全球化对欧亚大陆脆弱性的地方性理解

Q1 Arts and Humanities Journal of Eurasian Studies Pub Date : 2021-07-01 DOI:10.1177/18793665211044839
P. Kalra, Siddharth Shanker Saxena
{"title":"全球化对欧亚大陆脆弱性的地方性理解","authors":"P. Kalra, Siddharth Shanker Saxena","doi":"10.1177/18793665211044839","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The article aims to introduce the underlying motivation and conceptual underpinning to the special issue entitled “Globalizing Local Understanding of Fragility in Eurasia.” The main purpose of this article is to problematize the popular opinion and portrayal of Central Asia (Kazakhstan, Kyrgyz Republic, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, and Uzbekistan) and more generally the countries of Eurasia and the Caucasus as inherently fragile states which are politically unstable and thus on the brink of collapse. This article also seeks to question narratives of modernity that are singular and constantly out of reach for large swathes of the world’s populations because of the narrowness and hegemonic nature of the architecture of global governance. By carefully considering the ways and means through which international institutions categorize countries as fragile and/or failed, the article aims to provide the theoretical foreground for the special issue which focuses on locating inherent community resilience strategies. We explain how the non-participatory norm making behavior of international organizations privilege certain actors, largely the Global North, and simultaneously ignore the majority of Eurasian states. In other words, a demand predicated in the linear evaluation of institutions and norms dictated by global institutions clash with the Eurasian model of inherent complex adaptive capability and introduce fragility. The focus thus is on understanding the ‘local’ based on the historical analysis of development in the region, nodal points of urban development and community life, forms of social capital, and community resilience strategies in the wider Eurasian region.","PeriodicalId":39195,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Eurasian Studies","volume":"12 1","pages":"103 - 112"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Globalizing local understanding of fragility in Eurasia\",\"authors\":\"P. Kalra, Siddharth Shanker Saxena\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/18793665211044839\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The article aims to introduce the underlying motivation and conceptual underpinning to the special issue entitled “Globalizing Local Understanding of Fragility in Eurasia.” The main purpose of this article is to problematize the popular opinion and portrayal of Central Asia (Kazakhstan, Kyrgyz Republic, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, and Uzbekistan) and more generally the countries of Eurasia and the Caucasus as inherently fragile states which are politically unstable and thus on the brink of collapse. This article also seeks to question narratives of modernity that are singular and constantly out of reach for large swathes of the world’s populations because of the narrowness and hegemonic nature of the architecture of global governance. By carefully considering the ways and means through which international institutions categorize countries as fragile and/or failed, the article aims to provide the theoretical foreground for the special issue which focuses on locating inherent community resilience strategies. We explain how the non-participatory norm making behavior of international organizations privilege certain actors, largely the Global North, and simultaneously ignore the majority of Eurasian states. In other words, a demand predicated in the linear evaluation of institutions and norms dictated by global institutions clash with the Eurasian model of inherent complex adaptive capability and introduce fragility. The focus thus is on understanding the ‘local’ based on the historical analysis of development in the region, nodal points of urban development and community life, forms of social capital, and community resilience strategies in the wider Eurasian region.\",\"PeriodicalId\":39195,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Eurasian Studies\",\"volume\":\"12 1\",\"pages\":\"103 - 112\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-07-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"3\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Eurasian Studies\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/18793665211044839\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"Arts and Humanities\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Eurasian Studies","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/18793665211044839","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

摘要

本文旨在介绍题为“全球化对欧亚大陆脆弱性的地方性认识”的特刊的潜在动机和概念基础。本文的主要目的是质疑对中亚(哈萨克斯坦、吉尔吉斯共和国、塔吉克斯坦、土库曼斯坦和乌兹别克斯坦)以及欧亚大陆和高加索地区国家的普遍看法和描述,这些国家政治上不稳定,因此处于崩溃的边缘。由于全球治理架构的狭隘性和霸权性,这篇文章还试图质疑现代性的叙述是单一的,并且对世界上大部分人口来说总是遥不可及。通过仔细考虑国际机构将国家分类为脆弱和/或失败的方式和手段,本文旨在为专注于定位固有社区弹性策略的专题提供理论前景。我们解释了国际组织的非参与性规范制定行为如何使某些参与者(主要是全球北方)享有特权,同时忽视了大多数欧亚国家。换句话说,由全球机构决定的机构和规范的线性评估所预测的需求与固有复杂适应能力的欧亚模式发生冲突,并引入脆弱性。因此,重点是基于对该地区发展的历史分析、城市发展和社区生活的节点、社会资本的形式和更广泛的欧亚地区的社区弹性战略来理解“本地”。
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
Globalizing local understanding of fragility in Eurasia
The article aims to introduce the underlying motivation and conceptual underpinning to the special issue entitled “Globalizing Local Understanding of Fragility in Eurasia.” The main purpose of this article is to problematize the popular opinion and portrayal of Central Asia (Kazakhstan, Kyrgyz Republic, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, and Uzbekistan) and more generally the countries of Eurasia and the Caucasus as inherently fragile states which are politically unstable and thus on the brink of collapse. This article also seeks to question narratives of modernity that are singular and constantly out of reach for large swathes of the world’s populations because of the narrowness and hegemonic nature of the architecture of global governance. By carefully considering the ways and means through which international institutions categorize countries as fragile and/or failed, the article aims to provide the theoretical foreground for the special issue which focuses on locating inherent community resilience strategies. We explain how the non-participatory norm making behavior of international organizations privilege certain actors, largely the Global North, and simultaneously ignore the majority of Eurasian states. In other words, a demand predicated in the linear evaluation of institutions and norms dictated by global institutions clash with the Eurasian model of inherent complex adaptive capability and introduce fragility. The focus thus is on understanding the ‘local’ based on the historical analysis of development in the region, nodal points of urban development and community life, forms of social capital, and community resilience strategies in the wider Eurasian region.
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 Eurasian Studies
Journal of Eurasian Studies Arts and Humanities-History
CiteScore
2.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
15
审稿时长
8 weeks
期刊最新文献
In the shadow of war: Public opinion in the Baltic states, 2014 and 2021 The curious case of Aistija: Sidelights on Latvian–Lithuanian rapprochement during the 20th century Images of care: Marriage, family making, and the reproduction of the social order in Tajikistan Understanding the impact of social and academic factors on sense of belonging in higher education: A study from the Georgian educational landscape The effect of migration on economic and productivity growth in Russia
×
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