Understanding Regulatory Governance in Northeast Asia: Environmental and Technological Cooperation among China, Japan and Korea (original) (raw)
Related papers
FROM RIVALS TO PARTNERS: THE EVOLUTION OF ENVIRONMENTAL COOPERATION AMONG CHINA, JAPAN, AND KOREA
Global: Jurnal Politik Internasional, 2023
This study analyses the trilateral cooperation among China, Japan, and Korea in the realm of environmental issues, focusing on the Trilateral Environment Ministers Meeting (TEMM) as the representative institution. Through a theoretical perspective based on rational design theory, this paper examines the rationality of TEMM's design and how it has addressed the enforcement problems and asymmetry of control among the three countries. The study also suggests some strategies for further deepening and empowering the trilateral cooperation, such as developing the environmental protection industry and carbon trading market, involving funds and non-state actors, and improving institutionalization. While acknowledging the achievements and limitations of trilateral cooperation, this paper calls for future research to employ different theories and cases to enhance our understanding of the dynamics among these three countries' cooperation.
The year 2011 was marked by popular media perceptions of China surpassing the Japanese economy in terms of sheer size. Notwithstanding, Japan remains a formidable economic power not only in terms of size, but more importantly in the crucial areas of technological development, embeddedness in the global market system, as an influential player in international institutions such as the World Bank (WB), the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the second largest donor of foreign aid. Furthermore, Japan’s long-standing alliance with the United States and size and sophistication of its Self-Defense Forces (SDF) accord Japan with the status and capabilities to have both a regional and global role in international relations. Despite these strengths, Japan’s influence in regional and international relations remains limited due to sensitivities and perceptions of its wartime imperialist legacy, strategic interests of neighboring states and domestic norms stressing pacifism, economic development and developmentalism. To overcome these international and domestic hurdles, this paper argues that Japan is attempting to create and forge new regimes based on shared norms vis-à-vis human and environmental security to define a leadership role within the region.
Institutionalizing northeast Asia : regional steps towards global governance
2008
Globalisation and China's galloping economy have caused radically different economic growth rates, resulting in constant fluctuations in the balance of power among the nations of Northeast Asia. This publication advances the notion of regional institutionalism as a counterweight to the principle of sovereignty. It argues that cooperation through regional institution to building is the best way to deal with the growing intertwinement of global issues and developments and the needs and interests at the regional and national levels. A unified regional voice could also answer the demand for supra to territorial policy responses to such issues as trade, finance, the environment, human rights, and human security.
From distrust to mutual interests?: Emerging cooperation in Northeast Asia
East Asia: An International Quarterly, 2005
In Northeast Asia, historical legacies, a lack of common identity and great power politics impeded political cooperation and economic integration. However, China, Japan and South Korea have exhibited a growing interest in political and economic cooperation since the late 1990s. This article examines how the three Northeast Asian countries have developed political and economic cooperation by using the concept of ‘multilayered intergovernmentalism’. It argues that despite political tensions between China and Japan, regional cooperation among China, Japan and South Korea has been promoted by talks and bargains among the heads of state and government who strengthened incentives for closer cooperation. Moreover, multilayered frameworks formed at the ASEAN Plus Three (APT) level, through the Track II mechanisms, and in issue-specific areas have provided valuable input into advancing regional cooperation initiatives. Whereas the APT framework offered incentives and opportunities to exchange views and information for closer trilateral cooperation, the outcomes of the research at the Track II were incorporated into the leaders' cooperative initiatives. The existence of issue-specific frameworks stirred talks and negotiations at the summit level.
Further development of Asian regionalism: institutional hedging in an uncertain era
JOURNAL OF CONTEMPORARY EAST ASIA STUDIES, 2019
Currently, the confrontation between two global giants, the United States and China, in trade and technology advancement and hege- mony in international politics is escalating. The possibility of a Sino- U.S. economic “war,” or the so-called “new Cold War,” not only indicates the escalation of this confrontation but also symptomizes the international order’s transformation as a result of the change in power balance and rise of a challenger against the existing United States–led international liberal order. Most IR specialists focus on the prospects of this confrontation and its uncertain worldwide circumstances and are concerned about its impact on East Asian/ Asia Pacific regional circumstances. Among them, prospects regard- ing regionalism and regional institutions in Asia seem pessimistic. However, Asian regionalism was activated following the decline in United States’ power and rise of China as a global power, and the international liberal order’s retreat became visible toward the end of the 2000s. Furthermore, even under the uncertain situations created by the Sino-U.S. confrontation, regional powers, including China, Japan, and the Association of South East Asian Nations (ASEAN), are promoting their multilateral approach by proposing and advancing various regional frameworks. This indicates that each regional power is adopting the “institutional hedging” strat- egy to ensure that their individual interests are satisfied and the regional order is comfortable for themselves. This paper verifies that regionalism and regional institutions have become important as measures of regional power for countries’ institutional hedging strategies to overcome the challenges posed by the beginning of regional uncertainties and that Asian regionalism is more active today than ever before.
Multilateral Regional Governance: Comparing EU and China engagement in Asia
Interregional orchestration is one possible strategy to shape global governance agendas, coordinate international norm setting and contribute to a multilateral global order. The European Union has been engaging in various international and interregional settings seeking cooperation with state and non-state actors striving for a multipolar and, to some extent post-Westphalian, system, based on democratic global governance structures and the rule of law among nations. Europe's interests, it is frequently argued, are best served by a stable set of relations, allowing for political and economic cooperation, trade and mutual respect. At the same time, the EU may have a system-inherent bias for regional cooperation. In this respect, also the EU's international development agenda has been focussing on fostering regional ties among its partner countries in diverse geographic areas, to ensure peace and stability and to encourage sustainable economic growth and prosperity, as the basi...