Search

This paper surveys constructivist scholarship in the study of international political economy (IPE) in China. Chinese scholars in the field of IPE have until recently rarely used constructivism as an approach to study IPE for two reasons. The first, like Western IPE, is the short history of constructivism as a theoretical perspective. The second, unlike Western IPE, stems from the long-standing dominance of Marxism, China's official state ideology, in the academic field. In China, Marxism's materialist core shapes the basic research questions of IPE. Unsurprisingly then, constructivist analysis is quite alien to the dominant intellectual discourse in China. Nonetheless, of late, more Chinese scholars have begun to apply constructivist analysis. This paper surveys these developments and is divided into three sections. The first section provides an overview of how Chinese Marxist scholars approach the major issues of IPE as they relate to China. The second section provides an overview of the work of liberal-minded Chinese scholars who work on major IPE issues, another counterpoint to the Marxist school. The third section, which is the major focus of this paper, examines how Chinese scholars have applied the constructivist concepts to study major IPE issues in the Chinese context. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

China's increasing role as a provider of overseas aid is the subject of considerable debate both within and outside of China. However, despite research activity examining how Chinese aid is materialized, very little is actually known about why Chinese aid projects are developed or implemented the way they are. Although recent indications suggest the Chinese government is increasingly willing to be more open about overseas aid, for example, the release of the first White Paper on Foreign Aid in 2011, external observers remain largely unaware of the values, goals and motivations behind Chinese aid projects. Alongside this lack of information, non-Chinese analyses tend to be founded on a Realist approach to understanding international relations in which a "rising power" such as China automatically constitutes a threat to existing power relations. As a result, many scholars conclude that China's aid is part of a strategic quest to further its own geopolitical ends. This paper provides insights into the contentious topic of the drivers behind Chinese overseas development assistance. It finds that Chinese elites in the international development sphere do not share the views prevalent in Western international relations discourse about the international system and China's role within it. This article argues that exploring Chinese development actors' and commentators' conceptions of what development means, along with their views on China's role and obligations within the international system, allows a better understanding of the motivations behind Chinese aid, and a reexamination of some of the misconceptions around Chinese aid as a tool of Chinese geopolitical strategy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This work argues that writer Emmanuel John Hevi's works, written half a century ago about China's likely influence in Africa are still relevant today. Using relevant qualitative data and a constructivist analysis this paper argues that although Hevi was wary of China's influence because of the specific context in which he was writing, Africa would do well to keep his argument in mind and adopt from China only that which can aid the continent's development and spurn that which cannot. Constructivism has been used here to help explain the intersection of Chinese and African identities and interests as the main unifying factor in a growing China-Africa relationship. Hence, it is suggested that the West does not share such depth of identities and interests with China which has hugely influenced Western suspicions of China's growth and incursions in Africa. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The characteristics of the international system are changing and developing all the time, and we should truly understand these characteristics in order to formulate appropriate diplomatic policies and national development strategies. Employing the three methods of literature research, observation and qualitative research and conforming to the logic paradigm of Classical Realism and Constructivism, this paper focuses on an adequate analysis of the main characteristics of current international system and the course of China's integration into international system. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The simultaneous rise of China and India is one of the most important developments in contemporary world politics. Given their steadily growing power and aspirations and China’s more assertive posture in Asia, the management of China’s rise is one of the major challenges for India’s foreign policy. However, India is often said to have no guiding strategic framework for its China policy, which is seen as incoherent and reactive. This article, by contrast, shows that India has an evolving China strategy and that the alleged inconsistencies in India’s China policy are rather the result of an ambivalent image of China. Drawing on constructivism and discourse analysis, the article identifies the dominant perception of China in India’s foreign policy discourse and the resulting foreign policy strategy. In a next step, the article analyzes the China policy of the Congress-led UPA Government and investigates whether it conforms to the strategic policy frame of the dominant China discourse. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

The article focuses on the power shift narrative in Sino-Japanese interaction regarding the Diaoyu/Senkaku Islands in 2010. It states that the notion showing the rising of China, the declining of Japan, and the power shift in East Asia is compatible with the epistemological core of constructivism. It also discusses bilateral relationship between China and Japan, Japanese policymaking, and sovereign competition on two parties.

Universalism can be religious or secular; within the category of secular universalism, a distinction can be made (especially in China) between universalism focused on 'universality' or the universal validity of certain ideas and universalism focused on 'generality' or the general extension of certain ideas. Within the category of universality-based universalism, 'value universalism' holds one or some values to be universally valid and 'culture universalism' holds a certain culture or a certain way of ranking various values to be universally valid. Within the category of 'value universalism', a distinction can be made between 'dialogue-oriented universalism', which argues for the priority of the right to communication over other rights and 'monologue-oriented universalism', according to which one subject can unilaterally decide what is of universal validity for all. Not only 'monologue-oriented universalism', but also 'dialogue-oriented universalism' can be understood in a Euro-centrist way; there is thus a distinction between West-centrist and non-West-centrist varieties of universalism. The key to avoiding Westcentrist universalism while upholding universalism is to make a distinction between essentialist universalism and constructivist universalism, and to see what is universally shared by all relevant parties as something to be constructed through the process of 'Verkehr' in Marx's sense that is informed by the process of 'Kommunikation' in Habermas's sense. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article argues that 2003–4 were decisive years in Russo-Chinese relations. Uncertainties over Russia's commitment to supply China with much needed energy revived deep-seated anxieties about the whole future of their relationship. However, by the autumn of 2004 they had launched plans for strengthening the partnership and widening mutual popular understanding. It also argues that this coincides with new efforts to view their foreign policies through the lens of constructivism, instead of realism. The article then looks at developments in bilateral economic relations and in the Shanghai Cooperation Organization, before adumbrating their wider advocacy of multilateralism, linking this to converging relations with India. Finally, it argues that relations with the US will continue to have a significant impact on the direction and closeness of this bilateral relationship. It is still a partnership rather than an alliance. Russia and China may sometimes put a higher priority on their relations with the West rather than on each other. Yet they are also looking at other potential emerging powers and how they can bend that process of emergence to their advantage. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We investigated how third party managers from China, Japan and the USA intervened in employees' disputes. Consistent with predictions, we found (using non-linear HLM analysis) that managers who were superiors to the disputants behaved autocratically and/or decided on conservative (e.g., contract adhering) outcomes; but managers who were peers (especially in China and the USA), generally involved disputants in decision-making and obtained integrative outcomes that went beyond initial contract related mandates. Our results extend prior research and theorizing using the dispositional and constructivist perspectives on culture by introducing norm complexity as an explanation for variations in third party conflict intervention behaviour within one culture. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article draws on constructivist approaches to explore processes of socialization in the context of evolving relations between China and the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN). Constructivist discussions have challenged traditional accounts of socialization; however, left under-examined are the processes by which social learning and social change take place. This article contributes to the theoretical discussion with its examination of ASEAN's regional engagement processes. It treats ASEAN states' ‘complex engagement’ of China as an exercise in argumentative persuasion, which seeks common agreement via a deliberative, non-coercive process. In contrasting ASEAN's particular style of engagement with other models that emphasize more coercive and utilitarian strategies of persuasion, the article draws attention to how particular kinds of interaction may facilitate social learning, as well as the conditions that may make social learning more likely. Particular attention is paid to the roles played by power asymmetries, uncertainty, and different kinds of engagement (mutual and interactive versus closed and unidirectional) in social learning, as well as the importance of viewing socialization as a process that involves different stages. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

What is likely to be the future character of the relationship between the United States and the People's Republic of China? Will it be marked by convergence toward deepening cooperation, stability, and peace or by deterioration that leads to increasingly open competition and perhaps even war? The answers to these questions are of enormous importance. They are also, at this point, unknown. Most analysts who write on U.S.-China relations deploy arguments derived from the three main camps in contemporary international relations theorizing: realism, liberalism, and constructivism. Those whose basic analytical premises place them in one of these three schools, however, do not necessarily have similar views regarding the specific question of the future of U.S.-China relations. It is possible to identify realists who believe that the relationship will basically be stable and peaceful, liberals who expect confrontation and conflict, and constructivists who think that things could go either way. The six basic positions in this debate all rest on claims about the importance of particular causal mechanisms or sets of similarly aligned causal forces. In reality, one set of forces may turn out to be so powerful as to overwhelm the rest. But it is also conceivable that the future will be shaped by a confluence of different forces, some mutually reinforcing and others opposed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]