jerdén

AbstractMany states partially relinquish sovereignty in return for physical protection from a more powerful state. Mainstream theory on international hierarchies holds that such decisions are based on rational assessments of the relative qualities of the political order being offered. Such assessments, however, are bound to be contingent, and as such a reflection of the power to shape understandings of reality. Through a study of the remarkably persistent US-led security hierarchy in East Asia, this article puts forward the concept of the ‘epistemic community’ as a general explanation of how such understandings are shaped and, hence, why states accept subordinate positions in international hierarchies. The article conceptualises a transnational and multidisciplinary network of experts on international security – ‘The Asia-Pacific Epistemic Community’ – and demonstrates how it operates to convince East Asian policymakers that the current US-led social order is the best choice for maintaining regional ‘stability’.


2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Roger Buckley

Supported by an in-depth Introduction and contextual analysis, this six-volume set complements Series I (1918-1937 – From Armistice to North China), addressing the history between 1938 and1945. Despite the widespread operation of war-time censorship and surveillance, publishers in the West and, to a lesser degree in East Asia, put out a range of material that remains of considerable value to later generations. Some of the texts selected are undeniably partisan but the quantity of the published material (and to some extent its quality) left the general public with a vast and varied archive of printed matter that deserves to be consulted and debated by today's researchers and students. Greater attention is given to American and British literature rather than Chinese or Japanese simply by virtue of the practical realities.


2016 ◽  
Vol 10 (2) ◽  
pp. 175-206 ◽  
Author(s):  
Man-houng Lin (林滿紅)

This article deals with Taiwanese civilian emigration and overseas investment in the period of 1940–1945 when Japan engaged the Greater East Asian War. Taiwan in general, and some Taiwanese in particular, helped the reconstruction of Japanese occupied areas in this war. Overseas Taiwanese mainly worked as employees for Japanese stores, companies, mines, plantations, and Japanese government offices, but also opened stores, factories, plantations and banks by themselves. As overseas ethnic Chinese, the Taiwanese civilian emigrants examined in this paper moved in the direction opposite that of other overseas Chinese holding Chinese nationality. The Taiwanese populace expanded overseas to Greater East Asia, while Chinese nationals withdrew from this area and returned to China. Thus, this paper will illustrate how the phrase, “people should fight for their country,” bore different meanings for these two different types of overseas Chinese in the Asia-Pacific War theater of wwii. 1930至40年代,中日學者曾就華僑的定義進行討論。吳主惠將華僑定義為定居於海外的中國人及其後裔,不包括駐外政府官員和留學生。吳氏認為華僑的最嚴格定義,是指定居海外但仍保有中國國籍者。1933年日本大藏省為替局統計臺灣地區約有46,000至47,000名華僑,便是依據這樣的定義。吳氏指出,在此嚴格定義下,華人後裔如不具中國國籍者,便非華僑。另有一種較為寬鬆的定義是: 無論是否具中國國籍,凡定居或曾赴海外的中國人及其後裔皆為華僑,井出季和太即持此見。關於日本統治臺灣時期的臺灣人國籍,根據日本大藏省為替局的解釋,由於馬關條約簽訂後的二年內,臺灣人得自由決定離去與否,留下臺灣者為日本國民。這些成為日本國民的臺灣人或其祖先曾具有中國國民的身分,因而1933年的340萬臺灣人也被視為較寬定義下的華僑。在日本建構所謂的「大東亞共榮圈」時期 (1940–1945),許多不具軍人身分的臺灣人向海外移民或投資,與之相反的是,擁有中國國籍的華僑在此時期則多回歸故里。在大東亞戰爭時期的華人,由於出身不同,「為國而戰」一詞對於他們的意義也因而分歧。 (This article is in English.)


2018 ◽  
Vol 147 ◽  
Author(s):  
Chunxiao Duan ◽  
Xuefeng Zhang ◽  
Hui Jin ◽  
Xiaoqing Cheng ◽  
Donglei Wang ◽  
...  

AbstractSince the late 1990s, hand, foot and mouth disease (HFMD) has become a common health problem that mostly affects children and infants in Southeast and East Asia. Global climate change is considered to be one of the major risk factors for HFMD. This study aimed to assess the correlation between meteorological factors and HFMD in the Asia-Pacific region. PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, Wanfang Data and Weipu Database were searched to identify relevant articles published before May 2018. Data were collected and analysed using R software. We searched 2397 articles and identified 51 eligible papers in this study. The present study included eight meteorological factors; mean temperature, mean highest temperature, mean lowest temperature, rainfall, relative humidity and hours of sunshine were positively correlated with HFMD, with correlation coefficients (CORs) of 0.52 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.42–0.60), 0.43 (95% CI 0.23–0.59), 0.43 (95% CI 0.23–0.60), 0.27 (95% CI 0.19–0.35), 0.19 (95% CI 0.02–0.35) and 0.19 (95% CI 0.11–0.27), respectively. There were sufficient data to support a negative correlation between mean pressure and HFMD (COR = −0.51, 95% CI −0.63 to −0.36). There was no notable correlation with wind speed (COR = 0.10, 95% CI −0.03 to 0.23). Our findings suggest that meteorological factors affect the incidence of HFMD to a certain extent.


2016 ◽  
Vol 60 (4) ◽  
pp. 5-12
Author(s):  
S. Sevast'yanov

Until recently, only economically developed West-oriented states launched integration initiatives encompassing the entire Asia-Pacific region. However, over the last few years Beijing proposed several such initiatives embracing territories from America to Africa. The paper discusses the changes in Chinese views towards the leadership in modern world. Recent events in Syria, Ukraine, South China Sea and East China Sea made it clear that the world becomes more polycentric, with Russia and China resistant to external interference in the territories of their vital interests. The latest trends in East Asian and Asia-Pacific regionalism are singled out. China and USA have been the main rivals in initiating and supporting competing integration models. China has demonstrated unprecedented activity and launched several integration projects of trans-regional (Asia-Pacific and Eurasia) and on regional levels (East Asia). However, despite its growing geopolitical and economic aspirations, Beijing is not frontally challenging Washington-led system of intergovernmental agreements and financial institutions in Asia. Instead, Beijing is forming an alternative pro-Chinese model of integration without US participation (or with their secondary role) thus trying to gradually transform the Asia-Pacific to post-American hegemony model. President Xi Jinping put forward a concept of “Asia-Pacific Dream”. It incorporates formation of the “Silk Road Economic Belt” and the “New Maritime Silk Road” that will link the economies of Asia, Europe and Africa. By proposing these large scale infrastructure projects and two new regional financial institutions (Asia Infrastructure Investment Bank and New Development Bank), the Chinese leadership renewed its global and regional politics, attempting to create a Eurasian “economic corridor” which could serve not only its regional and global interests, but for the common good of whole Asia and the world. Obviously, “New Silk Roads” strategy faces geopolitical and other challenges; yet, even it partial realization would make China a leader of the continental part of Eurasia. In terms of global and regional governance these trends can be strengthened through coordinated policy of Moscow and Beijing towards including these projects into the agenda of non-Western intergovernmental institutions, such as BRICS, SCO, Eurasian Economic Union (EEU), and others. Moreover, strategic cooperation with Russia is one of the principal factors to secure the success of China’s integration plans in the Asia-Pacific and especially in Eurasia. For its part, Moscow should deepen interaction and effectively utilize the resources of “rising” China to support Russia’s interests in Eurasia and the Asia-Pacific. It is necessary for Moscow to coordinate efforts with Central Asian states and China to elaborate co-development plans for infrastructural initiatives put forward by the SCO, EEU and the “Silk Road Economic Belt”. At the same time, Moscow should increasingly encourage Chinese investment into the Russian Far East. Acknowledgements. This article has been prepared in the framework of contract with the RF Ministry of Education and Science “Formation of the New International Order in the Asia-Pacific and National Interests of Russia”, project № 1430.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document