Pub Date : 2021-09-02DOI: 10.1080/19480881.2021.2003036
V. Forbes
{"title":"Malaysia A Maritime Nation","authors":"V. Forbes","doi":"10.1080/19480881.2021.2003036","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/19480881.2021.2003036","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":53974,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the Indian Ocean Region","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.2,"publicationDate":"2021-09-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42234470","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-09-02DOI: 10.1080/19480881.2021.2001984
Mohammad Rubaiyat Rahman
ABSTRACT It cannot be overstated that in recent times the gravity and complexity of irregular maritime migration have triggered concerns and debates in the academic domains of International Relations and International Law. The article examines how states' compliance with, and enforcement of,international law and legal norms would tackle the challenges of irregular migration in the Indian Ocean region. The legislative and policy challenges regarding irregular migration can be analyzed under two segments. First, there is a lack of comprehensive discussion about the sending and the receiving states' commitments (regarding irregular migrants) to international law and legal norms. Secondly, deficit of comparative analysis to show how the littoral states comply with international law norms on migration and refugee influx. Such analysis from multiple perspectives would be helpful to get insights and make policy recommendations about how effectively international law norms could be enforced through national legislation and policy framework.
{"title":"Gambling with humanity at sea: states' legislative and policy responses to irregular migration in the Indian Ocean","authors":"Mohammad Rubaiyat Rahman","doi":"10.1080/19480881.2021.2001984","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/19480881.2021.2001984","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT It cannot be overstated that in recent times the gravity and complexity of irregular maritime migration have triggered concerns and debates in the academic domains of International Relations and International Law. The article examines how states' compliance with, and enforcement of,international law and legal norms would tackle the challenges of irregular migration in the Indian Ocean region. The legislative and policy challenges regarding irregular migration can be analyzed under two segments. First, there is a lack of comprehensive discussion about the sending and the receiving states' commitments (regarding irregular migrants) to international law and legal norms. Secondly, deficit of comparative analysis to show how the littoral states comply with international law norms on migration and refugee influx. Such analysis from multiple perspectives would be helpful to get insights and make policy recommendations about how effectively international law norms could be enforced through national legislation and policy framework.","PeriodicalId":53974,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the Indian Ocean Region","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.2,"publicationDate":"2021-09-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49658096","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-08-29DOI: 10.1080/19480881.2021.1966890
Hema Vaishnavi Ale
{"title":"Dust and smoke: air pollution and colonial urbanism, India, c. 1860–c. 1940","authors":"Hema Vaishnavi Ale","doi":"10.1080/19480881.2021.1966890","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/19480881.2021.1966890","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":53974,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the Indian Ocean Region","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.2,"publicationDate":"2021-08-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46422609","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-05-04DOI: 10.1080/19480881.2021.1966944
Medha Bisht
{"title":"Indus basin uninterrupted: A history of territory and politics from Alexander to Nehru","authors":"Medha Bisht","doi":"10.1080/19480881.2021.1966944","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/19480881.2021.1966944","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":53974,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the Indian Ocean Region","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.2,"publicationDate":"2021-05-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45565627","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-05-04DOI: 10.1080/19480881.2021.1970440
D. Dimopoulos, D. Queiros, C. V. Zyl
ABSTRACT South Africa's marine environment is rich in fauna and flora, and renowned for its pristine coral reefs. Yet, with various risks continuing to threaten the future of marine tourism in the Blue Economy, for how long can scuba diving tourism remain a popular marine recreational activity in the region? By means of a case study approach, this article aims to identify the range of domestic and international external risks impacting on dive tourism at a dive tourism hotspot at the iSimangaliso Wetland Park (iWP) in northern KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa. Results suggest that dive operators perceive external risks to be a significant threat to the future of their dive operations. Most pertinent are risks where domestic crime, political instability, depressed economic activity, access to dive tourism hotspots, and restrictive government regulations have impacted the dive tourism industry in the region.
{"title":"Perspectives on the impact of external risks on the future of dive tourism at a high latitude reef complex in the Indian Ocean Region","authors":"D. Dimopoulos, D. Queiros, C. V. Zyl","doi":"10.1080/19480881.2021.1970440","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/19480881.2021.1970440","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT South Africa's marine environment is rich in fauna and flora, and renowned for its pristine coral reefs. Yet, with various risks continuing to threaten the future of marine tourism in the Blue Economy, for how long can scuba diving tourism remain a popular marine recreational activity in the region? By means of a case study approach, this article aims to identify the range of domestic and international external risks impacting on dive tourism at a dive tourism hotspot at the iSimangaliso Wetland Park (iWP) in northern KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa. Results suggest that dive operators perceive external risks to be a significant threat to the future of their dive operations. Most pertinent are risks where domestic crime, political instability, depressed economic activity, access to dive tourism hotspots, and restrictive government regulations have impacted the dive tourism industry in the region.","PeriodicalId":53974,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the Indian Ocean Region","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.2,"publicationDate":"2021-05-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48657561","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-05-04DOI: 10.1080/19480881.2021.1924029
S. Bashfield
For a remote series of small atolls in the center of the Indian Ocean, the Chagos Archipelago plays an outsized role in international affairs and is generating considerable contention among members of the international community. While Britain is steadfast in its assertion of sovereignty over the Archipelago, Mauritius is relentless in its challenge – with most of the world’s backing – and, the Chagossians continue to organize and agitate to return to the Chagos regardless of the landlord. Meanwhile, the United States, the party which derives the most direct benefit from the Archipelago – via its military base on Diego Garcia – is the silent benefactor. For decades the United States has deferred to Britain on matters related to the Chagos dispute, delegating Britain to hold at bay the scorn of Mauritius and the international community. While this strategy has afforded the U.S. virtually unfettered access to Diego Garcia, the political and diplomatic costs are now mounting, and a there is a legitimate debate taking place regarding the United States’ stance on the issue. Do the military and security benefits to supporting British sovereignty over the Chagos Archipelago for the U.S. outweigh the political and diplomatic costs? Would the United States be better served by Mauritius or the United Kingdom as landlord of Diego Garcia? I welcome and thank Dr Peter Harris for his considered and thought-provoking response to my 2020 Journal of the Indian Ocean Region research article entitledMauritian sovereignty over the Chagos Archipelago? Strategic implications for Diego Garcia from a UKUS perspective (Bashfield, 2020). My article argues that Mauritian sovereignty over the Chagos Archipelago would adversely affect U.S. power projection capabilities from Diego Garcia due to questions over the long-term political ‘reliability’ of Mauritius versus the United Kingdom, the degree of oversight Port Louis may enforce regarding military activities, the application of the Pelindaba Treaty, and Archipelago resettlement. Harris’ response, entitled The Case for Decolonizing the Chagos Archipelago: A Response to Bashfield argues twofold: that while the above mentioned points are valid, these considerations should not be overstated; and that when viewed in a broader frame, various political and diplomatic considerations my analysis omitted make a compelling case that decolonizing the Chagos, and restoring sovereignty to Mauritius, is in the U.S. strategic
{"title":"Military security obstacles to decolonizing the Chagos: A reply to Harris","authors":"S. Bashfield","doi":"10.1080/19480881.2021.1924029","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/19480881.2021.1924029","url":null,"abstract":"For a remote series of small atolls in the center of the Indian Ocean, the Chagos Archipelago plays an outsized role in international affairs and is generating considerable contention among members of the international community. While Britain is steadfast in its assertion of sovereignty over the Archipelago, Mauritius is relentless in its challenge – with most of the world’s backing – and, the Chagossians continue to organize and agitate to return to the Chagos regardless of the landlord. Meanwhile, the United States, the party which derives the most direct benefit from the Archipelago – via its military base on Diego Garcia – is the silent benefactor. For decades the United States has deferred to Britain on matters related to the Chagos dispute, delegating Britain to hold at bay the scorn of Mauritius and the international community. While this strategy has afforded the U.S. virtually unfettered access to Diego Garcia, the political and diplomatic costs are now mounting, and a there is a legitimate debate taking place regarding the United States’ stance on the issue. Do the military and security benefits to supporting British sovereignty over the Chagos Archipelago for the U.S. outweigh the political and diplomatic costs? Would the United States be better served by Mauritius or the United Kingdom as landlord of Diego Garcia? I welcome and thank Dr Peter Harris for his considered and thought-provoking response to my 2020 Journal of the Indian Ocean Region research article entitledMauritian sovereignty over the Chagos Archipelago? Strategic implications for Diego Garcia from a UKUS perspective (Bashfield, 2020). My article argues that Mauritian sovereignty over the Chagos Archipelago would adversely affect U.S. power projection capabilities from Diego Garcia due to questions over the long-term political ‘reliability’ of Mauritius versus the United Kingdom, the degree of oversight Port Louis may enforce regarding military activities, the application of the Pelindaba Treaty, and Archipelago resettlement. Harris’ response, entitled The Case for Decolonizing the Chagos Archipelago: A Response to Bashfield argues twofold: that while the above mentioned points are valid, these considerations should not be overstated; and that when viewed in a broader frame, various political and diplomatic considerations my analysis omitted make a compelling case that decolonizing the Chagos, and restoring sovereignty to Mauritius, is in the U.S. strategic","PeriodicalId":53974,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the Indian Ocean Region","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.2,"publicationDate":"2021-05-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/19480881.2021.1924029","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45167748","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-05-04DOI: 10.1080/19480881.2021.1963913
Somen Banerjee
ABSTRACT Since the dawn of the twenty-first century, the Horn of Africa has undergone significant change. Presence of extra-regional powers has transformed the region into a strategic pivot of the Indian Ocean. But fractured societies of the region are in acute need of sustainable peace. Curiously, India’s engagements with the Horn have been confined to peacekeeping operations and anti-piracy patrols. As a member of the United Nations Security Council in 2021 and 2022, India could do more. Against this backdrop, this article examines the salience of the Horn of Africa as a strategic pivot. It assesses the challenges and opportunities for engaging a region that is steeped in geopolitics but yearns for sustainable peace. It seeks to develop a framework for India’s engagement in the Horn of Africa by evaluating the complementarities between the United Nations agenda of sustaining-peace and India’s vision of Security and Growth for All in the Region.
{"title":"Horn of Africa Emerging as a strategic pivot of the Indian Ocean Region: need for repackaging SAGAR 2.0","authors":"Somen Banerjee","doi":"10.1080/19480881.2021.1963913","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/19480881.2021.1963913","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Since the dawn of the twenty-first century, the Horn of Africa has undergone significant change. Presence of extra-regional powers has transformed the region into a strategic pivot of the Indian Ocean. But fractured societies of the region are in acute need of sustainable peace. Curiously, India’s engagements with the Horn have been confined to peacekeeping operations and anti-piracy patrols. As a member of the United Nations Security Council in 2021 and 2022, India could do more. Against this backdrop, this article examines the salience of the Horn of Africa as a strategic pivot. It assesses the challenges and opportunities for engaging a region that is steeped in geopolitics but yearns for sustainable peace. It seeks to develop a framework for India’s engagement in the Horn of Africa by evaluating the complementarities between the United Nations agenda of sustaining-peace and India’s vision of Security and Growth for All in the Region.","PeriodicalId":53974,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the Indian Ocean Region","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.2,"publicationDate":"2021-05-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42073231","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-05-04DOI: 10.1080/19480881.2021.1969516
Malshini Senaratne, Andrew Zimbroff, Jared Stevens
ABSTRACT The Blue Economy (BE) concept has come to particular prominence for coastal Indian Ocean (IO) countries, as well as Small Island Developing States (SIDS) in the region such as the Seychelles. Blue Economy entrepreneurship has emerged as a promising way to encourage sustainable economic growth. We developed an instrument for measuring Blue Economy entrepreneurship ecosystems (the network of resources and stakeholders that supports aspiring entrepreneurs). We applied this instrument to Seychelles, identifying local strengths and areas for improvement. This instrument has applicability beyond the Seychelles, and could be of further value for other countries hoping to encourage Blue Economy entrepreneurship.
{"title":"An instrument to assess Blue Economy entrepreneurship ecosystems: a case study from the Seychelles","authors":"Malshini Senaratne, Andrew Zimbroff, Jared Stevens","doi":"10.1080/19480881.2021.1969516","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/19480881.2021.1969516","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT The Blue Economy (BE) concept has come to particular prominence for coastal Indian Ocean (IO) countries, as well as Small Island Developing States (SIDS) in the region such as the Seychelles. Blue Economy entrepreneurship has emerged as a promising way to encourage sustainable economic growth. We developed an instrument for measuring Blue Economy entrepreneurship ecosystems (the network of resources and stakeholders that supports aspiring entrepreneurs). We applied this instrument to Seychelles, identifying local strengths and areas for improvement. This instrument has applicability beyond the Seychelles, and could be of further value for other countries hoping to encourage Blue Economy entrepreneurship.","PeriodicalId":53974,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the Indian Ocean Region","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.2,"publicationDate":"2021-05-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46926355","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-05-04DOI: 10.1080/19480881.2021.1924027
Peter Harris
The US military base on the British-controlled island of Diego Garcia in the Chagos Archipelago is a lynchpin of the USA’s Indo-Pacific Strategy. As the Pentagon’s only base in the Indian Ocean proper, Naval Support Facility Diego Garcia (NSFDG) constitutes a unique launchpad for US military operations from the Arabian Gulf to the South China Sea. But NSFDG comes with strings attached: it is housed inside a territorial jurisdiction, the British Indian Ocean Territory (BIOT), that London makes available to the United States free of charge but which most of the international community regards as an illegal colony (Nichols, 2019). Indeed, an overwhelming majority of the world’s states have called on Britain to decolonize the Chagos Archipelago (including Diego Garcia) and restore the entire territory to Mauritius, from which London unlawfully detached the islands in 1965. This poses the United States with a problem. Should Washington continue to back British control over Diego Garcia and the rest of BIOT, as it has done since the 1960s? Or would US interests be best served by urging London to initiate a transfer of sovereign authority to Mauritius, as is the will of the international community? In a recent article published in Journal of the Indian Ocean Region, Bashfield (2020a) sought to illuminate the USA’s strategic (military) interests in Diego Garcia and thereby explain the US calculus when it comes to the ongoing sovereignty dispute. If the problem is treated as one of how to secure maximum flexibility for the US forces that rely upon NSFDG for their operations, Bashfield suggests, then it must be concluded that London remains a far more desirable landlord than Port Louis, so much so that the British and Americans can be expected to pay ‘considerable [reputational] costs’ in defense of the status quo (pp. 177-178). This is an important conclusion, not least of all because it likely reflects the dominant view in Washington, DC – namely, that Diego Garcia is valuable to the United States only insofar as it facilitates military actions across the Indian Ocean littoral and beyond, and so Washington should be expected to prefer whichever landlord can commit to imposing the fewest restrictions upon military activities on the island. In this response, however, I argue that Bashfield is too charitable when it comes to evaluating US policy towards the Chagos Archipelago. For even if he does not excuse or endorse US support for British sovereignty over Diego Garcia (his article does not take
{"title":"The case for decolonizing the Chagos islands: A response to Bashfield","authors":"Peter Harris","doi":"10.1080/19480881.2021.1924027","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/19480881.2021.1924027","url":null,"abstract":"The US military base on the British-controlled island of Diego Garcia in the Chagos Archipelago is a lynchpin of the USA’s Indo-Pacific Strategy. As the Pentagon’s only base in the Indian Ocean proper, Naval Support Facility Diego Garcia (NSFDG) constitutes a unique launchpad for US military operations from the Arabian Gulf to the South China Sea. But NSFDG comes with strings attached: it is housed inside a territorial jurisdiction, the British Indian Ocean Territory (BIOT), that London makes available to the United States free of charge but which most of the international community regards as an illegal colony (Nichols, 2019). Indeed, an overwhelming majority of the world’s states have called on Britain to decolonize the Chagos Archipelago (including Diego Garcia) and restore the entire territory to Mauritius, from which London unlawfully detached the islands in 1965. This poses the United States with a problem. Should Washington continue to back British control over Diego Garcia and the rest of BIOT, as it has done since the 1960s? Or would US interests be best served by urging London to initiate a transfer of sovereign authority to Mauritius, as is the will of the international community? In a recent article published in Journal of the Indian Ocean Region, Bashfield (2020a) sought to illuminate the USA’s strategic (military) interests in Diego Garcia and thereby explain the US calculus when it comes to the ongoing sovereignty dispute. If the problem is treated as one of how to secure maximum flexibility for the US forces that rely upon NSFDG for their operations, Bashfield suggests, then it must be concluded that London remains a far more desirable landlord than Port Louis, so much so that the British and Americans can be expected to pay ‘considerable [reputational] costs’ in defense of the status quo (pp. 177-178). This is an important conclusion, not least of all because it likely reflects the dominant view in Washington, DC – namely, that Diego Garcia is valuable to the United States only insofar as it facilitates military actions across the Indian Ocean littoral and beyond, and so Washington should be expected to prefer whichever landlord can commit to imposing the fewest restrictions upon military activities on the island. In this response, however, I argue that Bashfield is too charitable when it comes to evaluating US policy towards the Chagos Archipelago. For even if he does not excuse or endorse US support for British sovereignty over Diego Garcia (his article does not take","PeriodicalId":53974,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the Indian Ocean Region","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.2,"publicationDate":"2021-05-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/19480881.2021.1924027","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46947860","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-05-04DOI: 10.1080/19480881.2021.1993660
S. Chaturvedi
This edition of the Journal of the Indian Ocean Region (JIOR) bears testimony to the ongoing broadening and deepening of Indian Ocean studies by critically informed interventions on inter-disciplinary intersections. The scholarly literature on indigenous peoples and their role in marine and fisheries development, coastal ecosystems, marine governance, and management has seen a welcome surge (Loch & Riechers, 2021; Parsons, Taylor, & Crease, 2021). This body of research emphasizes the importance of indigenous traditions and knowledge systems in ecologically sustainable, culturally sensitive, and socially inclusive development. It also pluralizes the ontology of Indian Ocean Region research and scholarship, granting greater salience to the subliminal ‘small scale’ at which coastal communities and local stakeholders operate, while exposing the limitations of the state-centric approach to the governance and management of fast multiplying human uses –and abuses– of maritime space and resources. Such perspectives from below relentlessly interrogate politics behind the production of geographical knowledge of maritime security and sustainability. They invite both academic and policy attention to the profound and far-reaching ethical and geopolitical implications of privileging a particular space-place, scale, and knowledge-power claim in universalizing narratives of Blue Economy and ocean governance at the cost of acknowledging the diverse worldviews, perspectives and priorities of different stakeholders. The current edition of JIOR opens with a thought-provoking article by Rosabelle Boswell and Jessica Leigh Thornton, which highlights the importance of knowledge pluralism in ocean governance and makes a persuasive case for including the perspectives, experiences, and world views of indigenous Khoisan people into the mainstream Blue Economy narratives in South Africa. Their key argument is that a holistic, integrated, and inclusive pursuit of Blue Economy demands and deserves a critical rethinking of the place of First Peoples and indigenous knowledge systems not only by South Africa but also in global ocean management regimes. We look forward to receiving more such submissions to JIOR, focusing on case studies from diverse sub-regions of the Indian Ocean region. The article by Somen Banerjee focuses on the emergence of the ‘Horn of Africa as a ‘Strategic Pivot of the Indian Ocean Region’ and builds a strong case for India to ‘repackage’ its vision and policy under the rubric of ‘Security and Growth for All’ (SAGAR) in pursuit of realising its ‘grand strategic’ vision of being a net security provider in the region. Revisiting its orientation towards the region also becomes a necessity considering recent developments and realignments in the Indo-Pacific theatre, especially the Aukus
{"title":"Broadening and Deepening the Indian Ocean Studies","authors":"S. Chaturvedi","doi":"10.1080/19480881.2021.1993660","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/19480881.2021.1993660","url":null,"abstract":"This edition of the Journal of the Indian Ocean Region (JIOR) bears testimony to the ongoing broadening and deepening of Indian Ocean studies by critically informed interventions on inter-disciplinary intersections. The scholarly literature on indigenous peoples and their role in marine and fisheries development, coastal ecosystems, marine governance, and management has seen a welcome surge (Loch & Riechers, 2021; Parsons, Taylor, & Crease, 2021). This body of research emphasizes the importance of indigenous traditions and knowledge systems in ecologically sustainable, culturally sensitive, and socially inclusive development. It also pluralizes the ontology of Indian Ocean Region research and scholarship, granting greater salience to the subliminal ‘small scale’ at which coastal communities and local stakeholders operate, while exposing the limitations of the state-centric approach to the governance and management of fast multiplying human uses –and abuses– of maritime space and resources. Such perspectives from below relentlessly interrogate politics behind the production of geographical knowledge of maritime security and sustainability. They invite both academic and policy attention to the profound and far-reaching ethical and geopolitical implications of privileging a particular space-place, scale, and knowledge-power claim in universalizing narratives of Blue Economy and ocean governance at the cost of acknowledging the diverse worldviews, perspectives and priorities of different stakeholders. The current edition of JIOR opens with a thought-provoking article by Rosabelle Boswell and Jessica Leigh Thornton, which highlights the importance of knowledge pluralism in ocean governance and makes a persuasive case for including the perspectives, experiences, and world views of indigenous Khoisan people into the mainstream Blue Economy narratives in South Africa. Their key argument is that a holistic, integrated, and inclusive pursuit of Blue Economy demands and deserves a critical rethinking of the place of First Peoples and indigenous knowledge systems not only by South Africa but also in global ocean management regimes. We look forward to receiving more such submissions to JIOR, focusing on case studies from diverse sub-regions of the Indian Ocean region. The article by Somen Banerjee focuses on the emergence of the ‘Horn of Africa as a ‘Strategic Pivot of the Indian Ocean Region’ and builds a strong case for India to ‘repackage’ its vision and policy under the rubric of ‘Security and Growth for All’ (SAGAR) in pursuit of realising its ‘grand strategic’ vision of being a net security provider in the region. Revisiting its orientation towards the region also becomes a necessity considering recent developments and realignments in the Indo-Pacific theatre, especially the Aukus","PeriodicalId":53974,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the Indian Ocean Region","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.2,"publicationDate":"2021-05-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49268853","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：