“一带一路”倡议、世界秩序和国际标准:连续性、适应性还是不连续性?

Q2 Arts and Humanities Journal of Global Ethics Pub Date : 2021-01-02 DOI:10.1080/17449626.2021.1946836
Guli-Sanam Karimova, S. LeMay
{"title":"“一带一路”倡议、世界秩序和国际标准:连续性、适应性还是不连续性?","authors":"Guli-Sanam Karimova, S. LeMay","doi":"10.1080/17449626.2021.1946836","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Many questions arise in any Western discussion of China’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI). Does China’s BRI represent a new world order that aligns with European values and interests? Alternatively, is it an attempt by China to dominate Eurasia and most of the world economically and socially? The West seems to have no clear answer to these and related questions. In this work, we look at one of the many potential theaters for tension: the relationship between BRI and international, mostly Western, standards. We highlight the BRI notion as a contested space between two distinct discourses: 1) discourse of Chinese dominance, with little influence from existing Western standards; 2) discourse of merging Western and Asian values that benefits all of humanity, an approach that fits with tianxia. This work examines Chinese norms and values in the context of these questions: 1) to what extent are written Western standards like the UN Global Compact compatible with the BRI? And 2) to what extent can those standards adapt to BRI, thus changing the European-dominated world order? We conclude with directions for future research on the role of standards in the BRI.","PeriodicalId":35191,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Global Ethics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Belt and Road Initiative, world order, and international standards: continuity, adaptation, or discontinuity?\",\"authors\":\"Guli-Sanam Karimova, S. LeMay\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/17449626.2021.1946836\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT Many questions arise in any Western discussion of China’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI). Does China’s BRI represent a new world order that aligns with European values and interests? Alternatively, is it an attempt by China to dominate Eurasia and most of the world economically and socially? The West seems to have no clear answer to these and related questions. In this work, we look at one of the many potential theaters for tension: the relationship between BRI and international, mostly Western, standards. We highlight the BRI notion as a contested space between two distinct discourses: 1) discourse of Chinese dominance, with little influence from existing Western standards; 2) discourse of merging Western and Asian values that benefits all of humanity, an approach that fits with tianxia. This work examines Chinese norms and values in the context of these questions: 1) to what extent are written Western standards like the UN Global Compact compatible with the BRI? And 2) to what extent can those standards adapt to BRI, thus changing the European-dominated world order? We conclude with directions for future research on the role of standards in the BRI.\",\"PeriodicalId\":35191,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Global Ethics\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-01-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Global Ethics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/17449626.2021.1946836\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"Arts and Humanities\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Global Ethics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17449626.2021.1946836","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

西方对中国“一带一路”倡议的讨论中会出现许多问题。中国的“一带一路”倡议是否代表了符合欧洲价值观和利益的世界新秩序?或者,这是中国试图在经济和社会上主宰欧亚大陆和世界大部分地区吗?对于这些问题和相关问题,西方似乎没有明确的答案。在这项工作中,我们研究了许多潜在的紧张局势之一:“一带一路”与国际(主要是西方)标准之间的关系。我们强调“一带一路”概念是两种不同话语之间的一个有争议的空间:1)中国主导的话语,几乎没有受到现有西方标准的影响;2)融合西方和亚洲的价值观,造福全人类的话语,这是一种符合天下的方法。本研究在以下问题的背景下考察了中国的规范和价值观:1)像联合国全球契约这样的西方书面标准在多大程度上与“一带一路”兼容?2)这些标准能在多大程度上适应“一带一路”,从而改变欧洲主导的世界秩序?最后,我们提出了标准在“一带一路”中作用的未来研究方向。
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
The Belt and Road Initiative, world order, and international standards: continuity, adaptation, or discontinuity?
ABSTRACT Many questions arise in any Western discussion of China’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI). Does China’s BRI represent a new world order that aligns with European values and interests? Alternatively, is it an attempt by China to dominate Eurasia and most of the world economically and socially? The West seems to have no clear answer to these and related questions. In this work, we look at one of the many potential theaters for tension: the relationship between BRI and international, mostly Western, standards. We highlight the BRI notion as a contested space between two distinct discourses: 1) discourse of Chinese dominance, with little influence from existing Western standards; 2) discourse of merging Western and Asian values that benefits all of humanity, an approach that fits with tianxia. This work examines Chinese norms and values in the context of these questions: 1) to what extent are written Western standards like the UN Global Compact compatible with the BRI? And 2) to what extent can those standards adapt to BRI, thus changing the European-dominated world order? We conclude with directions for future research on the role of standards in the BRI.
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
Journal of Global Ethics
Journal of Global Ethics Arts and Humanities-Philosophy
CiteScore
0.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
20
期刊最新文献
The Journal of Global Ethics after Twenty Years A human rights method of ethics – marrying intuitionism, reasoning, and communication Assessing the capability approach as a justice basis of climate resilience strategies Global ethics: sentimental education or ideological construction? Twenty-five years on: to move forward, we should return to Rawls’ The Law of Peoples
×
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