{"title":"东北亚的边界和扩展","authors":"Edward Boyle, A. Iwashita","doi":"10.1080/10225706.2021.1894189","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT This article utilizes an interdisciplinary border studies perspective in order to explain the absence of regional integration in Northeast Asia. While in other parts of the world, such as Europe or Southeast Asia, the cessation of the Cold War and increasing cross-border linkages promoted the emergence of integrative institutions and imagined regional communities, this has not occurred in Northeast Asia. Although the region experienced a veritable explosion of cross-border activity in the aftermath of the Cold War, potentially beneficial effects of economic and migratory flows for inter-state relations have not led to comparable success constructing regional institutions. The central issue with which the article is concerned is to understand the role of borders in this marked absence of regional integration. The paper adopts a pluralistic perspective on Northeast Asia’s borders that considers them as institutions existing between states, processes of exchange and mobility over them, and as constituting the region as a borderland space characterized by functionally and spatially extensive contestation over state and regional boundaries. Border studies allow us to analyze the Northeast Asian region from the edges of both its constituent states and the region itself, and thus offers a multi-layered lens through which to examine this space. The historical and comparative analysis conducted here reveals the dynamics of regional development and constraints under which the region operates. The paper suggests that the contrast between the Northeast Asia’s sharp, securitized, internal borders, multiplying into novel spaces, and its undetermined outer ones accounts for the failure to integrate today.","PeriodicalId":44260,"journal":{"name":"Asian Geographer","volume":"38 1","pages":"119 - 138"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2021-03-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/10225706.2021.1894189","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Bordering and scaling Northeast Asia\",\"authors\":\"Edward Boyle, A. Iwashita\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/10225706.2021.1894189\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT This article utilizes an interdisciplinary border studies perspective in order to explain the absence of regional integration in Northeast Asia. While in other parts of the world, such as Europe or Southeast Asia, the cessation of the Cold War and increasing cross-border linkages promoted the emergence of integrative institutions and imagined regional communities, this has not occurred in Northeast Asia. Although the region experienced a veritable explosion of cross-border activity in the aftermath of the Cold War, potentially beneficial effects of economic and migratory flows for inter-state relations have not led to comparable success constructing regional institutions. The central issue with which the article is concerned is to understand the role of borders in this marked absence of regional integration. The paper adopts a pluralistic perspective on Northeast Asia’s borders that considers them as institutions existing between states, processes of exchange and mobility over them, and as constituting the region as a borderland space characterized by functionally and spatially extensive contestation over state and regional boundaries. Border studies allow us to analyze the Northeast Asian region from the edges of both its constituent states and the region itself, and thus offers a multi-layered lens through which to examine this space. The historical and comparative analysis conducted here reveals the dynamics of regional development and constraints under which the region operates. The paper suggests that the contrast between the Northeast Asia’s sharp, securitized, internal borders, multiplying into novel spaces, and its undetermined outer ones accounts for the failure to integrate today.\",\"PeriodicalId\":44260,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Asian Geographer\",\"volume\":\"38 1\",\"pages\":\"119 - 138\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-03-08\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/10225706.2021.1894189\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Asian Geographer\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/10225706.2021.1894189\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"GEOGRAPHY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Asian Geographer","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10225706.2021.1894189","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"GEOGRAPHY","Score":null,"Total":0}
ABSTRACT This article utilizes an interdisciplinary border studies perspective in order to explain the absence of regional integration in Northeast Asia. While in other parts of the world, such as Europe or Southeast Asia, the cessation of the Cold War and increasing cross-border linkages promoted the emergence of integrative institutions and imagined regional communities, this has not occurred in Northeast Asia. Although the region experienced a veritable explosion of cross-border activity in the aftermath of the Cold War, potentially beneficial effects of economic and migratory flows for inter-state relations have not led to comparable success constructing regional institutions. The central issue with which the article is concerned is to understand the role of borders in this marked absence of regional integration. The paper adopts a pluralistic perspective on Northeast Asia’s borders that considers them as institutions existing between states, processes of exchange and mobility over them, and as constituting the region as a borderland space characterized by functionally and spatially extensive contestation over state and regional boundaries. Border studies allow us to analyze the Northeast Asian region from the edges of both its constituent states and the region itself, and thus offers a multi-layered lens through which to examine this space. The historical and comparative analysis conducted here reveals the dynamics of regional development and constraints under which the region operates. The paper suggests that the contrast between the Northeast Asia’s sharp, securitized, internal borders, multiplying into novel spaces, and its undetermined outer ones accounts for the failure to integrate today.
期刊介绍:
Asian Geographer disseminates knowledge about geographical problems and issues focusing on Asia and the Pacific Rim. Papers dealing with other regions should have a linkage to Asia and the Pacific Rim. Original and timely articles dealing with any field of physical or human geographical inquiries and methodologies will be considered for publication. We welcome, for example, submissions on people-environment interactions, urban and regional development, transport and large infrastructure, migration, natural disasters and their management, environment and energy issues. While the focus of the journal is placed on original research articles, review papers as well as viewpoints and research notes under the category of “Asian Geography in Brief” are also considered. Review papers should critically and constructively analyse the current state of understanding on geographical and planning topics in Asia. The ‘Asian Geography in Brief’ section welcomes submissions of applied geographical and planning research about Asia. The section aims to showcase (1) the diverse geography and planning of Asia; and (2) the diverse geographical and planning research about Asia. The journal will also publish special issues on particular themes or areas. Book reviews can be included from time to time.