Asian Politics & Policy最新文献

This paper critically examines the persistent under-representation of women in Japanese politics. I argue that raising the number of women in legislatures through descriptive representation solely does not ensure substantive gains for gender equality. Through conducting semi-structured interviews with eight female politicians representing municipal wards in Tokyo, this study sheds light on the recruitment strategies of political parties towards women and how it contributes in reinforcing existing gender stereotypes and limiting the effectiveness of female legislators. Situating the discussion within theories of critical mass and critical actors, the study demonstrates that structural barriers such as male-dominated political culture and electoral systems remain entrenched. By examining the status quo of women in politics and their marginalization in the electoral system, the study prescribes recruiting women based on their potential, qualifications and their willingness to act as active gender agents creating “feminist parliamentarians” instead of passive female tokens who are unable to speak about women's interests. By focusing on the substantive actions and motivations of female legislators, rather than their mere presence, this article argues for more meaningful and sustainable pathways towards gender equity in Japanese governance.

Why do states conduct naval diplomacy? While existing literature highlights its diplomatic utility, it often drowns in tautology. To escape the pit, the article asks: why do states conduct naval diplomacy in the 21st-century Indo-Pacific? It argues that naval diplomacy is a signaling act to communicate contributive status in a multiplex maritime order. Using Liberal Realism and Smart Power logic, the article compares Australia, Japan, and India's engagements with the Philippines. It finds that naval diplomacy signals legitimacy and adaptation—not just diplomatic functions. Order Contributors (Australia, Japan, and India) shape the rules-based order on their terms, while Order Stakeholders (Philippines) assert agency to sustain regional public goods. The article challenges binaries like the China–United States Thucydides Trap that beset the Indo-Pacific and reframes the strategic logic of contemporary naval diplomacy.

This article examines the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA), EIA Addendum, and Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) used to evaluate the Watuputih Groundwater Basin in the designated karst area of North Kendeng Mountain, planned for cement mining. Using discourse analysis of systematic language and text, it compares the narratives and framings within these documents. The analysis reveals a complex relationship between dominant and alternative discourses. The dominant policy discourse, reflected in the EIA and its addendum, is shaped by powerful actors such as cement companies and the Central Java provincial government, who explicitly prioritize economic development. In contrast, the alternative discourse, represented in the SEA, promotes a more sustainable approach to governing the karst landscape. This contrast highlights competing environmental governance paradigms and the political role of environmental assessments. Ultimately, the study shows how key actors influence public perception and policy direction through competing knowledge claims embedded in environmental assessment frameworks.

Does collaboration between the state and civil society offer a powerful tool to achieve an effective pandemic response? We address this question using a case study of the COVID-19 response in Bengaluru, India. We review the collaborative governance literature and analyze India's pandemic-related laws, regulations, reports, and academic studies. We supplement these with interviews with governmental and non-governmental actors involved in the COVID-19 response. We find that, overall, collaborative governance does not succeed in Bengaluru, attributing failure to weak institutionalization, low trust, and poor state-civil society relations. Only in rare situations do we encounter the successful collaboration identified in the literature as key to effective response. Furthermore, given the structure of Indian governance, we suggest that collaborative governance is unlikely to be effective across India. Our results contribute to a broader understanding of why and in what circumstances collaborative governance fails.

This research investigates how political institutional development can mitigate corruption in Thailand by drawing lessons from South Korea's reform trajectory. Anchored in the frameworks, the study explains both electoral behavior and the strategic constraints of policy implementation in patronage-based systems. Through comparative analysis, it highlights how Korea's shift toward independent oversight, digital transparency, and coordinated e-governance helped dismantle information monopolies and reduce agency costs. In contrast, Thailand's fragmented political landscape, entrenched monopolistic structures, and informal coalitions continue to undermine accountability. By contextualizing Korea's experiences within Thailand's institutional realities, the study proposes pragmatic, sequenced reforms—ranging from digital democracy to structural adjustments in public sector compensation.

Following Myanmar's 2021 military coup, the State Administrative Council (SAC) junta reversed a decade of modest political and economic reforms and oversaw a dramatic shift in foreign policy, reverting to a reactive and inward-looking diplomatic stance which this study describes as “negative neutralism.” In doing so, the junta has withdrawn from international organizations such as the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) and United Nations and returned to dependence on its traditional great power patron China to guarantee continued investment and access to defense exports. The junta's pivot to China is puzzling, given the military's long-held suspicion toward Chinese support for ethnic armed groups fighting against Myanmar's armed forces in the north. This study puts forward a Neoclassical Realist framework to analyze the external and domestic drivers of the junta's foreign policy. It argues that the junta has reluctantly resumed asymmetric dependency with Beijing due to political pragmatism and economic necessity. The primary goal of this strategy, which explains both the SAC's discomfort and pragmatism, is regime survival. The study also demonstrates how the SAC has simultaneously hedged against overreliance on China by deepening partnerships with Russia, India, and Thailand.