Asian Countries and Arctic Shipping: Policies, Interests and Footprints on Governance

Q1 Social Sciences Arctic Review on Law and Politics Pub Date : 2019-01-15 DOI:10.23865/ARCTIC.V10.1374
A. Moe, O. Stokke
{"title":"Asian Countries and Arctic Shipping: Policies, Interests and Footprints on Governance","authors":"A. Moe, O. Stokke","doi":"10.23865/ARCTIC.V10.1374","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Most studies of Asian state involvement in Arctic affairs assume that shorter sea-lanes to Europe are a major driver of interest, so this article begins by examining the prominence of shipping concerns in Arctic policy statements made by major Asian states. Using a bottom-up approach, we consider the advantages of Arctic sea routes over the Suez and Panama alternatives in light of the political, bureaucratic and economic conditions surrounding shipping and shipbuilding in China, Japan and the Republic of Korea. Especially Japanese and Korean policy documents indicate soberness rather than optimism concerning Arctic sea routes, noting the remaining limitations and the need for in-depth feasibility studies. That policymakers show greater caution than analysts, links in with our second finding: in Japan and Korea, maritime-sector bureaucracies responsible for industries with Arctic experience have been closely involved in policy development, more so than in China. Thirdly, we find a clear tendency towards rising industry-level caution and restraint in all three countries, reflecting financial difficulties in several major companies as well as growing sensitivity to the economic and political risks associated with the Arctic routes. Finally, our examination of bilateral and multilateral Chinese, Japanese and Korean diplomatic activity concerning Arctic shipping exhibits a lower profile than indicated by earlier studies.\nResponsible Editor: Øyvind Ravna, UiT The Arctic University of Norway, Tromsø, Norway","PeriodicalId":36694,"journal":{"name":"Arctic Review on Law and Politics","volume":"39 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-01-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"23","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Arctic Review on Law and Politics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.23865/ARCTIC.V10.1374","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 23

Abstract

Most studies of Asian state involvement in Arctic affairs assume that shorter sea-lanes to Europe are a major driver of interest, so this article begins by examining the prominence of shipping concerns in Arctic policy statements made by major Asian states. Using a bottom-up approach, we consider the advantages of Arctic sea routes over the Suez and Panama alternatives in light of the political, bureaucratic and economic conditions surrounding shipping and shipbuilding in China, Japan and the Republic of Korea. Especially Japanese and Korean policy documents indicate soberness rather than optimism concerning Arctic sea routes, noting the remaining limitations and the need for in-depth feasibility studies. That policymakers show greater caution than analysts, links in with our second finding: in Japan and Korea, maritime-sector bureaucracies responsible for industries with Arctic experience have been closely involved in policy development, more so than in China. Thirdly, we find a clear tendency towards rising industry-level caution and restraint in all three countries, reflecting financial difficulties in several major companies as well as growing sensitivity to the economic and political risks associated with the Arctic routes. Finally, our examination of bilateral and multilateral Chinese, Japanese and Korean diplomatic activity concerning Arctic shipping exhibits a lower profile than indicated by earlier studies. Responsible Editor: Øyvind Ravna, UiT The Arctic University of Norway, Tromsø, Norway
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
亚洲国家与北极航运:治理的政策、利益与足迹
大多数关于亚洲国家参与北极事务的研究都认为,通往欧洲的较短海上航线是主要的利益驱动因素,因此本文首先考察了亚洲主要国家在北极政策声明中对航运问题的关注。根据中国、日本和韩国围绕航运和造船业的政治、官僚和经济条件,采用自下而上的方法,我们考虑了北极航线相对于苏伊士和巴拿马航线的优势。特别是日本和韩国的政策文件对北极海上航线表示冷静,而不是乐观,指出仍然存在的限制和需要进行深入的可行性研究。政策制定者比分析师表现得更加谨慎,这与我们的第二个发现有关:在日本和韩国,负责北极经验的行业的海事部门官僚机构与政策制定的关系比中国更密切。第三,我们发现这三个国家在行业层面的谨慎和克制都有明显的上升趋势,这反映了几家大公司的财务困难,以及对与北极航线相关的经济和政治风险的日益敏感。最后,我们对中国、日本和韩国有关北极航运的双边和多边外交活动的研究,显示出比早期研究所表明的更低的姿态。负责编辑:Øyvind Ravna, UiT挪威特罗姆瑟北极大学
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Arctic Review on Law and Politics
Arctic Review on Law and Politics Social Sciences-Law
CiteScore
2.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
24 weeks
期刊最新文献
An Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis of Residence Permit Appeals at the Administrative Courts of Finland: Acquiescence Bias by Legalised Judicial Injustices in Finland EU Engagement in the Arctic: Challenges to Achieving Ambitions in an Area outside Its Jurisdiction War in Europe, but Still Low Tension in the High North? An Analysis of Norwegian Mitigation Strategies Welcome to Another Demanding and Exiting Year Small States in World Politics: Norwegian Interests and Foreign Policy Challenges in the Arctic
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1