中国空间外交的分岔与制度密度

IF 0.9 Q3 INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS Hague Journal of Diplomacy Pub Date : 2023-03-23 DOI:10.1163/1871191x-bja10155
Kunhan Li, M. Mayer
{"title":"中国空间外交的分岔与制度密度","authors":"Kunhan Li, M. Mayer","doi":"10.1163/1871191x-bja10155","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\nThis article compares two central pillars of China’s space programme and observes that Chinese space diplomacy is not uniform regarding international scientific co-operation either in its approaches or in results. In the case of the Chinese Space Station programme, the China National Space Administration went through existing United Nations (UN) channels and successfully attracted international partners. However, the International Lunar Research Station has avoided UN channels and used national and bilateral platforms. This bifurcation in approaches and results offers an intriguing puzzle concerning international co-operation: practices of institutionalised multilateral co-operation and areas of state-centric bilateral co-operation co-exist in this case and further complicate the issue of space diplomacy. To propose a potential explanation, it is argued here that a crucial intermediate variable — institutional density — requires further theorising, as it seems to influence strategic choices about space diplomacy, which may lead to success or failure.","PeriodicalId":44787,"journal":{"name":"Hague Journal of Diplomacy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.9000,"publicationDate":"2023-03-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"China’s Bifurcated Space Diplomacy and Institutional Density\",\"authors\":\"Kunhan Li, M. Mayer\",\"doi\":\"10.1163/1871191x-bja10155\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\nThis article compares two central pillars of China’s space programme and observes that Chinese space diplomacy is not uniform regarding international scientific co-operation either in its approaches or in results. In the case of the Chinese Space Station programme, the China National Space Administration went through existing United Nations (UN) channels and successfully attracted international partners. However, the International Lunar Research Station has avoided UN channels and used national and bilateral platforms. This bifurcation in approaches and results offers an intriguing puzzle concerning international co-operation: practices of institutionalised multilateral co-operation and areas of state-centric bilateral co-operation co-exist in this case and further complicate the issue of space diplomacy. To propose a potential explanation, it is argued here that a crucial intermediate variable — institutional density — requires further theorising, as it seems to influence strategic choices about space diplomacy, which may lead to success or failure.\",\"PeriodicalId\":44787,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Hague Journal of Diplomacy\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-03-23\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Hague Journal of Diplomacy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1163/1871191x-bja10155\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Hague Journal of Diplomacy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1163/1871191x-bja10155","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

本文比较了中国空间计划的两个核心支柱,并观察到中国的空间外交在国际科学合作方面无论是在方法上还是在结果上都是不统一的。就中国空间站计划而言,中国国家航天局通过现有的联合国渠道,成功地吸引了国际合作伙伴。然而,国际月球研究站避开了联合国的渠道,使用了国家和双边平台。这种方法和结果上的分歧为国际合作提供了一个有趣的难题:在这种情况下,制度化的多边合作实践和以国家为中心的双边合作领域并存,并使空间外交问题进一步复杂化。为了提出一个可能的解释,本文认为一个关键的中间变量——机构密度——需要进一步的理论化,因为它似乎影响着关于空间外交的战略选择,这可能导致成功或失败。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
China’s Bifurcated Space Diplomacy and Institutional Density
This article compares two central pillars of China’s space programme and observes that Chinese space diplomacy is not uniform regarding international scientific co-operation either in its approaches or in results. In the case of the Chinese Space Station programme, the China National Space Administration went through existing United Nations (UN) channels and successfully attracted international partners. However, the International Lunar Research Station has avoided UN channels and used national and bilateral platforms. This bifurcation in approaches and results offers an intriguing puzzle concerning international co-operation: practices of institutionalised multilateral co-operation and areas of state-centric bilateral co-operation co-exist in this case and further complicate the issue of space diplomacy. To propose a potential explanation, it is argued here that a crucial intermediate variable — institutional density — requires further theorising, as it seems to influence strategic choices about space diplomacy, which may lead to success or failure.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Hague Journal of Diplomacy
Hague Journal of Diplomacy INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS-
CiteScore
3.10
自引率
28.60%
发文量
55
期刊最新文献
Diplomats as Skilful Bricoleurs of the Digital Age: EU Foreign Policy Communications from the COREU to WhatsApp Domestic Digital Diplomacy: Digital Disruption at the Macro and Micro Levels Public Diplomacy in Vietnam: National Interests and Identities in the Public Sphere, written by Vu Lam Diversity and Women’s Representation in Small States’ Diplomacy: A Case Study of Lithuania Chinese Soft Power, written by Maria Repnikova
×
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