Revisiting the debate on constructing a theory of international relations with Chinese characteristics
Author(s)
Noesselt, NeleKeywords
Internationale BeziehungenSozialwissenschaften, Soziologie
International relations
Social sciences, sociology, anthropology
politisches Modell
internationale Beziehungen, Entwicklungspolitik
Wissenschaftstheorie, Wissenschaftsphilosophie, Wissenschaftslogik, Ethik der Sozialwissenschaften
International Relations, International Politics, Foreign Affairs, Development Policy
Philosophy of Science, Theory of Science, Methodology, Ethics of the Social Sciences
China
internationale Beziehungen
analytische Wissenschaftstheorie
Wissenschaftstheorie
Legitimität
nationale Identität
internationales System
Außenpolitik
Einparteiensystem
Dialog
China
international relations
analytic theory
philosophy of science
legitimacy
national identity
international system
foreign policy
one-party system
dialogue
10500
Full record
Show full item recordOnline Access
https://www.ssoar.info/ssoar/handle/document/58383https://doi.org/10.1017/S0305741015000387
Abstract
After decades of policy learning and adoption of "Western" theories of international politics, the Chinese academic community has (re-)turned to the construction of a "Chinese" theory framework. This article examines the recent academic debates on theory with "Chinese characteristics" and sheds light on their historical and philosophical foundations. It argues that the search for a "Chinese" paradigm of international relations theory is part of China's quest for national identity and global status. As can be concluded from the analysis of these debates, "Chinese" theories of international politics are expected to fulfil two general functions - to safeguard China's national interests and to legitimize the one-party system.Date
2018-08-10Type
ZeitschriftenartikelIdentifier
oai:gesis.izsoz.de:document/583831468-2648
https://www.ssoar.info/ssoar/handle/document/58383
urn:nbn:de:0168-ssoar-58383-6
https://doi.org/10.1017/S0305741015000387
Copyright/License
Deposit Licence - Keine Weiterverbreitung, keine BearbeitungRelated items
Showing items related by title, author, creator and subject.
-
Conference of Soviet and American Jurists on the Law of the Sea and the Protection of the Marine EnvironmentKatz, Milton; Baxter, Richard R; Bogdanov, O. V; Butler, William E; Franck, Thomas M; Frank, Richard; Gureev, P. P; Hargrove, John L; Ivanaschenko, L. A; Kasmin, Y.; et al. (Digital Commons @ Georgia Law, 2017-01-19)Included in the papers for the Conference of Soviet and American Jurists on the Law of the Sea and the Protection of the Marine Environment: Introduction by Milton Katz and Richard R. Baxter, p. 1 Freedom of Scientific Research in the World Ocean by A.F. Vysotsky, p. 7 The International Law of Scientific Research in the Oceans by Richard R. Baxter, p. 27 Responsibility and Liability for Harm to the Marine Environment by Robert E. Stein, p. 41 Liability for Marine Environment Pollution Damage in Contemporary International Sea Law by A. L. Makovsky, p. 59 Protection of the Marine Environment from Pollution by Richard A. Frank, p. 73 The Freedom of Navigation and the Problem of Pollution of the Marine Environment by V. A. Kiselev, p. 93 The Freedom of Navigation Under International Law by William E. Butler, p. 107 International Fisheries Management Without Global Agreement: United States Policies and Their Impact on the Soviet Union by H. Gary Knight, p. 119 Some Biological Background for International Legal Acts on Rational Utilization of the Living Resources of the World Ocean by P. A. Moiseev, p. 143 An International Regime for the Seabed Beyond National Jurisdiction by Thomas M. Franck, p. 151 Settlement of Disputes Under the Law of Ocean Use, with Particular Reference to Environmental Protection by John Lawrence Hargrove, p. 181
-
The CGIAR at 40Ozgediz, Selcuk (World Bank, Washington, DC, 2016-03-03)The Consultative Group on International
 Agricultural Research (CGIAR) has been one of the most
 successful research-for-development organizations over the
 past 40 years. The $11 billion invested by CGIAR donor
 members in research conducted by the international Centers
 under its umbrella has yielded many multiples of that sum in
 economic benefits to developing and emerging countries.
 Annual economic benefits of research on rice in Asia alone
 are equivalent to the total investment made by CGIAR donors
 over 4 decades, leaving aside benefits in other continents
 and from other research conducted by CGIAR institutions. The
 CGIAR‘s success is due in part to the way it was organized.
 The Group itself was an informal forum for dialogue among
 donor members about research priorities, investment options,
 and the continuing relevance and effectiveness of the
 institutions supported. The international centers
 constituted the core of the CGIAR. Each was (and still is)
 an autonomous international organization governed by an
 international board. The Group and the Centers were
 originally advised by the Technical Advisory Committee (TAC)
 of distinguished scientists from developing and developed
 countries, each appointed as an individual. The Group’s
 activities were facilitated by its Secretariat based at the
 World Bank in Washington, DC, and TAC’s activities by
 another secretariat based at the food and agriculture
 organization in Rome.
-
Euro-Barometer 28: Relations with Third World Countries and Energy Problems, November 1987The Eurobarometer (EB) survey series is a unique programme of cross-national and cross-temporal comparative social science research. Since the early seventies representative national samples in all European Union (EU) (formerly the European Community (EC)) member states have been simultaneously interviewed in the spring and autumn of each year. Starting with EB 34.1 (autumn 1990), separate supplementary surveys on special issues have been conducted under almost every EB number. The EB is designed to provide regular monitoring of public social and political attitudes in the EU through specific trend questions. More information about the series may be found on the Zentralarchiv fuer Empirische Sozialforschung (ZA - Central Archive for Empirical Social Research, University of Cologne) Eurobarometer Survey Series web pages. Background Work on European survey series began in early 1970, when the Commission of the European Community sponsored simultaneous surveys of the EC. These surveys were designed to measure public awareness of, and attitudes toward, the Common Market and other EC institutions, in complementary fashion. They also probed the goals given top priority for each respondent's nation. These concerns have remained a central part of the EC's research efforts - which were carried forward in the summer of 1971 with another six-nation survey that gave special attention to agricultural problems. The nine EC member countries were then surveyed again on the same topic areas in September 1973. After 1973, the surveys took on a somewhat broader scope in content as well as in geographical coverage, with measures of subjective satisfaction and the perceived quality of life becoming standard features of the EC public opinion surveys. Over time, the member states of the EC/EU have increased in number, and the coverage of the EB surveys has widened accordingly. In 1974, nine countries were surveyed: France, Germany, United Kingdom, Italy, Netherlands, Belgium, Denmark, Ireland and Luxembourg. Greece has been included since the autumn 1980 survey (EB 14) onwards, Portugal and Spain since autumn 1985 (EB 24), the former German Democratic Republic since autumn 1990 (EB 34), Finland since the spring of 1993 (EB 39), and Sweden and Austria since the autumn of 1994 (EB 42). Norway has been included in some surveys since 1991, from EB 36 onwards. In 2004, the Czech Republic, Cyprus, Estonia, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Malta, Poland, Slovakia and Slovenia joined the EU, and in 2007, Bulgaria and Romania (some of these countries participated in the Candidate Countries Eurobarometer survey series (see under GN 33343) before full accession). Some surveys are also conducted in Turkey, and in the Turkish Cypriot Community (Northern Cyprus). The Eurobarometer public opinion surveys are conducted on behalf of and co-ordinated by the European Commission, DG Press and Communication - Opinion Polls Sector (European Commission Public Opinion Analysis). Special topic modules are carried out at the request of the responsible EU Directorate General. Main Topics: The main focus of this Euro-Barometer is the respondent's knowledge of and attitudes toward the nations of the Third World. Topics covered include the culture and customs of these nations, the existence of poverty and hunger, and the respondent's opinions on how best to provide assistance to Third World countries. Individuals answered questions on social and polical conditions as well as on the level of economic development in these countries. Additionally, respondents were asked to assess the state of relations between the respondent's country and various Third World nations. Another focus of this data collection concerns energy problems and resources in the countries of the European Economic Community. Respondents were asked to choose which regions of the world are considered to be reliable suppliers of fossil fuel for the future and to evaluate the risks that various industrial installations such as chemical and nuclear power plants pose to people living nearby. Respondents were also asked about solutions to the need for additional energy supplies in the future. Possible solutions included the development or continued development of nuclear power, the encouragement of research into producing renewable energy sources such as solar energy, and the conservation of energy. As in previous surveys in this series, respondents' attitudes towards the Community, life satisfaction, and social goals continued to be monitored. The survey also asked each individual to assess the advantages and disadvantages of the creation of a single common European market and whether they approved or disapproved of current efforts to unify western Europe. in addition, the respondent's political orientation, outlook for the future, and socioeconomic and demographic characteristics were probed.