Asia Europe Journal最新文献

The post-World War II experience of conflict and regional cooperation in (Western) Europe and East Asia has been very different. Despite their differences in terms of receptiveness of, and preferences for, regional cooperation, regional cooperation and/or integration still remains one of the most promising avenues for achieving or at least institutionalising peace. Against this backdrop, we aim to assess the scope for EU–Korean collaboration in regional integration, outlining the European and the Korean perspectives on regional integration and conflict resolution, their similarities and differences in this process, and prospects of cooperation amid the intensifying US–China rivalry. We argue in this paper that although confronted with the spectre of global power politics heading for a new Cold War, both the EU and Korea have normatively and practically sought to pursue a policy of ‘hedging’, and that integration may be a testament to the power of integration in the peaceful transformation of international order than undermining its rationale. The paper thus argues that the future trajectory that regional cooperation for conflict transformation would be bound up by the spectre of power politics by the geostrategic rivalry between the US and China would not necessarily be the only one expected.

The European Union and South Korea have significantly progressed in developing their bilateral relationship since their strategic partnership in 2010. Recently, they have paid considerable attention to strengthening bilateral security cooperation. Against this backdrop, this paper asks three questions: first, what is the current shape of EU-Korea security cooperation; second, how is this cooperation developing and third, what is the future potential of this cooperation. In so doing, the paper revisits bilateral security cooperation with a focus on how shared ideas are the bedrock of the development and progress of bilateral relations. In our study, we identify the European Union and South Korea as having especially strong shared ideas in the areas of non-proliferation, human rights and cybersecurity. As the Union perceives growing strategic importance in the Indo-Pacific Area, it will seek a competent and reliable partner more actively. Therefore, there is tremendous potential for security cooperation especially in an era of escalating geopolitical tension.

To counterbalance a potential overemphasis on the state as the key unit of analysis in research on Asia-Europe relations, we examine how their major cities are interconnected. Analytically, this is achieved by applying a network model to data on the office locations of 175 globalized producer service firms. We examine the strength and orientation (for 2022) and the evolution (for 2010–2022) of these connections. We find that both Asia and Europe have more well-connected cities than any other world region and are characterized by a wide variety of levels of connectedness among their cities. However, the Asian system is somewhat top-heavier and showed more comprehensive connectivity gains. Most cities tend to be oriented towards their own region, albeit that there are some notable exceptions such as Luxembourg and New Delhi having an important trans-regional focus to their intercity connections, while London, Paris, Tokyo, Singapore, and Hong Kong show a relatively balanced profile. We argue that the time is ripe for a nuanced and context-specific approach to understanding how cities can engage on the global stage in general and in Asia-Europe relations in particular.

This article examines ASEAN’s position and strategies regarding the emerging Indo-Pacific politics by employing three elements of actorness—opportunity in the external environments, capacities for internal preference convergence and external engagement, and policy entrepreneurship. It argues that Indonesia’s policy entrepreneurship enabled ASEAN to respond to a new regional opportunity of the emerging Indo-Pacific construct, and ASEAN exhibited limited capabilities in internal preference convergence and the development of institutional influence on external relations as it relied on institutional features of conference diplomacy and the strong chairmanship system. The exploration of actorness in ASEAN’s policy reactions contributes to expanding the comparative scope of actorness research and deepening the theoretical implications of ASEAN’s regional initiatives in the emerging Indo-Pacific regionalism.

China’s perceptions of climate justice have changed since 2007, affecting the country’s domestic climate policies and its actions internationally. This study takes 2007 as a starting point, as that was a milestone year in China: climate change was made a national priority issue. Examining China’s views as to what were perceived as ‘fair’ regarding climate actions around 2007, we compare these with more recent perceptions of what ‘climate justice’ entails for China’s climate responsibilities. We find that China’s perceptions have changed regarding what being a ‘responsible’ country entails. From seeing itself as a developing country that should focus on other pressing challenges, China now views itself as a leading developing country that must reduce carbon emissions as soon as possible, and also as a donor providing aid to less wealthy developing countries. With ongoing feedback between the international and domestic levels on climate change, the principle of unequal burden sharing has also been incorporated into how China now delegates its domestic climate and energy targets, demanding more of its developed provinces and areas.

In its Indo-Pacific Strategy adopted in 2021, the EU reconfirmed the importance of “the voices of civil society, the private sector, social partners, and other key stakeholders count” in the region, highlighting the role of Asian civil society in the EU-Asia inter-regionalism. Therefore, this paper aims to evaluate Taiwanese people’s perception of the EU between January 2018 and May 2021 and analyze the key factors shaping the EU’s image in the region. At the same time, in terms of methodology, it also tries to establish an innovative and more efficient approach in this transnational survey of Asian people’s perception of the EU with the help of data sciences, which may contribute to the cognitive dimension of the EU study. Lastly, this paper aims to compare different theoretical doctrines on enhancing the visibility and support of the EU among Asians to indicate the optimal strategy for the EU to promote its image among Asians and its theoretical implications.

With the rapid internationalization and the recent development of the knowledge economy, universities are now facing challenges around the globe. Consequently, university governance is urged to be a strategic driving force of the university to transform efficiently and adapt to the changing needs. This special issue brings 4 articles together to enhance our understanding on university governance and broaden our perspectives through academic research on university governance cases. Specifically, it begins by introducing the cases of university governance structures in European and Chinese universities. Then, it goes on to explore the current reforms and the challenges encountered during transformation processes both in European and Chinese universities. This editorial discusses the university governance and its transformation, introduces the research papers, and presents the reflections and insights of the special issue.

This paper aims to analyse the comparative advantage of selected agricultural products for both EU and China in the context of EU-China bilateral trade and explore how the trade specialization changes along with the economic development based on the data between 2001 and 2017. First, we obtain the static results from both a comparative advantage perspective and a trade complementarity perspective. We then analyse three types of trade specialization dynamics by using the OLS regression and Markov transition probability matrix from a more dynamic perspective. Results show that EU’s comparative advantage includes meat products, dairy products, animal originated products, preparations of cereals or milk products, beverages, wool and vegetable textile fibres. China has a comparative advantage in fish, animal originated products, edible vegetable, lac, gums, resins, vegetable, plaiting materials, preparations of vegetables, silk, wool and vegetable textile fibres. We also find that both EU and China have unstable trade specialization for their agricultural products trade and we give policy implications for EU-China bilateral trade based on the results.