技术主权是一种能力,而不是自给自足

IF 3.1 1区 社会学 Q1 INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS International Studies Review Pub Date : 2023-05-04 DOI:10.1093/isr/viad012
Christoph March, Ina Schieferdecker
{"title":"技术主权是一种能力,而不是自给自足","authors":"Christoph March, Ina Schieferdecker","doi":"10.1093/isr/viad012","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Aspirations toward technological sovereignty increasingly pervade the political debate. Yet, an ambiguous definition leaves the exact goal of those aspirations and the policies to fulfil them unclear. This opens the door for vested interests who benefit from misinterpreting the goal, e.g., as a strive for autarky, nationalism, and the rollback of globalization. To close this gap, we show how certain key technologies challenge state sovereignty as conventionally understood. By interpreting technological sovereignty in this light, we develop a competence-based definition, which puts innovation policy at the core of fulfilling sovereignty aspirations. Moreover, we establish the important role of international cooperation and trade to enhance technological sovereignty understood as ability. Hence, autarky would be detrimental rather than helpful to technological sovereignty. Two case studies illustrate how innovation policy helps to achieve technological sovereignty.","PeriodicalId":54206,"journal":{"name":"International Studies Review","volume":"26 2","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2023-05-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"7","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Technological Sovereignty as Ability, Not Autarky\",\"authors\":\"Christoph March, Ina Schieferdecker\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/isr/viad012\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Aspirations toward technological sovereignty increasingly pervade the political debate. Yet, an ambiguous definition leaves the exact goal of those aspirations and the policies to fulfil them unclear. This opens the door for vested interests who benefit from misinterpreting the goal, e.g., as a strive for autarky, nationalism, and the rollback of globalization. To close this gap, we show how certain key technologies challenge state sovereignty as conventionally understood. By interpreting technological sovereignty in this light, we develop a competence-based definition, which puts innovation policy at the core of fulfilling sovereignty aspirations. Moreover, we establish the important role of international cooperation and trade to enhance technological sovereignty understood as ability. Hence, autarky would be detrimental rather than helpful to technological sovereignty. Two case studies illustrate how innovation policy helps to achieve technological sovereignty.\",\"PeriodicalId\":54206,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Studies Review\",\"volume\":\"26 2\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-05-04\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"7\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Studies Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/isr/viad012\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Studies Review","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/isr/viad012","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 7

摘要

对技术主权的渴望日益渗透到政治辩论中。然而,模棱两可的定义使得这些愿望的确切目标和实现这些目标的政策不明确。这为既得利益者打开了大门,他们通过误解目标而受益,例如,将其视为争取自给自足、民族主义和全球化倒退。为了缩小这一差距,我们展示了某些关键技术如何挑战传统意义上的国家主权。通过从这个角度解释技术主权,我们提出了一个基于能力的定义,将创新政策置于实现主权愿望的核心。此外,我们建立了国际合作和贸易的重要作用,以提高技术主权理解为能力。因此,对技术主权来说,闭关自守是有害的,而不是有益的。两个案例研究说明了创新政策如何有助于实现技术主权。
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
Technological Sovereignty as Ability, Not Autarky
Aspirations toward technological sovereignty increasingly pervade the political debate. Yet, an ambiguous definition leaves the exact goal of those aspirations and the policies to fulfil them unclear. This opens the door for vested interests who benefit from misinterpreting the goal, e.g., as a strive for autarky, nationalism, and the rollback of globalization. To close this gap, we show how certain key technologies challenge state sovereignty as conventionally understood. By interpreting technological sovereignty in this light, we develop a competence-based definition, which puts innovation policy at the core of fulfilling sovereignty aspirations. Moreover, we establish the important role of international cooperation and trade to enhance technological sovereignty understood as ability. Hence, autarky would be detrimental rather than helpful to technological sovereignty. Two case studies illustrate how innovation policy helps to achieve technological sovereignty.
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
CiteScore
6.70
自引率
9.10%
发文量
62
期刊介绍: The International Studies Review (ISR) provides a window on current trends and research in international studies worldwide. Published four times a year, ISR is intended to help: (a) scholars engage in the kind of dialogue and debate that will shape the field of international studies in the future, (b) graduate and undergraduate students understand major issues in international studies and identify promising opportunities for research, and (c) educators keep up with new ideas and research. To achieve these objectives, ISR includes analytical essays, reviews of new books, and a forum in each issue. Essays integrate scholarship, clarify debates, provide new perspectives on research, identify new directions for the field, and present insights into scholarship in various parts of the world.
期刊最新文献
Fifty Shades of Deprivation: Disaggregating Types of Economic Disadvantage in Studies of Terrorism Postcards from the Pandemic: Women, Intersectionality, and Gendered Risks in the Global COVID-19 Pandemic Reimagining Comparisons in International Relations through Reflexivity Infrastructures and International Relations: A Critical Reflection on Materials and Mobilities More Women, Fewer Nukes?
×
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